The plaintiff wants his $1,772 back from the shop, but the owner said the company doesn’t owe him anything. The delays were out of their control. The client was unsatisfied and sued. Is this what you can call a “cartastrophe” in today’s world? It might be! Here’s what the judge decided after the case was brought into a court of law.
Robert Fullmore brought his car into the shop to get it fixed because it wouldn’t start anymore after a year of ownership. The engine was blown out. Fortunately, he had an extended warranty for the vehicle. The mechanics looked at it and told the man it would be “a week tops” until he could be back on the road again, after mistakenly informing him it could take just two days of work. All was good at this point.
But as time went by, the car’s owner had stuff to do and needed his own mean of transportation. He asked if the car was ready, but the shop didn’t manage to return it in a week. He had to wait months for the engine to be replaced. In the meantime, he rented a car to make sure he could go wherever he was needed. The warranty offered him a rental car for two days.
Fullmore decided that reimbursement is needed because he had to keep the rental for longer than just 48 hours. The case was brought to court. Here the man asked to be reimbursed by the shop. The plaintiff argued he had to wait too long, and the costs of renting covered by the warranty didn’t help much.
The judge told the plaintiff that she understands the situation but also pointed out an engine replacement takes longer than a week. Her honor told the man she had to wait four months in a similar situation.
The car eventually got a new engine. After he received it and drove it, the vehicle started leaking. Smoke and steam were also coming out from under the hood. Fullmore went to other similar businesses and got it checked. He paid a couple of hundred bucks for mechanics to look at it and to tell him what was wrong.
The defendant argued that supply chains were disrupted by the health crisis and shipping issues while underlining that the plaintiff’s car remained a priority. Not getting the part needed was the issue. The judge agreed. The car’s owner wasn’t going to receive the $1,772 he wanted for rental fees.
However, the judge decided that the plaintiff should receive $220.23 from the team that did the original repair. The money was meant for covering the checking of the car’s engine problems in other shops. Is this fair? Let us know down below.
Car shows on TV and his father's Fiat Tempra may have been Florin's early influences, but nowadays he favors different things, like the power of an F-150 Raptor. He'll never be able to ignore the shape of a Ferrari though, especially a yellow one. Full profile
Would you like AUTOEVOLUTION to send you notifications?
Google News