How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask BizIPEsq. Your Own Question
BizIPEsq.
BizIPEsq., Attorney
Category: Business Law
Satisfied Customers: 996
Experience:  I am a business attorney. I represent individuals and companies with all business related matters.
73280834
Type Your Business Law Question Here...
BizIPEsq. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

This appears to be a gray area, and I need advice on how hard

This answer was rated:

This appears to be a gray area, and I need advice on how hard to push the automobile dealer. My 2008 Cadillac was taken to the dealer where it was bought because a front turn signal light bulb was not working. While bulbs and wiring were not covered in my extended warranty, I paid the bill of $110 for them to replace the bulb. The bulb and turn signal worked properly for 3 days. My $110 invoice states that all parts and labor are warenteed for 90 days(nothing to do with extended warranty). Three days after the bulb was installed, it failed again, and the car was returned to the same dealer who said there had been a “short” although no report of a short either written or verbal was made to me at the time of the original bulb replacement They implied the original bulb failure was caused by the short, the entire front light module needed replacing and the cost to me is $1100. They declined to honor the "90 day warranty for parts and labor" because they claim it was the "short" originally, which causes the bulb failure, and declined to accept the possibility the "short" was related to the recent work performed. My comment to lawyer: there is probably no way to demonstrate for sure when the "short" occurred. If the dealer cannot demonstrate the short was not caused by the first work performed, do I have a claim against the 90 day warranty for parts and labor?

Thanks..........George Converse

BizIPEsq. :

Hello, I will be assisting you.

BizIPEsq. :

I think you have a reasonable claim to make that the 2nd repair itself was within the scope of the 90 days warranty for parts and labor.

BizIPEsq. :

realistically you would need to take the matter to small claims court and here's how it could play out

BizIPEsq. :

my assumption is that the $1100 includes additional labor cost (in addition to the first repair) you could reasonable claims that the labor cost portion should be covered by the first repair and have the court reduce the invoice. If the court does not agree at least ask for the $110 back since that repair turned out to be bad. Finally, independently confirm the cost of the front light module (you can check ebay, or a distributor). If the cost of the dealer is disproportionate ask the cost to reduce it. Or better yet have the dealer provide the dealer cost of the part and the ask the court to adjust the invoice to reflect the actual cost of the part without the dealer's profit (note to the court that otherwise it would not be fair for the dealer to profit from its incompetence)

BizIPEsq. :

Thank you for allowing me to assist you

BizIPEsq. :

Please rate my service

BizIPEsq. :

Without your rating I do not get compensated for my work. A bonus is always appreciated. Thank you.

BizIPEsq. and other Business Law Specialists are ready to help you

Related Business Law Questions