Ok, I got my car about 3 weaks ago through a guy who works for SWA. He told me everything was in working order, and he would provide all records things he had had installed, through the shop and otherwise. He told me the clutch wasn't brand new, but worked perfectly and had no problems.
Make a short story long, a week later the clutch is slipping. In Arizona there are very clear statuets that say there is a 15day implied warentee on all parts of a car bought privatly, as so they will not make the car unsafe for normal highway or city use. I consider a clutch that is not only slipping but could break at any moment pretty unsafe, so much so I havn't driven it other than to replace tires, even which I wasn't so thrilled about having to do. Would you drive a car with only one lug nut on each wheel? It would last for a while, but could give at any minute, that's how I think of it.
Now i've tried to resolve this with him, but he feels his involvment with the car he sold me is 100% over with, and not only that, that where he works has nothing to do with it. Even though he EXPLICITLY said more than once he was selling it THROUGH THE GOOD NAME OF THE SHOP. It's where we met for me to see it, I talked to all the people there, good people, so is Kevin, but I am seriously not about to drop $400 on a new clutch that broke a week after I bought it. I mean in Small Claims this would be in and out, but I would also probably have to get the work done now and be reimbursed for it. I'm not trying to weasel money out of this, I just want what I paid for. I gave him the option of giving me a new performance clutch kit (I only did this because the price of the clutch kit is close to half the total cost, which is more than fair to me.) But he is putting up a "it's yours now dont bother me about it" attitude. I just would rather not have to sue either him or SWA.
Any suggestions on what could be done? I am fairly sure he hasn't discussed any of this with his boss yet. I just want to get what I paid for, and that was a car with a working clutch.
To sue, or not to sue?
I really don't see much of a real-world case against this guy. Do you really want to take the time to go through the hassle of small claims, only to get a judgement against this guy...how much time and effort really worth?
At least you learned a lesson to be alert for the con.
Talk to his boss immediately. Don't be thinking you'll get any kind of money, just go and take his job from him if possible.
Offer to split the dollar amount with him. He knew the general condition of the clutch, and it seems he unloaded the car just before it failed. If he is responding to you in a childish manner and trying to wash his hands of the situation, take it up with his boss....and see where it gets you.
At least you learned a lesson to be alert for the con.
Talk to his boss immediately. Don't be thinking you'll get any kind of money, just go and take his job from him if possible.
Offer to split the dollar amount with him. He knew the general condition of the clutch, and it seems he unloaded the car just before it failed. If he is responding to you in a childish manner and trying to wash his hands of the situation, take it up with his boss....and see where it gets you.
Is it the origional OEM clutch? If so and you have 200K on the car then you should have been expecting it, after all it's a consumable item, just like brakes. Its not like he sold you a car with a bad motor. Id try and find out when the clutch was last replaced. And I would run from a car that had 1 lug nut on each wheel (faster than you can say warped rotors) I dont know how bad small claims court is in AZ, but here in CA it can take an extremely long time to even get your case heard, so you would have to shell out the cash for it anyway and wait to get reimbursed. Is it really worth all that time an effort to you for a clutch?
Dude its just a clutch....when you buy an old car....expect to replace the miscellaneous items that has tear and wear over the year. My friend bought an 88 supra turbo from a small dealership and the engine caught on fire like a day or two later. He took it to court and didn't get $hit, only a long lecture from the judge. What a *****.
uhm dude seriously, from a dealership there are LAWS not only statuets, that judge could have seriously been disbarred.
And I know it's a used car, if it had starting whirrrring and slipping on the 16th day i'de owned it, fine, but, it didn't. It took just more than a week. And the fact it was sold through a shop, SouthWest Autoworks (see thier add on the left side over there? yeah..), they should not only have the proffessionalism to correct thier mistake, but also it's not just a clutch, for someone my age without a ton of money, a MINIMUM of $350 for get this **** fixed is not just something I can up and get. I would rather not have to sue them, but I will name SWA as a secondary defendent if I have to, I am going to either call Alex or go up to phoenix and speak with him personally this weekend. $350 is alot of money for someone my age. If I had ****ed it up trying to drift it or something stupid I would take responsibility, but 8 days of normal driving later poof bye bye. I am just looking for how you all think I might want to approach this before I take legal action? I'm not interested in if you think I have a case or not, it's what you think I can do to avoid getting it to that step?
