Somebody damaged my car on purpose at the dealership
03-12-2017, 01:45 PM
#27
MBWorld Fanatic!
OP, I think you need to back away from the assertion that someone at the dealership intentionally damaged your car. For one, it sets an adversarial tone right off the mark, and secondly, it's just not likely to be true.
Just stick with the facts and don't infer motive.
Here's what happened:
You dropped off your car for service at the dealership.
You inspected and noted no damage.
The dealership may or may not have adequately inspected it since the form has been misplaced.
You went to retrieve your car following the service and discovered extensive damage to the paint.
All evidence suggests that the damage occurred while the vehicle was in the custody of the shop.
You don't need to prove or even suggest the circumstances "why" the damage occurred or whether it was intentional or accidental. The only thing you are concerned with is that you received it back in worse condition than when you dropped it off and they are responsible for repairing it.
Just stick with the facts and don't infer motive.
Here's what happened:
You dropped off your car for service at the dealership.
You inspected and noted no damage.
The dealership may or may not have adequately inspected it since the form has been misplaced.
You went to retrieve your car following the service and discovered extensive damage to the paint.
All evidence suggests that the damage occurred while the vehicle was in the custody of the shop.
You don't need to prove or even suggest the circumstances "why" the damage occurred or whether it was intentional or accidental. The only thing you are concerned with is that you received it back in worse condition than when you dropped it off and they are responsible for repairing it.
03-12-2017, 02:52 PM
#30
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by Mr. J
OP, I think you need to back away from the assertion that someone at the dealership intentionally damaged your car. For one, it sets an adversarial tone right off the mark, and secondly, it's just not likely to be true.
Just stick with the facts and don't infer motive.
Here's what happened:
You dropped off your car for service at the dealership.
You inspected and noted no damage.
The dealership may or may not have adequately inspected it since the form has been misplaced.
You went to retrieve your car following the service and discovered extensive damage to the paint.
All evidence suggests that the damage occurred while the vehicle was in the custody of the shop.
You don't need to prove or even suggest the circumstances "why" the damage occurred or whether it was intentional or accidental. The only thing you are concerned with is that you received it back in worse condition than when you dropped it off and they are responsible for repairing it.
Just stick with the facts and don't infer motive.
Here's what happened:
You dropped off your car for service at the dealership.
You inspected and noted no damage.
The dealership may or may not have adequately inspected it since the form has been misplaced.
You went to retrieve your car following the service and discovered extensive damage to the paint.
All evidence suggests that the damage occurred while the vehicle was in the custody of the shop.
You don't need to prove or even suggest the circumstances "why" the damage occurred or whether it was intentional or accidental. The only thing you are concerned with is that you received it back in worse condition than when you dropped it off and they are responsible for repairing it.
Since the car new, his options are;
1) Live with it.
2) Let the dealer do a partial repair and live with it.
3) Pay out of pocket for a full repair and eat it.
4) Pay for a full repair and attempt recovery from the dealer.
If 4 is his choice, and I guarantee it would be my choice, he'll need to be able to prove the damages occurred in the dealers custody. The inference alone isn't enough for small claims.
He says the car had no damage when it went in. They say it did. That doesn't meet the burden of proof. But a series of clean inspection reports by the same dealer for previous visits, plus the age of the car, and the lack of a signed condition report for the last visit might.
03-12-2017, 08:21 PM
#31
Some of you guys/gals are spinning up the OP for a bad ending.
A. Don't assume, or act like, it was done intentionally. Why on earth would
they do that? What is the proof of that? Nil. All of that damage could have happened, before leaving it, at various times when the OP wasn't around or didn't notice (somebody backs in to you on the street and cracks the license plate holder; passenger opens the door too close to something sitting on the curb, scratching the door, or something gets kicked up on the highway).
B. Don't assume that threatening to sue, or threatening "subpoenas," will get you anywhere. To the contrary, it likely will only make the dealer resist your claims further. Going to court will be frustrating, time-consuming, and likely fruitless.
C. Don't think for a minute that "the evidence all leans your way side," as someone suggested. First of all, could the OP testify, truthfully, that he inspected those areas closely before leaving the car? Second of all, I'm sure the dealer will say they sometimes don't look closely before marking the damage report at check-in -- and we all know from experience that that happens sometimes.
D. Going "all medeval." Now, THAT sounds like Trump.
E. The advice I DO agree with is to take a deep breath, act civilly, and try to reach a fair resolution. Given the actions (calling the police -- :roll eyes) and accusations made already, it may be too late for that.
Cheers.
03-12-2017, 09:36 PM
#32
MBWorld Fanatic!
I think it's clear that the damage was incidental and not intentional. In fact, had the car not been three months old with 2500 miles on it I'd say any or all of that damage could be attributed to normal wear and tear.
I agree calling the police or accusing the dealer of intentionally causing the damage was incredibly counterproductive and may have permanently poisoned the well.
My advice, given the dealer's apparent recalcitrance, was not to bow up and threaten suit. I suggested he let the dealership take a crack at repairs, and if they were unsatisfactory, the next step was not to file suit at all.
Instead I suggested the next step would be to pay out of pocket to have the car repaired correctly, and write a letter requesting reimbursement. Nothing in my sample letter threatened suit.
If, at that point the dealership refuses (and given how adversarial they've been to date, I wouldn't hold out much hope), THEN his last remaining recourse would be small claims.
Even then, I suggested sending one last letter in an attempt to resolve the issue amicably with a time limit demand. Time limit demands are meaningless if there's no adverse consequence once the time expires, so it is necessary at that point to threaten litigation.
