Suing local auto parts place your thoughts please.

JOCCO

Well-known Member
1. A local fellow was given the wrong fluid for a car transmission. Now it needs service probably buy a shop, Or possibly rebuilt. This place seems to have issues mostly people related. They admitted to the mistake now he is going round with the management on relief. Well he is going to file suit Monday (if its not resolved) ON BOTH THE AUTO SUPPLY PLACE AND EMPLOYEE!! 2. Same outfit sold a reman engine to a company it had all kinds of issues. They did get another one and same thing lots of problems. Now they do not seem to want to make this right so the company manager is filing suit. I doubt they rebuilt the engine probably just ordered it from another outfit. MY QUESTIONS FOR YOU FOLKS ARE HAVE ANY OF YOU BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS TYPE OF MESS? And what was the outcome? I try to avoid this as much as possible (court and suing) My take is 1. won't get much relief 2.Might get something on a warrantee claim. I know many of the local people on both sides whole thing is kind of a shame. I am not involved just a bystander THANKS TO ALL
 
I think the person dumping in the fluids is ultimately responsible. Not to say the business should share some of it but especially today with the internet there is no reason to not have the right answer. As far as the reman engine, the engine builder should shoulder responsibility not the middle man unless stated otherwise. No different than if you buy something bad at a store many times.
 
> A local fellow was given the wrong fluid for a car transmission. Now it needs service probably buy a shop, Or possibly rebuilt

Unless they sold him carburetor cleaner and told him it was transmission fluid, it's hard to believe adding the wrong fluid caused the transmission to fail. It seems more likely the tranny was already on its last legs.

> Same outfit sold a reman engine to a company it had all kinds of issues. They did get another one and same thing lots of problems.

What kind of "issues"? If it was something covered under warranty, then an exchange is due. If not, well then the buyer is SOL.
 
If the business is solid it will be insured or bonded to cover that type of foreseeable error. The fellow needs to file an insurance claim. Filing a lawsuit will just stall any settlement until the lawsuit is settled. A decent lawyer would help him get a claim started.
 
Having been in auto service management, I'd say the onus would be on the end user putting the fluid in the trans to know what he was putting in and making sure it was the right fluid.

That being said, I'd try for a fair settlement with the store and look at legal action as an absolute last resort. Keep in mind if the aggrieved party went to court and lost, legal expenses and court costs could easily exceed the price of doing whatever needs to be done with the trans.
 
Oops, I was thinking the business was a service center where an employee used the wrong fluid while servicing the car. If the customer did the work himself, then the customer should have checked the fluid, he's SOL.
 
I agree, the person "dumping in" the fluid should be responsible-- unless (very unlikely) what he dumped in was mislabeled. If the person doing the dumping doesn't know what to dump in he shouldn't be doing it. (just my opinion)
 
A transmission that needed fluid means it has a leak, and it has been run low on fluid. Not the fluid, but running it low caused the transmission to fail. That is what any good attorney is going to say in court.
 
I don't think the wrong fluid is going to hurt that trans right now, was probably junk to start with, and a rebuilt engine should have some kind of warranty unless the installer screwed something up which is very possible.
 
(quoted from post at 16:36:12 02/24/17) A transmission that needed fluid means it has a leak, and it has been run low on fluid. Not the fluid, but running it low caused the transmission to fail. That is what any good attorney is going to say in court.

Even if he was doing a routine fluid change he will need to prove:
1. that the fluid he bought was in fact the fluid that was used
2. that the transmission had no problems before the incident
3. that the fluid used was the cause of any failure

Good Luck....
 
I think its a touchy one. The person selling "should" have been able to look up the proper fluid. The person adding the fluid should also know what they should be using. If not should have checked the owners manual. You never said how much was put in. Was it just a little or was it a pull the pan, replace filter and re fill ? And how long was it driven ? I disagree that the wrong oil will cause harm. Maybe not 30 years ago but tranny's now require "special" oil which I am sure contains special additives for the vehicle it's going in. The more I am writing this and thinking about it I would also have to say whoever put the oil in is more at fault than the seller. I can never remember what kind of oil my wife's Jeep Cherokee takes and always have to look at the manual before I buy it. Oil changes are done for free at the dealer where we bought it but sometimes I have to add a little here and there. I never trust the 20 years old at the auto parts to tell me what I need.
 
Good luck in finding a lawyer that will touch it. If it isn't going to get them enough to pay for their time they won't take a case like this. What are you looking at, $3000 to $4000 bucks max? You might have some luck in civil court. Even with that if you get a judgement in your favor there is no real way to make them pay anything. At least in Oregon. Sometimes just a letter from a lawyer will scare them enough to pay. I agree with the comment that you would have to prove that there was now problem with the tranny before you were given the wrong fluid.

OTJ
 
Even if he wins he can only collect for the value of a used tranny rebuild. They will tell him it was an old tranny and having problems,that's why he brought it in.
 
