Simple "Express" Oil Change (now a blown transmission)

[penguins]

State: Ohio (interesting story)

My mother went to a local "Express" oil change company. As indicated on the "Service Order," the technicians checked all of the fluid levels etc... including the Transmission Fluid. I might add that this was all done very quickly, hence the name "Express" (if it was done at all).

About a 1,000 miles after this oil change and other mechanical "checks," my mother was driving down the road with a friend and her car broke down. Luckily, and ironically, a "good Samaritan" who who pushed her car off to the side of the road was a mechanic just leaving work. Since my mother is legally disabled, this gentleman's help was a blessing.

So, the mechanic started the car with no problem, but when he shifted it into Drive, there was shrieking coming from the transmission. He lifted the hood and checked the transmission dipstick, which was totally dry. There was no Transmission fluid in the car. He went across the street to buy a couple of quarts of tranny fluid and poured it into the car's reservoir, to no avail, the car wouldn't shift into gear and the shrieking was louder.

MY QUESTION...
The oil-change company's Service Order clearly shows that the tranny fluid was checked although the "good Samaritan" mechanic proves that there was no fluid in the transmission. (he even showed it to my mom and her friend.) I'm under the impression that since the fluid that the "good Samaritan" poured into the car is still present, that the oil change company neglected to properly check the tranny's fluid level or didn't do it at all.

My mother sent a detailed letter to the company and requested that the company fix her broken transmission. Does she have a case. I think it was poor workmanship and that the company should pay for the repairs. Plus, the "good Samaritan" even said that "they" should have checked it etc...

I want to help my mother, but this is a big company who will probably say "tough luck," which doesn't seem right in this case.

Thanks a lot in advance.

 

[alligatorob]

I am not a lawyer, but I do know a little about how quick lube businesses operate. You can always sue, and if can do it in small claims court it will probably be much easier for you to prosecute than for the quick lube business to defend. If this happened after 1000 miles you probably have a weak case at best; but I know larger quick lube outfits get a lot of these kinds of suits and will usually settle rather than fight. So if you write letters, document and file suit you have at least some chance of recovering something.

Good luck.

 

[joseph17]

transmission

I'm not a lawyer, but I will be seeing one on Wednesday to help me fill out a small claims form for a similar problem.

-about a year ago I had an express oil change on my car. the car was running fine going in, but coming out it was jerking whenever it shifted gears (automatic transmission).

-i took it back, but they couldn't find anything wrong with it, but it still jerked and would stall-out in the morning when cold. i took it to the dealer, who found that there was no transmission oil in the car and that the transmission bolts had fresh wrench marks on it. they believe that the transmission fluid was drained by mistake and they also noticed that the motor oil was overfilled.

-the express oil company has been a brick wall and has taken no responsibility for anything. i've spent several months with consumer affairs office, before i learned they have no authority to force them to do anything.

-although the transmission works fairly well (driven for over 500 miles with little or no transmission oil), it can't be predicted if any permanent damage or pre-mature failure will occur, so i'm just going to small claims court to recoup my out of pocket expenses which i've spent at the dealer as well as oil testing and follow-up evaluation (about $600).

- My question would be, did your mother have any problem with the car immediately coming out of the express oil station, or was it all of a sudden? can you have a mechanic look at the transmission bolt area and document if there are any fresh wrench marks on it?

-The main difference in your case and mine, seems to be I have documentation from the mechanic which shows that a mistake/negligent act had taken place causing the mechanical failure. I'm not sure if you can get this type of documentation at this late stage, but maybe it's still possible from a mechanic? Good luck in your efforts!

Joe/NJ
[email protected]

 

[JETX]

Q: "The oil-change company's Service Order clearly shows that the tranny fluid was checked although the "good Samaritan" mechanic proves that there was no fluid in the transmission. (he even showed it to my mom and her friend.) I'm under the impression that since the fluid that the "good Samaritan" poured into the car is still present, that the oil change company neglected to properly check the tranny's fluid level or didn't do it at all."

A: Though you may be able to show that the 'Express Lube' was negligent in not checking the fluid level, it would be very unlikely that the negiglence would allow recovery of the transmission repair cost. If anything, you would only be able to recover the few cents that the 'failed service' would have cost... if it were chargable. The problem you have is that the failure to notice the low fluid level was not a CAUSE of the transmission damage. Now, if you were able to show that THEY did something to the fluid level (drained and 'forgot' to refill), etc. that would be different and could be found to be 'causal' to the damages.
Finally, the transmission fluid had to have 'disappeared' someway. Can you show that it DIDN'T leak out in the 1,000 miles since the fluid MIGHT have been checked??? Without that, you are pushing your car up a very steep hill...

 

[penguins]

response to Halket...

To Halket,

I'm not quite sure I understand your reasoning when you say, "The problem you have is that the failure to notice the low fluid level was not a CAUSE of the transmission damage."

Not detecting or inspecting the fluid level IS the cause or the transmission damage. The transmission will not function properly without it. The same parallel logic applies to the tire inflation levels, windshield washer fluid, brake fluid, and so on...

When these levels are low or empty, the mechanical features fail.

The fluid the good samiritan poured into the car a few days ago is STILL PRESENT, which indicates no leak, crack, or broken off plug. This is an Acura Integra, a very reliable automobile.

This situation is a classic case of compromising precision for time, hence the "Express" lube change philosophy. In my opinion, these guys simply failed to check the tranny level and consequently the transmission failed after being driven dry for miles.

The philosophy of the quick lube, express lube and other like companies, places more emphasis on getting the customer out and not on doing a thorough inspection. People who don't have problems are somewhat lucky or simply have newer cars that don't require thorough maintenance.

Your comment is appreciated though!

thanks,
penguins

 

[JETX]

You missed the principal... the issue is NOT the notice of the low fluid.

The problem is, assuming that the fluid was in fact low (or empty), the lube center didn't do it (unless you are claiming that they purposely drained the case). There is no way for anyone to know how long the tranny may have been run without any fluid.. and that is the key. If you were able to prove that the fluid was okay when it went in, and not when it came out, you might have a claim that they have some responsibility for the tranny failure. Absent that proof, your only real claim is that they said they did the fluid level check when they didn't. And that failure is NOT definitively causal to the tranny failure.

You can certainly claim that their failure MAY have lead to 'more' damage, but not exclusively that IT was the cause of the damage.