The reference to subpoena presumes that the dealer is not going to cooperate by voluntarily having his employees testify. Since he already refused to give the OP the inspection report pre-suit, my guess is he's not going to produce the records on the car. Since it's key to the OP's case that there's a recorded history of "clean" pre-service condition reports, he'll likely need to have the court obtain them, and the mechanism for that process is subpoena.
I never start out threatening suit, but I always lay the groundwork. In my experience, judges hate doing small claims when the two parties have made no attempt to settle. That's why building a paper trail of very calm, dispassionate correspondence from the plaintiff to the defendant is important. It demonstrates that you tried in good faith to resolve the matter pre-suit. It disposes the judge to take you seriously.
With respect to evidence, while it may not ultimately prove dispositive, what evidence there is...two clean condition reports, one report that occurred prior to the alleged damage incident that wasn't signed and which the dealer now refuses to share, on a brand new car... does favor the OP. The simple fact the dealer won't share the last condition report should be a major clue. I assure you if it was all marked up with gouges and scratches he wouldn't be trying to keep it hidden. It would be over if he had it.
I've litigated several small claims cases. They are incredibly stressful to prepare, and incredibly stressful to try. They are absolutely a last resort. But they're also incredibly stressful for the defendant to prepare, and to try, so both parties should see a trial as something they should work hard together to avoid if at all possible.
You should always aim for a negotiated resolution. But if one side is basically telling you to go F yourself, your choice is to take it up the *** or fight it out. I'm never in the take-it-up-the-***-let's-just-all-get-along-camp. I can tell you that the handful of cases I've tried I've won, not because I'm a brilliant litigator, but because I only try cases that the other side should have long ago settled.
I agree calling the police or accusing the dealer of intentionally causing the damage was incredibly counterproductive and may have permanently poisoned the well.
My advice, given the dealer's apparent recalcitrance, was not to bow up and threaten suit. I suggested he let the dealership take a crack at repairs, and if they were unsatisfactory, the next step was not to file suit at all.
Instead I suggested the next step would be to pay out of pocket to have the car repaired correctly, and write a letter requesting reimbursement. Nothing in my sample letter threatened suit.
If, at that point the dealership refuses (and given how adversarial they've been to date, I wouldn't hold out much hope), THEN his last remaining recourse would be small claims.
Even then, I suggested sending one last letter in an attempt to resolve the issue amicably with a time limit demand. Time limit demands are meaningless if there's no adverse consequence once the time expires, so it is necessary at that point to threaten litigation.
The reference to subpoena presumes that the dealer is not going to cooperate by voluntarily having his employees testify. Since he already refused to give the OP the inspection report pre-suit, my guess is he's not going to produce the records on the car. Since it's key to the OP's case that there's a recorded history of "clean" pre-service condition reports, he'll likely need to have the court obtain them, and the mechanism for that process is subpoena.
I never start out threatening suit, but I always lay the groundwork. In my experience, judges hate doing small claims when the two parties have made no attempt to settle. That's why building a paper trail of very calm, dispassionate correspondence from the plaintiff to the defendant is important. It demonstrates that you tried in good faith to resolve the matter pre-suit. It disposes the judge to take you seriously.
With respect to evidence, while it may not ultimately prove dispositive, what evidence there is...two clean condition reports, one report that occurred prior to the alleged damage incident that wasn't signed and which the dealer now refuses to share, on a brand new car... does favor the OP. The simple fact the dealer won't share the last condition report should be a major clue. I assure you if it was all marked up with gouges and scratches he wouldn't be trying to keep it hidden. It would be over if he had it.
I've litigated several small claims cases. They are incredibly stressful to prepare, and incredibly stressful to try. They are absolutely a last resort. But they're also incredibly stressful for the defendant to prepare, and to try, so both parties should see a trial as something they should work hard together to avoid if at all possible.
You should always aim for a negotiated resolution. But if one side is basically telling you to go F yourself, your choice is to take it up the *** or fight it out. I'm never in the take-it-up-the-***-let's-just-all-get-along-camp. I can tell you that the handful of cases I've tried I've won, not because I'm a brilliant litigator, but because I only try cases that the other side should have long ago settled.
Last edited by Mike5215; 03-13-2017 at 12:15 PM.
03-16-2017, 06:39 PM
#33
Senior Member
Thread Starter
It looks like I have never received any paperwork stating the condition of the car. They might have done it but I just didn't have a copy...
Frustrating. I got back from vacation and the car was towed coz I didn't park it at where I should park it. They only towed it for a couple of hours and I got hit by a $216 towing bill and $75 fine for SNOW REMOVAL OBSTRUCTION and UNAUTHERIZED... Anyway, that's my bad.
I took the car to the dealer after I got it from the towing company. The dealer agreed to fix major scratches but not minor ones (those show up under flash light), which I guess a full detail should get rid of ? I asked if they could buff it and I am waiting for response.
Hope it will be my last trip to the dealership.
Frustrating. I got back from vacation and the car was towed coz I didn't park it at where I should park it. They only towed it for a couple of hours and I got hit by a $216 towing bill and $75 fine for SNOW REMOVAL OBSTRUCTION and UNAUTHERIZED... Anyway, that's my bad.
I took the car to the dealer after I got it from the towing company. The dealer agreed to fix major scratches but not minor ones (those show up under flash light), which I guess a full detail should get rid of ? I asked if they could buff it and I am waiting for response.
Hope it will be my last trip to the dealership.
03-16-2017, 06:57 PM
#37
Senior Member
Thread Starter
