10 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHAny Attorney's Out There?
Leading reported evidence
Replace engine
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
It went in for a tune-up and they ended up replacing the engine, which then seized up a month later.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Also, although I understand the "trust" issue, I think you would be hard-pressed to get a court to award you a judgment if you decline their offer to repair the damage themselves.
Leading evidence: 'Replace engine' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Repair damage themselves' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Also, although I understand the "trust" issue, I think you would be hard-pressed to get a court to award you a judgment if you decline their offer to repair the damage themselves.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I'm not sure of the amount that is at issue for you, but if I were you I would secure two or three estimates for the repair from other shops, and then send the original shop a strongly-worded letter detailing what they did, setting forth the costs to repair it, and demanding they pay for the repair.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I'm not sure of the amount that is at issue for you, but if I were you I would secure two or three estimates for the repair from other shops, and then send the original shop a strongly-worded letter detailing what they did, setting forth the costs to repair it, and demanding they pay for the repair.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
It will probably spell out the specific exclusions from liability, and may also specifically set forth the shop's warranty policy.
These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.
Repair damage themselves
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Also, although I understand the "trust" issue, I think you would be hard-pressed to get a court to award you a judgment if you decline their offer to repair the damage themselves.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I'm not sure of the amount that is at issue for you, but if I were you I would secure two or three estimates for the repair from other shops, and then send the original shop a strongly-worded letter detailing what they did, setting forth the costs to repair it, and demanding they pay for the repair.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
I'm not sure of the amount that is at issue for you, but if I were you I would secure two or three estimates for the repair from other shops, and then send the original shop a strongly-worded letter detailing what they did, setting forth the costs to repair it, and demanding they pay for the repair.
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Generally speaking, when you retain a professional to perform labor or services, they are under an obligation to use due care when providing the labor or performing those services, and must live up to the "standard of care" in the industry -- i.e., they must use such skill and expertise as would be expected of other professionals in their field.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
10 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T161109Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Looking for free advice here...
LOL
If an independent shop damages your Porsche when you take it in to them what are their obligations to make the car right?
Suppose the damage and treatment of the car is such that you don't want to take it back to them to fix because you have lost any "trust" factor there? What are the damaged parties options?
Just looking for any legal warranties or rules that might apply to this kind of situation.
Thanks in advance!
i am no laywer,
but u tried small claim court?
i think it will be hard to prove they did the damage, if you don't have any paper work when dropping off the car.
What specifically did they damage? Did you point out the damage to them when you picked up the car? What has been their reaction to your claim? Maybe you can settle this without a lawyer - it'll wind up costing you more than the original repair!
I asked an attorney friend, and he asked me what you do for a living and if you are willing to give whatever you deal in for free in exchange for the free advice that he will offer to you? Also maybe I should get something for free from the both of you for making the connection for free. What do you think? LOL
You're better off just eating it and walking away. I went throughthis several years ago with a garage that royally goofed up my wife's Blazer (she was my fiance back then). It went in for a tune-up and they ended up replacing the engine, which then seized up a month later. Several attorney associates told me there was no real way to get compensated, so just writ eit off to experience.
I'm an attorney, although I practice in California, and don't know the laws that would specifically apply in your state. Also, I can't tell what happened exactly in your case, so this is pure off the top of my head speculation. I offer no warranty on this advice, and will tell you only that it's worth exactly what you paid for it.
Lastly, many other lawyers who read this site might disagree with my views, so I can't claim that this will be authoritative.
Now that the necessary disclaimers are out of the way, here are some thoughts:
First read the contract/invoice/receipt relating to the repair. It will probably spell out the specific exclusions from liability, and may also specifically set forth the shop's warranty policy.
In order to determine if there are some specific laws that might help you, on-line legal authorities are available for free at
www.findlaw.com
. You might check this site for any statutes/regulations in your state that speak to warranties for labor/services performed. Generally speaking, when you retain a professional to perform labor or services, they are under an obligation to use due care when providing the labor or performing those services, and must live up to the "standard of care" in the industry -- i.e., they must use such skill and expertise as would be expected of other professionals in their field. Stated another way, they must act "reasonably," and if they don't, they are guilty of negligence. And if they were negligent, they are responsible for all damages "proximately caused" by the negligence.
I'm not sure of the amount that is at issue for you, but if I were you I would secure two or three estimates for the repair from other shops, and then send the original shop a strongly-worded letter detailing what they did, setting forth the costs to repair it, and demanding they pay for the repair. You should be prepared to sue in small claims court if they decline (if this issue is worth more than the small claims court limit of $5,000, you should retain an attorney to pursue this on your behalf). Also, although I understand the "trust" issue, I think you would be hard-pressed to get a court to award you a judgment if you decline their offer to repair the damage themselves. I would imagine it will be the best work they ever do though, since they will want to make sure it gets done right this time.
I hope this is helpful.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