If it is a chain you can threaten to take it up the chain to corporate, and if necessary follow through.

You can also mention Better Business Bureau . If you file a complaint with BBB they will follow up with the vendor to try to resolve the issue
 
The trans fluid situation may be tough to prove. The reman engine remedy is whatever is stated in their warranty. I believe I would just fix the transmission and move on. Lesson learned. Buying a reman engine from a parts store is a crap shoot. Either have one rebuilt by a competent, known machine shop or buy a factory reman engine with a good warranty.
 
I never heard of anyone suing the employee. "They admitted the mistake" When it gets to court they don't remember saying that.
 
Who poured the fluid in the transmission? If he bought it and poured it in himself,shouldn't he have read the label?

If you do damage with a pesticide,you,not the retailer,are responsible. Don't know why oil should be any different.
 
I remember years ago i had a truck that was full time four wheel drive if you put gear lube in the transfer case you would wreck it because there was a chain in there and it took engine oil i can't remember all the times i caught a mechanic trying to add gear lube .
This shows how valuable a good partsman is someone thats been around and can pick out the odd balls unfortunately to many places cut costs by hiring cheap or transient help and the customer is the one that pays.
It also brings to mind the warranty and maybe on new cars it's better to take it to a dealer
 
If the auto parts store is part of a large chain they have staff lawyers who know the quirks of the auto parts business. They will win one way or another. The employee should be under the umbrella of the parts store. I agree that the few thousand dollars lost by rebuilding the transmission might be less than what he would lose if he does not win the suit. If he does win the suit it might be appealed and drug out for a long, long time and he still might lose in the end. Either way, the bill for overhauling the trannmission will be presented to him way before the lawsuit has ended, or does he plan to leave the car parked till the lawsuit is over? So, does he want to gamble on winning, or losing and ending up with a bill higher that a transmission overhaul and still have to pay for an overhaul?

Also, if he does sue, he shoots himself in the foot because the word gets around to the other auto parts dealers in town.

I think he should just drop it for his own good and get on with life.
 
transmissions always require a certain type of oil. He should have looked in his manual or he should have contacted the dealership. Relying on some one from a parts place is a risky business period. The old boys in there are normally pretty good but these young bucks need more schooling or some thing. I would say suing some one is far fetched.
 
With so many different requirements for different vehicles I think it should have been up to the purchaser to do their homework and know what type fluid it should have.
 
Not enough details but he will lose. How many miles on his transmission? Has it been regularly serviced? You take a transmission that is full of old black tranny fluid that is only getting serviced because it isn't working quite right and put new fluid in, it will almost die on the spot.

Unless it is a variable speed transmission (fancy belt drive) you can't ruin a transmission quickly with any of the many automatic transmission fluids on the market. We do not even try to save a vehicles transmission if it has 100,000 with no previous services because of what new fluid does with old hard seals.

Last guy that sued me for damaging his transmission cost him 14,000 plus dollars for my lawyer plus he still had to pay me for the mis-fire we fixed for him. And he had to pay his own bill at a transmission shop of 4500 dollars. He stopped payment on his check. Seventy miles later his transmission quit. He claimed it was our fault because we had checked the fluid level and told him it was black. Never serviced in 163,000 miles.

So, he will just get all stirred up for nothing.
 
Even if he wins in small claims who knows when they will pay if at all BTDT.

He will need a expert witness one that the judge/magistrate does not question his qualifications to have an chance BTDT.

If its a store like Advance Auto the lost comes out of the stores profits, corporate could care less they will not send a $250 hr lawyer to fight it, its up to the store manager its coming out of his commission check.

From what I have seen Store manages are not lawyers and lost inside a court room. I was involved in a case I answered the customers questions the store manger would have won if he would have ask me the right questions but he did not. It was plain as day what caused the issue they could see it but never brought it up.

Two engines had issues after start up one a bad lifter and the other the oil pan did not fit the block and leaked oil bad. I testified to both issues. Both were repaired before they left the shop.

The customer blowed up both engines off road 4 wheeling all the engines were returned covered in mud :shock: that was there out but they never brought it up :roll:
 
I have one parts store I go to out of three in town just because the guy is about as old as I am.
 
He is wasting his time.
First thing to prove is why he got the wrong fluid. Did the customer do his own homework? He should have an owner's manual to tell him what fluid to use. Fluid requirement should also be stamped into the dipstick. I know that it is on Ford products.
Second, he would need to PROVE that the fluid he used actually CAUSED the damage. Not an easy thing to prove.

While the wrong fluid can shorten the life of a transmission, the effects of using the wrong fluid will take some time to manifest themselves.

As to engine "issues," in my mind, there are only four basic "issues" that I can figure:
1) noises/knocking
2) oil consumption or smoking
3) Leaking
4) compression or drivability issues.

