Damage to windshield after dropping off for servicing

[Mike703]

What is the name of your state? Virginia


I very recently dropped my car off to have it serviced (paying over $800!!). Upon picking the car up I immediately noticed a crack in my front windshield about 18" in total length. I went back to the shop and showed the service manager the damage. He was acting hesitant and seemed like he didn't want to be bothered with it. He tells me to come back another day. I come back...repeatedly!! I brought the car back 3 times!!! (all day everytime becuase they would not look at it). I finally get one of the service crew to look at it and he claims that none of his mechanics were aware of a crack in the windshield, and that even though there is an 18" crack in the windshield, it would still pass a safety inspection. What I would like to know is if these guys are liable. Just because they may not have been neglegent in causing the damage to the windshield (who knows??), they should still be held liable for the following reasons:

1. The car was left in their possession
2. They did not keep the car on their property, they parked the car on the street over by an apt complex
3. There is nothing in their disclosure agreement that I signed limiting this type of liability. (I'll post it below)

"Notice to customers:
I hereby authorize the above repair work to be done along with necessary materials. You and your employees may operate above viehicle for purposes of testing, inspection or delivery at my risk. An express mechanics lien is acknowleged on above vehicle to secure the amount of repairs thereto. It is understood that this company assumes no responsibility for loss or damage by theft or fire to vehicles placed with them for sotrage, sale, repair, or while road testing."

My question is after reading the above situation and disclaimer, are these guys still liable for the damage to my windshield???

Any help you all can give would be GREATLY appreciated!!!

[CALIF-PROLAW18]

Originally Posted by Mike703

What is the name of your state? Virginia


I very recently dropped my car off to have it serviced (paying over $800!!). Upon picking the car up I immediately noticed a crack in my front windshield about 18" in total length. I went back to the shop and showed the service manager the damage. He was acting hesitant and seemed like he didn't want to be bothered with it. He tells me to come back another day. I come back...repeatedly!! I brought the car back 3 times!!! (all day everytime becuase they would not look at it). I finally get one of the service crew to look at it and he claims that none of his mechanics were aware of a crack in the windshield, and that even though there is an 18" crack in the windshield, it would still pass a safety inspection. What I would like to know is if these guys are liable. Just because they may not have been neglegent in causing the damage to the windshield (who knows??), they should still be held liable for the following reasons:

1. The car was left in their possession
2. They did not keep the car on their property, they parked the car on the street over by an apt complex
3. There is nothing in their disclosure agreement that I signed limiting this type of liability. (I'll post it below)

"Notice to customers:
I hereby authorize the above repair work to be done along with necessary materials. You and your employees may operate above viehicle for purposes of testing, inspection or delivery at my risk. An express mechanics lien is acknowleged on above vehicle to secure the amount of repairs thereto. It is understood that this company assumes no responsibility for loss or damage by theft or fire to vehicles placed with them for sotrage, sale, repair, or while road testing."

My question is after reading the above situation and disclaimer, are these guys still liable for the damage to my windshield???

Any help you all can give would be GREATLY appreciated!!!

My response:

You may as well make a claim under your "Comprehensive" coverage in your insurance policy - - assuming of course, that you have that coverage.

You can't prove that it was their negligence, or whether it was a natural occurrence; e.g., hot sun with air conditioning on, or whether there was already a "rock hit" prior to service, and it just decided to "split."

There are any number of causes - - but, one thing is sure, you'd have an impossible time proving it was through the shop's negligence.

IAAL

[Mike703]

Originally Posted by CALIF-PROLAW18

My response:

You may as well make a claim under your "Comprehensive" coverage in your insurance policy - - assuming of course, that you have that coverage.

You can't prove that it was their negligence, or whether it was a natural occurrence; e.g., hot sun with air conditioning on, or whether there was already a "rock hit" prior to service, and it just decided to "split."

There are any number of causes - - but, one thing is sure, you'd have an impossible time proving it was through the shop's negligence.

IAAL

I have coverage but do not feel it is my responsiblity to have to pay my deductible for something that was not even my fault. They should be held liable if the car was in their posession.

[CALIF-PROLAW19]

Originally Posted by Mike703

They should be held liable if the car was in their posession.

