by aal118 » Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:26 pm
Took car for minor repair My Mechanic drove my car without my permission and get hit in rear damaging my spoiler bumper headlight and now the alarm keep sounding everytime i try to lock the car. His reason for driving my car was he needed to buy the paint for the car so he needed to make sure that it's the right colour. The problem is his insurance would not help as he is only insured for third party when driving other car.
He gave all details of ther driver i contacted the other driver who gave me the broker (kiwk fit) when i contacted kwik fit they refused to supply any details for the underwriters so were do i go from here.
He gave all details of ther driver i contacted the other driver who gave me the broker (kiwk fit) when i contacted kwik fit they refused to supply any details for the underwriters so were do i go from here.
Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 07:04 am Post Subject:
Guys, I was just wondering that aren't the bodyshops required to maintain insurance against such claims? I mean since this is a business hazard and like any other business the bodyshop too may require to maintain certain coverage for claims arising during the repair work.
Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 11:36 am Post Subject:
certainly bandit, they have several policys/coverages...just this particular loss would not be covered most likely.
Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 03:34 pm Post Subject:
In 'theory' without this authorization for repair a real jerk could say, 'i didn't tell you to fix my car, and i'm not paying for it' then the shop won't release the car, then the owner will sue the shop and it will take forever and a judge will eventually make the decision...
This is a risk a shop takes when it chooses to negotiate with an insurer and assumes it has authorization from the owner to repair their vehicle. Just because a shop has a written agreement with an insurer that insures a vehicle owner's car, it doesn't have the implied authority to repair that car without owner's permission.
I recently repaired a 2008 Honda Accord in which the dealership had ordered all the parts to repair a car and partially disassembled it without permission from the owner. They assumed since it was towed to the dealership at the suggestion of the third party insurer, (can you say steering?) that they had some implied consent since they had agreements with the third party insurer. Guess what repair shop called me and pleaded with me to buy those parts when the owner authorized my business to repair that vehicle. You bet I took them off their hands at nearly dealer cost rather than the usual dealer discounted price.
Written on every insurer estimate that I have seen, it states we can not authorize repairs to your vehicle. I know of instances where shops failed to get authorization and did not get paid for any repairs they had made. Another reason for the shop to have a written authorization and a contract is to include language that informs the owner that they are the only ones that expressly approve of the parts and methodogy in the repair since it is their property; they are ultimately responible for all payment; written notice of failure to pay for all authorized repairs would allow the shop to place a lein on the property to secure payment for those authorized repairs.
After the repairs are completed is a poor time to authorize those repairs. More than likely a consumer may have signed acceptance of repairs upon completion of them. Some states have statutes that require that any deviation from the estimate be reported to the consumer if it exceeds ten percent of the original estimate or quote before additional repairs are completed.
Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 04:16 pm Post Subject:
Mike, I have been reading this thread, and I was wondering if you charge for time or have a fee for a test drive or are somehow compensated for the risk associated with sending a tech out on the road in a customer's vehicle?
Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 05:05 pm Post Subject:
There are several schools of thought on this.
I do not personally charge for test drives. I may test drive for windnoises, rattles, etc. I let the alignment shop do their own test drive. If I charge for a test drive, then that makes me liable for any conceivable hidden damage that may have occured during the accident simply because I claimed to have test driven by virtue of claiming the expertise to do so. Even though I sublet the aligment, you and I know that I am still liable for their work. We routinely mark up their labor and our expense to get the vehicle to that repairer because we are accepting the risk that they did their job correctly and we charge an appropriate price commensurate with work performed and the risk taken.
I know there are those that do charge for a test drive and when the insurer puts in writing that they refuse to pay for a test drive, then that removes some of the liability from hidden damage because the insurer refused to reimburse the consumer for a fee that we may have determined was necessary. It's all about assuming risk with proper payment and acknowledging those that refuse to pay for a thorough test drive.
Posted: Tue Feb 10, 2009 06:13 pm Post Subject:
It sounds like there could be a lot of risks involved in being a shop owner. I personally have never paid for a garage to test drive my vehicle but I am from the back woods. You simply take your vehicle to a place you have went to for yeats and years and hand over the keys. The guys working on your car are people your around alot. Thinking of this and reading your post makes me wonder if maybe they carry insurance to cover themselves sonce its more of a drop and go garage.
I am glad I have never had anything happen that would bring on a problem of whos to blame but reading this post has made me relize just what riskd there are .
Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2009 10:47 am Post Subject:
After the repairs are completed is a poor time to authorize those repairs
I totally agree...the company I work for even the direct repairs shop MUST have a signed authorization to repair that vehicle from the owner...no insurance company can give any shop authorization to repair a vehicle..or even move one for that matter....I've seen both sides of the 'half way done' repair without an authorization...it's not pretty, (unless you are the one on the back half :wink: )
I've never had a shop ask to be paid for a test drive...unless and only if it was part of a diagnostic, which would also include other things..But never to check that the repair was done correctly (ie wind noise, after susp/steering work etc)...
It sounds like there could be a lot of risks involved in being a shop owner.
There are huge risks that the public doesn't realize or think about in owning any business...any time you are in a business that repairs or works on someone elses property (as opposed to selling them new property) the expectation and risk are much higher.Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 06:49 pm Post Subject: mechanic backs into customer car with a customer car
so my fiance is a mechanic and he backed into a customer car with a customer car, his boss didn't want to go through insurance because it would raise his rates so he paid out of pocket. Now his boss is saying he wants him to pay for the damage which is $1500. We don't have that much money and I am wondering if what he is asking of him is even legal. That's why he has insurance to cover accidents like this, because it was a complete accident. Thanks for your advice in advance.
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 07:53 pm Post Subject:
We don't have that much money and I am wondering if what he is asking of him is even legal.
It's legal to ask for... and I'm guessing if it's not paid his employer may fire him. I've handled many claims where valet attendents do the same thing. The company has a deductible that they pay and they require the valet attendents to pay back the deductible.I think it's rude and nto right to require an employee to pay but I can see the employers point of view... the employee was not doing their job correctly and this caused money out of the employers pocket. But I also think when you hire someone you should expect that they might make a mistake. You take the good with the bad.
Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 08:10 pm Post Subject:
So it looks like he won't be able to deduct anything from his paycheck and he can't fire him either or we will take his butt to court.
from the industrial welfare commission
8. Cash Shortage and Breakage
No employer shall make any deduction from the wage or require any reimbursement from an employee for any cash shortage, breakage,
or loss of equipment, unless it can be shown that the shortage, breakage, or loss is caused by a dishonest or willful act, or by the gross
negligence of the employee.
9. Q. What can I do if my employer retaliates against me because I objected to a deduction from my wages?
A. If your employer discriminates or retaliates against you in any manner whatsoever, for example, he discharges you because you object to what you believe to be an illegal deduction, or because you file a claim or threaten to file a claim with the Labor Commissioner, you can file a discrimination/retaliation complaint with the Labor Commissioner’s Office. In the alternative, you can file a lawsuit in court against your employer.
so hopefully everything will work out...
Add your comment