Engine noises are generally internal, and should be covered under a warranty.
Oil consumption is a definite cause for concern. An engine sold as being rebuilt should not use oil.
Most leakage comes from assembly/installation problems. If you buy a short block, do not expect a warranty on the head gaskets! If you buy a long block, there can still be issues with the installation of the parts from the old engine - like manifolds, oil pan, and valve covers.
Unless a person buys a COMPLETE engine, there will be more issues with installation that with the engine itself.
Again, not easy to prove who is at fault.

My advice is to tell the guy to put on his big boy underpants, take the blame for his own shortcomings, and leave the lawyers and government out of it.
 

He's SOL if he put the fluid in himself. The days of blindly buying something with out verifying or even knowing something or correct are over.
 

He's SOL if he put the fluid in himself. The days of blindly buying something with out verifying or even knowing something or correct are over.
 
I was a parts mgr at a Ford Tractor dealer for years, one of my men gave a guy the wrong air filter one time which didn't seal and allowed the engine to fail. Difference in the two was about a half inch, we went to court and within 5 minutes the judge asked the man one question, did you compare what you pulled out to what you were putting in. You sir have the final responsibility as the end user to compare and decide.
 
I once represented a client who went to "Big Box Store" for an oil change. They drained her oil but unfortunately failed to replace any new oil. She got down the road and the engine locked up, store acknowledged they didn't replace oil but she couldn't get satisfaction from them. We brought an action for negligence and damages and believe it or not Big Box Store demanded a full jury trial WHICH WE WON.

I will never forget my law school Torts professor always saying "Defendant has a duty not to expose Plaintiff to a reasonably forseeable risk of injury" (person or his property)

There are several legal issues involved such as but not limited to justifiable reliance and reasonable expectations and duty and breach plus fact issues that need resolved by a jury or judge in a bench trial NONE OF WHICH CAN BE ANSWERED OR RESOLVED BY ANYONE HERE consult a trained competent professional torts attorney for advice...........

John T BSEE, JD Attorney at Law
 
(quoted from post at 06:05:10 02/25/17)
[color=yellow:9c5b34c90c] I will never forget my law school Torts professor always saying "Defendant has a duty not to expose Plaintiff to a reasonably forseeable risk of injury" (person or his property) [/color:9c5b34c90c]
John T BSEE, JD Attorney at Law
Can you explain what that means exactly? I understand it to mean that the transaction must be safe for both parties?
 
I have been a mechanic for over fifty years. I was always told to check to see if the fluid matches the equipment requirements.Then he will have to prove the wrong oil caused the damage. Sounds like he didn't check so he might as well eat the transmission.
 
It's one thing to go into a store and someone hands you what they "think" you need and you later add/install. It's another thing altogether when the customer is 100% hands-off, where the store is doing all the work. I cannot understand the court siding with the big box store. Some little tidbit of info must be missing here.

As for the OP, I still side with the store. The owner was the one who added the oil. It was their responsibility to know whether it would work.
 
When you go to court, even if you're 100% in the right, there are no guarantees you're going to win. The only guarantee is that there's going to be a lot of money spent. Guy I know had some work done on his classic car and thought the bill was way too high and refused to pay. They wouldn't release his car so he sued. The outcome was, he not only had to pay his lawyer, he had to pay $12,000 for the other person's lawyer, wound up losing his car and additional money to boot.
 
(quoted from post at 06:05:10 02/25/17) I once represented a client who went to "Big Box Store" for an oil change. They drained her oil but unfortunately failed to replace any new oil. She got down the road and the engine locked up, store acknowledged they didn't replace oil but she couldn't get satisfaction from them. We brought an action for negligence and damages and believe it or not Big Box Store demanded a full jury trial WHICH WE WON.

I will never forget my law school Torts professor always saying "Defendant has a duty not to expose Plaintiff to a reasonably forseeable risk of injury" (person or his property)

There are several legal issues involved such as but not limited to justifiable reliance and reasonable expectations and duty and breach plus fact issues that need resolved by a jury or judge in a bench trial NONE OF WHICH CAN BE ANSWERED OR RESOLVED BY ANYONE HERE consult a trained competent professional torts attorney for advice...........

John T BSEE, JD Attorney at Law

John is right. We can discuss this all day and come up with many answers. Truth be told, you want tractor advice ask here. Want legal advice? Ask a lawyer IN YOUR STATE! Same with tax advice. You wind up in court charged with tax evasion because of advice offered here? That's your defense? "I was told on YT I could tax these deductions"? See how far that flies! Ask a CPA!

Rick
 
Back when I was younger, people didn't sue people. You worked through your problems yourself. Back then you identified the sorry parts houses or clerks and later avoided them having brought the defective part back with your comments after going through the initial frustration of having to pull out what you thought you had fixed and all the rest of that fiasco.

Other thing is today stuff works. Back then it was a crap shoot especially with mom and pop shops.....walk out the door with it and it's yours, 20% chance of it being a shoddy/wrong part. I had one tell me "we don't like giving money back". No joke. Well I don't like getting a crappy or wrong part either, neither of which is my doing.
 

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Back
Top