I agree that was definitely noteworthy!!

ChuckJ

 

How can the dealership not step up at this point? Sounds like there is evidence they screwed up... threaten legal action.

I had a wheel come off my ML63 two days after it was in for service (part of which included rotating/balancing the wheels due to a slight shimmy) and the dealership bent over backward for me. The damage to the vehicle was around $8k... they paid for everything, detailed the car, gave me a loaner while they did and offered to detail my M3 as well. They were fully apologetic of what happened and were aware that they coulda killed me as well... Oh, they even flat bedded the truck from my house because I didn't want to drive it in on the spare.

I would like to think if my fairly new Porsche went up in flames, someone would be kissing my ***.

 

That is awful.

 

Things go wrong all the time guys. Cars get rear ended, t-boned, etc. That is what insurance is for. They'll pay out his car's value and hopefully the dealer will provide some extra discounts to get the OP closer to the value of a new car. If the mechanic was negligent, not much different than the driver who looks down at his cell phone while driving and then looks up again just before rear ending you and writing off your car. Insurance will cover it. Thinking you can put the guy on "the rack" and stretch until his limbs fall off is a bit ridiculous (i.e. his first born, punitive damages, etc.). its just a car an there are thousands more out there to choose from.

 

Corn Flakes looking a little yellow these days? How many cars have you had burned to the ground? Won't be adding to your reputation. Geez...

 

Straight up Cold hearted...but he has a valid point.

 

WRONG! Very different from being rear ended. When you bring your car into a dealer for service, whether you know it or not, you are entering into a contract with said dealer. The dealer agrees to service you car and you agree to pay said amount of money for the service. Now you have a reasonable expectation that the dealer servicing you car does the job you are paying for.
You would be correct in your statement if the dealer was not good with service. e.g. forgot to replace the oil filter. In the rear end/cellphone crash the individual is in no contract with you and presumably is not an expert on cellphone driving. So because he was negligent in his actions the insurance company for whom HE is in a contract with has to cover your losses. You may still choose to go after him for more although usually you do not get much. The service tech presumably was negligent in leaving rag on the motor so the contract was violated. The courts are a lot more on the side of the individual with the total loss basically because the dealer should have checked the work or known better being that that is what they do. It is not incumbent on the individual to check the work done by a professional afterward, although advisable. The OP will probably NOT get a new car, but will probably be compensated for the agreed value of the car plus some extra. His insurance company will no doubt go after the dealer for compensation not the OP. This one is interesting...keep us posted.

 

Great job, Greg!

ChuckJ

 

great explanation which makes total sense - you are paying for a service and expect to get the car back in the condition it was before the service, plus whatever service you paid for. No "surprises!"

 

I don't see the argument. We agree that he'll get compensated for the value of the car. But, it is a used car, so he isn't getting a new one for old, just because it burned to the ground vs getting rear ended. Negligence is negligence and in the end, you are compensated for your "loss", which is the value of what you lost, plus some inconvenience, rental car costs, etc.

As to the OP's dream of "punitive damages", he sounds like a child stamping his feet after someone defiled his heirloom or some irreplaceable object. It isn't. Its a car. An expensive one, no doubt, but a mass produced car nonetheless, regardless of how fanatical we are about Porches on this forum.

So call, me "coldhearted" if you like, but go to law school and you'll understand the principle of damages. His car was totalled, albeit in a dramatic fashion, but unless he has replacement cost insurance on the car, he ain't getting new for old.

And it is quite a bit different if a surgeon leaves a sponge in you and you suffer illness and long lasting health effects from the negligence.

Have a good day.

 

In Pennsylvania the measure of damages is the replacement value of the vehicle. That is, fair market value before the fire.

Many years ago I was at the Superior Court arguing an appeal. While waiting a young lawyer whose client's dog had died while in the custody of a veterinarian argued to the Court her client was entitled to significant damages well in excess of a value of a like dog. One of the Judges looked up and said, "it's a dog, a dog is chattel [property], next case."
I argued my case - the inapplicability of dicta for the application of collateral estoppel. I lost. Mellon Bank v. Rafsky, 369 Pa.Super. 585, 535 A.2d 1090 (1987). I appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, was granted the appeal and did not get the opportunity to present the case and make new law as the case settled. Mellon Bank, E. Nat. ***'n v. Rafsky, 518 Pa. 650, 544 A.2d 961 (1988)

Yes, the OP may be entitled to contract damages as well as treble damages and all attorney fees under the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law if there was some representation upon which the OP relied when servicing the car.

 

I'm just pointing out the law on "damages" while others are running around saying hang the bastard who dd this and give him a brand new car. I'd find a new dealer for sure if he doesn't add some cash to the insult and from a PR perspective, he'd be wise to do so. But, I doubt his insurer is going to offer new for old and like I wrote earlier, if someone rear ended this car na dee were looking at a worked 911 with the engine in the back seat, the other driver's insurance company wouldn't be paying for a brand new replacement car, they'd be paying the value of the car directly before it was hit, plus other losses: rental car, taxi, (until an offer was made) and medical, etc.

I hope the OP does better - and it has nothing to do with Cornflakes (which I don't eat).

 

Thank you!

I did forget to mention that there may be state or federal legislation that modifies the common law principles of damages, but you might know more about that than I.

Which brings up another point - the service contract itself may limit the recovery of damages to the actual loss (read the fine print when you sign the work order) and not allow recovery beyond that (in absence of applicable legislation).

 

...the essence of fraud is that it destroys consent in the context of consumer contracts. To the extent that the dealer fraudulently induced the limitation on damages and the like would be meaningless.

I recently had our 2016 Subaru Outback at the dealer to repair and replace roof racks I truly believe will not ever be used by me and I really did not care if it were ever fixed.

It took over 6 months for the rack to be delivered from the manufacturer. The dealer was really apologetic, kept the car a few days to make certain that absolutely everything was correct and provided a 2017 model to me while my car was in the shop.

A few days later Subaru headquarters send me an email offering a 100,000 mile 7 year warranty over and above the 36,000mi/3year warranty as a way of apologizing for the delay -

Turns out the dealer demanded the extension.

I've dealt with the Dealer that screwed the pooch on the OP's car....IMHO I wouldn't take roller skates to them to fix.

 

Not to mention that if this car was ordered to the ops liking, it can never be replaced since it's a .1 and the op may not like the character of the .2. That may not have legal consequences, but it adds to the shame of the matter.

ChuckJ