My response:

Really? What does "possession" have to do with anything? Did you read my above response? How can you prove their NEGLIGENCE?

Maybe it was a prior "rock hit." All because it finally split in their possession, doesn't prove negligence.

IAAL

[Mike703]

Originally Posted by CALIF-PROLAW19

My response:

Really? What does "possession" have to do with anything? Did you read my above response? How can you prove their NEGLIGENCE?

Maybe it was a prior "rock hit." All because it finally split in their possession, doesn't prove negligence.

IAAL

Posession is 9/10 of the law...

If u read the disclaimer, it mentions that they are not liable for damages in the event of loss and fire, non of which this was caused by. So wouldn't that make them liable?

[averad]

Originally Posted by Mike703

Posession is 9/10 of the law...

If u read the disclaimer, it mentions that they are not liable for damages in the event of loss and fire, non of which this was caused by. So wouldn't that make them liable?

Prove it, show us what proof you have that links the damage to the repair shop. What would you show the judge that would prove guilt?

[CALIF-PROLAW19]

Originally Posted by Mike703

Posession is 9/10 of the law...

If u read the disclaimer, it mentions that they are not liable for damages in the event of loss and fire, non of which this was caused by. So wouldn't that make them liable?

My response:

Oh, God. Somebody shoot me and deliver me from these stupid Dufus State people!!

IAAL

[BelizeBreeze]

Originally Posted by Mike703

Posession is 9/10 of the law...

If u read the disclaimer, it mentions that they are not liable for damages in the event of loss and fire, non of which this was caused by. So wouldn't that make them liable?

Mike, I would strongly suggest you stop while you're ahead. The more you post the more ignorant you sound.

[Mike703]

Originally Posted by BelizeBreeze

Mike, I would strongly suggest you stop while you're ahead. The more you post the more ignorant you sound.

Why do u all have to be so freaking negative....I'm just trying to find out what I can do. Are u all even familiar with VA law???

[averad]

Originally Posted by Mike703

Are u all even familiar with VA law???

O god *shakes head* have fun.

Originally Posted by Mike703

I'm just trying to find out what I can do

No, you are practicing selective hearing (or reading) because we have told you what you can do.

[CALIF-PROLAW19]

Originally Posted by Mike703

Why do u all have to be so freaking negative....I'm just trying to find out what I can do. Are u all even familiar with VA law???

My response:

First of all, accept the fact that you're a Dufus, from a Dufus State. Okay?

Second, you bring up the old wives' tale, "9/10 of the law."

Third, you bring up the "possession" issue again despite the fact that you can't state a "nexus" between their possession and any negligence.

I've given you your alternatives, yet you persist without, apparently, understanding a word I've said to you; e.g., you keep bringing up "possession."

This issue is strictly the laws of negligence, bailment and contract. We're not going to take the time to explain to you all the necessary elements you need in these various areas of law. And, why would we? You don't have the educational ability to understand these concepts. Remember, you're a divorced, high school dropout, Hillbilly, Dufus, Hick from Virginia.

IAAL

[seniorjudge]

Originally Posted by Mike703

Why do u all have to be so freaking negative....I'm just trying to find out what I can do. Are u all even familiar with VA law???

Google

virginia bailment


You will find that you have been given 100% correct information in this thread.

[fairisfair]

now that's the IAAL we all know and love, LOL

can somebody talk real slow for
Mike??

oh FYI, all the attorneys are out to get mike
[url]http://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=321195[/url]

[CALIF-PROLAW19]

Originally Posted by fairisfair

now that's the IAAL we all know and love, LOL

can somebody talk real slow for
Mike??

My response:

Knowing this guy was from Virginia, right from the outset, I tried REAL hard to keep myself "in check." But, as this thread progressed, I couldn't stand it anymore, and my real feelings about this Dufus idiot, and his ilk, just came spilling out!!

IAAL

[fairisfair]

Originally Posted by CALIF-PROLAW19

My response:

Knowing this guy was from Virginia, right from the outset, I tried REAL hard to keep myself "in check." But, as this thread progressed, I couldn't stand it anymore, and my real feelings about this Dufus idiot, and his ilk, just came spilling out!!

IAAL

You have been EXTREMELY well behaved lately!