Your worst nightmare when you drop your ZL1 car off at the dealer...

[DCNISMO]

I would be soooo pissed…..and the pissed even more by this whole dealership…..
Dealership Totals Customer's Camaro ZL1, Owner And Dealer At War

[theDreamer]

Just read this, dealership keeps making the wrong choices in this.

[cdoxp800]

That Chevy Dealership won't be a a Dealer much longer...

[Tazicon]

I was reading that on Yahoo.........................man oh man.

[TerribleONE]

69 SS>ZLI IMO.. This really sucks.

[shadoquad]

stunningly awful.

[zmanelite]

wow that sucks balls

[dtul]

They screwed up big. They made some good moves like firing the employee and even trying to have him brought up on charges, but they butchered the most important part - appeasing the pissed off customer. I heard they offered him comparable used ZL1s. I have no idea how they managed to think that would go over well.

They should have ate the loss and offered a brand new ZL1. They should have known that this would make it into the news and they would get tons of bad press by fighting the customer on this and that it would cost them much more in lost business than the price difference between a new and used ZL1. Hell they could have even turned this into a marketing opportunity, going above and beyond for the guy. People would still be iffy about the dealer, but they could have saved a lot of face here. Future and current customers see how well they handle a massive mistake and it could make them feel more confidence in the dealer going forward. All kinds of fail here on the dealers part.

[122554]

I don't understand why they're on a forum, any forum! Hire an attorney and STFU!

[SuperTom]

Originally Posted by 122554

I don't understand why they're on a forum, any forum! Hire an attorney and STFU!

Word of mouth is the best way to get back at any bad business. If the dealership makes good on the situation they can gain back their credibility. Either way everyone on the internet has that information on that dealership now.

[122554]

Originally Posted by SuperTom

Word of mouth is the best way to get back at any bad business. If the dealership makes good on the situation they can gain back their credibility. Either way everyone on the internet has that information on that dealership now.

What you say is true, but this is not the right time.

As an attorney, I would love to be representing the dealership. The plaintiff is out there shouting his whole case to everyone. You think the attorney's that represents the defendant doesn't read this? Perhaps there's some law that protects the dealer from the actions of an employee? If not, they would in most cases have insurance to cover such an event.

Now the whole case is on the internet. If for some reason the dealership prevails, I can turn around and sue the plaintiff for slander.

I'm not judging anyone by these statements. If the plaintiff wins, they have the rest of their life to blast the dealership.

I stand-by my earlier statement in this case, past, and future. The best advice you will ever receive from an attorney is "STFU"

[Wonka2581]

The dealer is reponsible for the safe keping of the vehicle when it is in there possession. If I was Hooper I would sue for a new car! I would put money on it that the case wouldnt even make it to court, the dealer would come up with a new car...

[122554]

Originally Posted by Wonka2581

The dealer is reponsible for the safe keping of the vehicle when it is in there possession. If I was Hooper I would sue for a new car! I would put money on it that the case wouldnt even make it to court, the dealer would come up with a new car...

You need to raise your level up a bit. A car would be the last thing I'd accept. Something that starts with a $ and ends with a lot of 0000's would be more appropriate!

[wackjum]

Originally Posted by MightyBobo

This was the written equivalent of dropping the microphone. Just so you know.

And FWIW, your argument seemed logical. Problem here is that a lot of people are obviously biased towards the poor guy who lost his car, and it clouds their judgement. I guess they wont be on this jury :-p

Thanks. I understand the sentiment but I still think it was rude to call out 122554. I want as many options on the table in a case, and one potential option might have been using confidentiality as leverage in a settlement. But now that the cat is out of the bag, I doubt the dealership would find any value in such a settlement.

And I'm not rooting for the dealership. I am a car enthusiast and I have represented clients against shops for similar situations. Liability is without a doubt on the employee, but he doesn't have the money to make this right. Hooking liability onto the party with resources (the dealership) is where its going to be a challenge.

Originally Posted by Wonka2581

The dealer is reponsible for the safe keping of the vehicle when it is in there possession. If I was Hooper I would sue for a new car! I would put money on it that the case wouldnt even make it to court, the dealer would come up with a new car...

He's not entitled to a new car, even in the best circumstance. He's entitled to be made whole, and that's a car of similar value to what he lost.

And of course when you get down to the nitty-gritty, its never simple. A dealership arguably has a duty to care for cars in its possession, but how far does this duty extend? Fallout proof concrete vault with 24/7 armed guards? Obviously there has to be a limit on the dealership's duty, and generally this goes down to what can be reasonably anticipated. If the dealership locked up customer's keys and kept the car in a secured area, I think that might discharge their duty.

The irony here is that the more "wrong" the employee acted, the less liable the dealership is. Example: If the employee just strolled into a publicly accessible area and took the keys out of a bowl and then jumped into the car parked out in front, it could be said that the dealership failed in their duty to safeguard.

On the other extreme, if the employee swiped his security badge to get into a secure area, dropped knockout gas on the guard, and used bolt cutters to get through the locks of the garage facility, I don't think anybody would question the dealership didn't do enough. A somewhat silly example, but if you can see there's a continuum of the dealership's responsibility, then you can see its not so simple to just say the car was in the dealer's possession and the dealer should pay.

[MMC Racing]

Originally Posted by 122554

What you say is true, but this is not the right time.

As an attorney, I would love to be representing the dealership. The plaintiff is out there shouting his whole case to everyone. You think the attorney's that represents the defendant doesn't read this? Perhaps there's some law that protects the dealer from the actions of an employee? If not, they would in most cases have insurance to cover such an event.

Now the whole case is on the internet. If for some reason the dealership prevails, I can turn around and sue the plaintiff for slander.

I'm not judging anyone by these statements. If the plaintiff wins, they have the rest of their life to blast the dealership.

I stand-by my earlier statement in this case, past, and future. The best advice you will ever receive from an attorney is "STFU"

The main facts don't seem in dispute. The dealership had possession of the vehicle. An employee of the dealership damaged the vehicle. The dealership admits all this and fired the employee.

Is the judge going to care that there was some settlement negotiations? Because any potential slander is around statements made about the aftermath of the damage. The only thing before the judge would be applying liability law.

You are an attorney in what field?