• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

$2000 Oil Change..Do I have a case?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

F

fujineko

Guest
What is the name of your state? Arizona

My husband and I went to Chevron Oilstop for an oil change. They asked for the year and the milage of the car. Besides the oil change, they recommended us many other services and products they had to offer. One of them was the transmission services and we accepted it. It included partial exchange of the fluids and a bottle of conditioner. 20 miles after we left there, the tranny got fried. The bill is $2000 and they won't pay, although they admitted partial responsibility. Their argument was that the tranny's maintenance was not up to date, and the tranny was old to begin with.

Our argument is that, we bought the car used and we were not responsible to know every single maintenance that was due. I don't think every single driver who uses their service know the exact history of the car. In fact, we wanted to keep up with the maintenance, so we drove into the place in good faith. We saw the Chevron Logo, so we subconsciously assumed they would do a good job.

Sure they can say our car was over due, but they have this sign that stated their 32 Pt. Service. This was included in the basic service. One article stated, "Check the transmission for the maintenance needs." They obviousely skipped this paid service because we found out later (from them) that our car WAS over due in maint., but they didn't tell us. The proper maintenance was to change the tranny filter and flush the system, according to the recommendation. Their website stated that they do nothing more or less than the recommendation. But they did nothing the recommendation said...all they did was something the recommendation didn't stated. I have asked around people who knows about the tranny and they all said the filter change was necessary. The very reason that broke our tranny was because they did not change the filter, and the substances loosened up by the conditioner clogged the filter, starved the tranny of fluids and broke the second gear band.

In my opinions, they should have pointed us to the tranny experts when they asked about the model and the milage. If they keep the recommendations, they knew our service was past due. Since they don't offer what the reccomendation suggested, they should have told us what we needed and where we needed to go to fullfill them. Again, we paid for them to tell us that. Instead they got greedy with the $33 extra dollars and sold us their improvised services that broke the car.

I really would like to know if we have a case if we take this to the small claims. There aren't many local civil lawyers around, and they have blown us off perhaps because there isn't much money involved for them. We are each other's witnesses, and a friend was with us all the time to be another witness. The mechanic who tear down the car for the investigation wouldn't give us an affadavid because the company was in business relations with Oilstop. Please help us win this case, any advise would be helpful. If you should have any questions about the case, feel free to post them.

We are poor nobodies but honest, hard working poeple. The only mistake we made was that we drove into the nightmare oil change one day....
 


racer72

Senior Member
This happens more often than we hear about. As parts wear in transmissions, contaminants fill in the spaces that were once filled with transmission parts. This is especially true of the clutch pack and bands. The filter is changed, new fluid is installed and away you go. For a short while. The increased pressure from the new filter and fluid flushes out a lot of the contaminants and things begins to act funny. Soon, the transmission fails. And like you, the company that performed the service is to blame.

You could sue the company in small claims but because of the size of the company, they will petition that the case gets moved to a higher court so their lawyers can handle the case. This forces you to either hire a lawyer yourself or defend yourself against some very experience lawyers and their expert witnesses than also happen to be employees of the company. Your legal cost will exceed the cost of your claim easily. And your claim of not knowing the previous maintainance of the tranny would probably be enough for a judge to find against you.

I went through the same thing a few years ago and decided it would be a losing proposition to try to sue.
 
F

fujineko

Guest
So...

>>>Hi Grandpa, and thanks for the reply.


According to the law, everybody who drives into the place needs to know the previous maintenance records? Like I stated, they were PAID to tell us about that. There is no sign anywhere that says "You (the consumers) have to be up-to-date on your car maintenance." Like I said we got this car used and we didn't know how to find out about the service records other than going to a place that supporse to inform us of those things. How can judges judge against us when they neglected the paid job and break our car? Isn't that like a fraud because we paid for a product and they didn't give it to us?
 
F

fujineko

Guest
PS

Oh by the way....tell me about your case if you don't mind. Did you personally went thru the similar thing? Or are you the lawyer who handled this case?

I don't think Oilstop itself is such a big company. They are using the name Chevron, but the manager told us that they were able to do so because they are using their products. They have something like 11 branches and their website is cheap home-made like, and none of the message boards or the e-mail addresses work. I think there are only about 10 people working at the main company. I'd be glad if we are gonna lose, they should lose some money on the lawyers and fees too.
 
A

a neighbor

Guest
eeeccckkk!

" they should lose some money on the lawyers and fees too."

Careful, careful, careful, you could be paying their attorney's fees if you lose!:eek:
 
F

fujineko

Guest
So....