And I know it's a used car, if it had starting whirrrring and slipping on the 16th day i'de owned it, fine, but, it didn't. It took just more than a week. And the fact it was sold through a shop, SouthWest Autoworks (see thier add on the left side over there? yeah..), they should not only have the proffessionalism to correct thier mistake, but also it's not just a clutch, for someone my age without a ton of money, a MINIMUM of $350 for get this **** fixed is not just something I can up and get. I would rather not have to sue them, but I will name SWA as a secondary defendent if I have to, I am going to either call Alex or go up to phoenix and speak with him personally this weekend. $350 is alot of money for someone my age. If I had ****ed it up trying to drift it or something stupid I would take responsibility, but 8 days of normal driving later poof bye bye. I am just looking for how you all think I might want to approach this before I take legal action? I'm not interested in if you think I have a case or not, it's what you think I can do to avoid getting it to that step?
The car was no officially brokered through SWA, but he said more than once that the deal was through the shops good name, and to me that sais they hold responsibilty, as the shop was in the know to every part of this deal. Whether or not that would hold up in court, I dont know, worst thing that happens though is that they are dismissed as codefendant and the employee falls as the only defendant.
-
AZhitman
- Administrator
- Posts: 54542
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
- Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
- Location: Surprise, Arizona
- Contact:
SWA has a dealers' license?
I pulled some case law - You don't have much to go on. I feel for you, I've been there before, but no judge in AZ is gonna award you on that. Did you test the clutch before purchase? Did a mechanic inspect the car? Those are all part of "due diligence", which goes a long way in such a dispute...
I pulled some case law - You don't have much to go on. I feel for you, I've been there before, but no judge in AZ is gonna award you on that. Did you test the clutch before purchase? Did a mechanic inspect the car? Those are all part of "due diligence", which goes a long way in such a dispute...
-
C-Kwik
- Moderator
- Posts: 8070
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 9:28 pm
- Car: 2013 Chevy Volt, 1991 Honda CRX DX
You should probably read the actual law or statute before pursuing this. Look at the wording. Unless you are reading the actual words, I wouldn't trust what you've heard. You would not believe how misconstrued laws become when information is passed from one mouth to another.
Secondly, even if the law exists as you say it does, is it a law intended to be used for causation in a civil damage case? WE have a lot of laws designed for the safety of others, but even though someone is guilty of it does not mean that caused your damages or is considered a tort in that of itself. Case in point, a guy is driving drunk. He is stopped waiting at a light and gets rear ended. He's cited and arrested for DUI, but the guy who rear ended him is still at fault for the accident and is legally liable for damages. tHe DUI in this case had nothing to do with the cause of the accident. In the same sense, does that mean thi guy is legally liable for your worn clutch. I personally do not think so. You assume a risk in buying a used car. It is your responsibility to make sure you are buying a product that is in good condition. Unless there was malicious intent(he knew the clutch was slipping and told you otherwise), and you can prove it, I doubt you have much of a case. You're certainly welcome to try, but based on what you've said so far, I doubt you will be able to convince a judge.
And honestly, the clutch is a wear item. Reasonably, it is not unsafe. No damages resulted from it not working(it's not like your brakes failed and you slammed into a wall). It is a condition of wear. And it could be reasonable that he didn't know it was wearing. After all, he did tell you it wasn't new. And the argument about you not having money or your age won't do anything for you in court. Civil cases are decided by legal liability. in this case, any other person would have the same damages you do. I'd refrain from even bringing it up if you go to court. Don't try to stack up as many chips as possible. A judge will see right through it. Argue the strong points and stick to them.
Secondly, even if the law exists as you say it does, is it a law intended to be used for causation in a civil damage case? WE have a lot of laws designed for the safety of others, but even though someone is guilty of it does not mean that caused your damages or is considered a tort in that of itself. Case in point, a guy is driving drunk. He is stopped waiting at a light and gets rear ended. He's cited and arrested for DUI, but the guy who rear ended him is still at fault for the accident and is legally liable for damages. tHe DUI in this case had nothing to do with the cause of the accident. In the same sense, does that mean thi guy is legally liable for your worn clutch. I personally do not think so. You assume a risk in buying a used car. It is your responsibility to make sure you are buying a product that is in good condition. Unless there was malicious intent(he knew the clutch was slipping and told you otherwise), and you can prove it, I doubt you have much of a case. You're certainly welcome to try, but based on what you've said so far, I doubt you will be able to convince a judge.
And honestly, the clutch is a wear item. Reasonably, it is not unsafe. No damages resulted from it not working(it's not like your brakes failed and you slammed into a wall). It is a condition of wear. And it could be reasonable that he didn't know it was wearing. After all, he did tell you it wasn't new. And the argument about you not having money or your age won't do anything for you in court. Civil cases are decided by legal liability. in this case, any other person would have the same damages you do. I'd refrain from even bringing it up if you go to court. Don't try to stack up as many chips as possible. A judge will see right through it. Argue the strong points and stick to them.
