Ignition Interlock Device Failure: Tow Costs

[Skttrbrain]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Washington.

I have an ignition interlock device installed in my car as a result of a DUI conviction. The device recently went completely dead after trying to start my car after work. I brought the handset to the shop that leased the device (it is a Guardian) and the firmware was updated. Unfortunately this did not fix the problem and I had to have my car towed from my work site to the shop. The malfunction was not a result of anything on my part. I'm wondering if the shop that leased me the device is responsible for reimbursing me for the cost of the tow ($140). I have read the contract I signed and there is nothing I can find that would save them from this besides perhaps this one line in the "Warranties" section:

"Lessee expressly acknowledges and agrees that lessor shall have no responsibility or liability related to damage to lessee's vehicle related to installation or removal of the system. Lessor is not responsible for inconvenience or loss of revenue related to the use, non-use, or failure of the system."

Is this the line that will keep me from being reimbursed?

 

[racer72]

Is this the line that will keep me from being reimbursed?

Yes. Looks like the tow was on your dime.

 

[You Are Guilty]

I'm going to disagree. I think there may be enough wiggle room in there to at least make a small claims case without being laughed out of court. Specifically, the release says "Lessor is not responsible for inconvenience or loss of revenue related to the use, non-use, or failure of the system."

The question then, is whether the cost of a tow (due solely to the failure of the interlock), is "inconvenience" or "loss of revenue". It certainly is not "loss of revenue". But exactly what is "inconvenience"? That word is exceedingly vague. Is inconvenience having to deal with the whole tow hassle? Being late to work that day and being docked time? Or losing out on that big promotion for being late? Who knows.

Given proof that the interlock failed through no fault of the user, I can see a judge coming down against the manufacturer. Worth a shot at least.

 

[Skttrbrain]

Thanks for replies much appreciated.