So I admit my ignorance...

Then the small people like us are screwed twice as soon as we file such a case to the small claims? We are in the U.S, right?
 

stephenk

Senior Member
If you file in small claims court for damages up to or less than the small claims limit, the court will not allow the defendants to have the case moved up to a higher jurisdiction.

File the claim against the owner of the franchise you got the service from and the manager of that branch. They have to appear to defend the case. No attorneys are allowed to argue in small claims matters.

You will need to the mechanic who checked out your car after it broke down to establish fault on the defendants. I dont think you and your husband are qualified experts in the field of transmissions.
 
A

a neighbor

Guest
Unfortunately

"No attorneys are allowed to argue in small claims matters."

Unfortunately, the above is not true in Maryland and Washington D.C.:( I do remember the day Maryland didn't allow attorney's, but they do now.

EDITED: And under Arizona, if all parties agree, attorney(s) can be present, and the wording looks as tho it also can be transferred:

"Because proceedings in small claims cases are simplified, lawyers are generally not necessary; however, they are allowed to participate if all parties agree. A form, Stipulation for Use of Attorneys, may be obtained from the court for this purpose. If all parties do not agree, attorneys are prohibited from representing any party in the case unless it is transferred out of the small claims division."


Found: http://www.supreme.state.az.us/info/brochures/smclaims.htm
 
Last edited:
A

a neighbor

Guest
fuji

"Then the small people like us are screwed twice as soon as we file such a case to the small
claims? We are in the U.S, right?"

I hate to say it, I've been bent over so many times, I walk around saying BOHICA! (Bend Over Here it Comes Again):D
 

racer72

Senior Member
stephenk said:
If you file in small claims court for damages up to or less than the small claims limit, the court will not allow the defendants to have the case moved up to a higher jurisdiction.

Wrong. I attempted a small court action against the service center about the car I mentioned in my first post. I sued the manager of the store and the owner of the franchise. Quaker State stepped in to help the franchisee and the case was moved to a superior court because the QS lawyers claimed the franchise owner was not able to properly defend himself, he was a business man, not an auto mechanic. The judge granted the movement and advised me to hire an attorney myself, he would not hear the case pro se. I dropped it, I knew I had no chance.
 
A

a neighbor

Guest
racer

And Gosh forbid you did go Pro Se against the attorney's, they would have prolly eaten you alive, and taken your money for their fees!

Which brings to mind another question?? I thought you were allowed, and not to be mandated by a judge, to be Pro Se? Never understood being "ordered" to get an attorney?
 

stephenk

Senior Member
Racer said he was "advised" to get an attorney. Judges dont like to deal with pro per plaintiff/defendants. A judge cant order you to get an attorney, but they can make your life difficult in the case if you decide to represent yourself.

The court will not grant a pro per any special considerations just because they are not an attorney. A pro per will be expected to know all the rules and procedures just like an attorney.

I am very disappointed in the judge's ruling in Racer's case. Small claims court was specifically set up to avoid having lawyers being involved. If the defendant didnt like any award in the small claim hearing they can always appeal. The small claims appeal hearing allows a party to be represented by counsel.

Fujineko, just dont stipulate to allow attorneys to be heard at the small claims hearing.
 
A

a neighbor

Guest
stephen

racer said "he would not hear the case pro se." Pretty much means you HAVE to get an attorney, and I've heard judges say this before. Wonder how well it holds water???
 
F

fujineko

Guest
A lot to think about....

I really appreciate your opinions!

Well lawyers or no lawyers, sounds like they are going to take this up to the justice court....and expect us to drop the case. I think they've been blowing us off because they knew what to do in the worst case scenario. I guess the law is just another game designed to make our life more miserable.

And I still don't believe O.J. was innocent!
 
A

a neighbor

Guest
fuji, the laws are to keep the honest people honest, the crooks will get away with anything regardless of the law!

Sad part, even when you say enough-is-enough, as in my case, and hire an attorney, you can't guarantee the attorney is not just lining his pockets.

In my case, it consisted of an attorney advising me under MD law of my rights, instead he filed a lawsuit, charging me $1900 for a case I had to dismiss on my own (after I found out what I could actually do, long story.) In the end I'm now fighting paying him $1200, which he says I still owe.

Now what would have been the prudent thing to do? Pay for attorney advice, pay the $495 that it cost me to get the job done, or pay thousands of $'s fighting a case that had no chances of winning (under MD law?) Oh and I would have gotten stuck paying for the Defendants attorney's fees because they were asking for them!!:eek:
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top