-
Aaron_RMS13
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 5:09 pm
If you attempt to sue him or SWA you will lose. Period.
From the law you speak of: (bold type added for emphasis)
" Except as provided in subsection I of this section and in addition to the requirements of section 28-4412, a used motor vehicle dealer shall not exclude, modify or disclaim the implied warranty of merchantability prescribed in section 47-2314 or limit the remedies for a breach of that warranty, except as otherwise provided in this section, before midnight of the fifteenth calendar day after delivery of a used motor vehicle...."
" "Used motor vehicle dealer" means a person or business that sells or offers for sale a used motor vehicle after selling or offering for sale four or more used motor vehicles in the previous twelve months"
**This is strike 1. The crap about... "he said more than once that the deal was through the shops good name" means absolutely nothing. Unless you can show he personally sold more than 4 cars in the last 12 months you lose right here. But wait, thats not all!
"The implied warranty of merchantability described in this section does not extend to damage that occurs after the sale of the motor vehicle and that is the result of any abuse , misuse, neglect, failure to perform regular maintenance or to maintain adequate oil, coolant or other required fluid or lubricant or off road use, racing or towing."
**This is strike 2. I assume you are young and this is somewhat of a "sporty" car. Well, it wouldn't be difficult for him to demonstrate the clutch likely failed due to abuse.
"Ok, I got my car about 3 weaks (sic) ago through a guy who works for SWA"
**This is strike 3. I guess you don't have a work order or invoice from an automotive technician or some other proof that the clutch failed within the 15 day period do you?
This is a lost cause.
From the law you speak of: (bold type added for emphasis)
" Except as provided in subsection I of this section and in addition to the requirements of section 28-4412, a used motor vehicle dealer shall not exclude, modify or disclaim the implied warranty of merchantability prescribed in section 47-2314 or limit the remedies for a breach of that warranty, except as otherwise provided in this section, before midnight of the fifteenth calendar day after delivery of a used motor vehicle...."
" "Used motor vehicle dealer" means a person or business that sells or offers for sale a used motor vehicle after selling or offering for sale four or more used motor vehicles in the previous twelve months"
**This is strike 1. The crap about... "he said more than once that the deal was through the shops good name" means absolutely nothing. Unless you can show he personally sold more than 4 cars in the last 12 months you lose right here. But wait, thats not all!
"The implied warranty of merchantability described in this section does not extend to damage that occurs after the sale of the motor vehicle and that is the result of any abuse , misuse, neglect, failure to perform regular maintenance or to maintain adequate oil, coolant or other required fluid or lubricant or off road use, racing or towing."
**This is strike 2. I assume you are young and this is somewhat of a "sporty" car. Well, it wouldn't be difficult for him to demonstrate the clutch likely failed due to abuse.
"Ok, I got my car about 3 weaks (sic) ago through a guy who works for SWA"
**This is strike 3. I guess you don't have a work order or invoice from an automotive technician or some other proof that the clutch failed within the 15 day period do you?
This is a lost cause.
1st) **** you for saying I abused the clutch. what part of me saying I would cop to it if I had ****ed it up did you not understand? My mother happend to be with me on every instance but one, and there was no abuse. so again. **** you.
2nd) I have read the actual statuets WORD FOR WORD, and the laws in Lousiana are not the same as here, there are special section pertaining to PRIVATE SALES. the sale was officially a private sector, and it sais there is a 15 day implied warentee. period. Also he said the parts that had been installed on the car were warenteed as are everything else done by SWA, so the car, as a project car of SWA, which it admitidely was, it was bought solely to put items on to expand thier Sport Compact Division, SWA possibly holds some responsibility here. I don't know if they took the clutch out saturday night after i looked at it and put the throughout bearing up thier *** and reassembled it before I bought it sunday afternoon, I have no ****ing clew, but it did work when I test drove it on a Saturday, the next friday it was slipping. Maybe my inexpierence with clutches and him telling me it was in perfect working order led me to believe it would last, but it didn't. Coincidence or not, he is still responsible for it.
You all also seem to not understand that all I have to do is convince a judge, and aside from me asking you to refrain from commenting on whether or not you think I have a case, you still did. I'm not looking for your supposed legal input. The law can be construed many ways, and if watching Judge Judy has taught me anything, small claims court judges dont really have any rules. they can not like the way you look at them and rule against you.
3rd) After I talk with the owner of SWA depending on his input, one of 2 things will be happening. I will either be getting the clutch replaced ASAP since I cannot drive it now, and I will be persueing legal action, or I will have a new Centerforce Dual Friction or ACT street/strip stg 2 kit and things will move along, and I will settle for shelling out another $300 in labor and flywheel work.
