Quote:
Originally Posted by JARblue
It shouldn't matter when the test drive was. The test drive was due to brake fluid igniting. If they drove it without fixing it, that's on them. If they fixed it and then drove it and it ignited anyway, they didn't fix it properly and its still on them. Its not like his mods spontaneously burst into flames. There was a brake line leak. It absolutely should have never caught fire; the fact that it did is on the dealership.
|
So let me clarify. I'm not defending the dealership in any way, shape or form. I'm trying to gather more information to get a clearer understanding of the sequence of events.
Keep in mind that in legal territory, it's irrelevant what we "think" should or should not happen. It's what can be proven, and how strong the case is given the evidence, and what has to occur to obtain/present said evidence.
If it's clear that you can prove the car was driven a long distance before the fix, then that shows complete and utter disregard for the risks that have already been known. You have a very strong case.
If it's after the fix, and they "claim" they've taken all precautions, and cleaned up the compartment, and "claim" there's no reason for the fire to have started from their repairs, then they can start a fight and claim faulty parts from aftermarket parts.
You and I, and likely everyone else here probably knows there's little to no chance his engine is going to spontaneously combust from his mods... but do all lawyers know that? Do the claims adjusters know that? Will a Jury know that (not saying this will go so far). But people who have no idea how an engine or aftermarket part works, might believe someone who manipulates that information.
I'm not a lawyer, but my experience gives me some insight on the legal system, and you really have to explain things so a baby could understand, and not make any assumptions of what others know, in order to get an advantage in a case.
So in short, it would be easier to prove Dealership liability if they drove it before the repairs, rather than a more drawn out investigation after the repairs and them claiming faulty aftermarket parts. So yes, it can make a difference when the test drive was.
Not saying this should get serious enough to draw out in court... at least I really hope not cuz that can get ugly. I don't think Nissan would want to spend too much money to fight this. Really hope his insurance company can resolve everything. But providing all the necessary evidence to the insurance company, to prove they were reckless, can speed things up.