4th) Before I get the clutch replaced I will be having a mechanic certify it's deadness, and he should be able to tell from driving it and looking at it it has been on it's way out for a while. As of today it's been 17days since purchase, the judge should have no problem concuring that a car that hasn't been drivin on a city street since 11 days after purchase was faulty at that time. I had to take it around my complex once today to make sure it was working after putting everything back after a compression test, and let me tell you the next time I will be driving it will be only to go to get the clutch replaced. Let me talk about bad....
And C-Kwik, no, no damage has been incurred, but that's only because I have the presence of mind to not drive it until I am trying to make a left turn at a green light and finally crapps out with me in the middle of an intersection and I get T-Boned by a guy eating a jelly doughnut trying to shave and call his wife in his F-450 and am killed along with my passengers.
SO AGAIN
HOW. CAN. I. AVOID. TAKING. THIS. TO. COURT.
2nd) I have read the actual statuets WORD FOR WORD, and the laws in Lousiana are not the same as here, there are special section pertaining to PRIVATE SALES. the sale was officially a private sector, and it sais there is a 15 day implied warentee. period. Also he said the parts that had been installed on the car were warenteed as are everything else done by SWA, so the car, as a project car of SWA, which it admitidely was, it was bought solely to put items on to expand thier Sport Compact Division, SWA possibly holds some responsibility here. I don't know if they took the clutch out saturday night after i looked at it and put the throughout bearing up thier *** and reassembled it before I bought it sunday afternoon, I have no ****ing clew, but it did work when I test drove it on a Saturday, the next friday it was slipping. Maybe my inexpierence with clutches and him telling me it was in perfect working order led me to believe it would last, but it didn't. Coincidence or not, he is still responsible for it.
You all also seem to not understand that all I have to do is convince a judge, and aside from me asking you to refrain from commenting on whether or not you think I have a case, you still did. I'm not looking for your supposed legal input. The law can be construed many ways, and if watching Judge Judy has taught me anything, small claims court judges dont really have any rules. they can not like the way you look at them and rule against you.
3rd) After I talk with the owner of SWA depending on his input, one of 2 things will be happening. I will either be getting the clutch replaced ASAP since I cannot drive it now, and I will be persueing legal action, or I will have a new Centerforce Dual Friction or ACT street/strip stg 2 kit and things will move along, and I will settle for shelling out another $300 in labor and flywheel work.
4th) Before I get the clutch replaced I will be having a mechanic certify it's deadness, and he should be able to tell from driving it and looking at it it has been on it's way out for a while. As of today it's been 17days since purchase, the judge should have no problem concuring that a car that hasn't been drivin on a city street since 11 days after purchase was faulty at that time. I had to take it around my complex once today to make sure it was working after putting everything back after a compression test, and let me tell you the next time I will be driving it will be only to go to get the clutch replaced. Let me talk about bad....
And C-Kwik, no, no damage has been incurred, but that's only because I have the presence of mind to not drive it until I am trying to make a left turn at a green light and finally crapps out with me in the middle of an intersection and I get T-Boned by a guy eating a jelly doughnut trying to shave and call his wife in his F-450 and am killed along with my passengers.
SO AGAIN
HOW. CAN. I. AVOID. TAKING. THIS. TO. COURT.
-
Aaron_RMS13
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 5:09 pm
Reread my post you little brat.
1. I never said you abused the clutch. Reading comprehension isn't your strong point is it?
2. The excerpts from the laws I posted were from ARIZONA. You know, you can look up state laws on this thing called the internet.
"You all also seem to not understand that all I have to do is convince a judge"
And you fail to understand that will never happen.
3. You can't even spell "persueing legal action". Do you understand that in small claims court you will be representing yourself? :rolleyes
1. I never said you abused the clutch. Reading comprehension isn't your strong point is it?
2. The excerpts from the laws I posted were from ARIZONA. You know, you can look up state laws on this thing called the internet.
"You all also seem to not understand that all I have to do is convince a judge"
And you fail to understand that will never happen.
3. You can't even spell "persueing legal action". Do you understand that in small claims court you will be representing yourself? :rolleyes
-
yellow_jacket
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 4:43 pm
- Car: 95 240sx
Your only chance to not take this to court is to sit down and talk to the owner of the shop or this guy face to face. Do it in a calm rational manner. If you get all pissed off and act stupid like when tried to answer Aaron's post you will get nothing. Explain to them what you think the law says and why they should have to cover the expense or at least help you with part of it. Also explain that this looks bad for their shop. Your biggest problem with convincing anyone that they should help you out with this is the fact that it is a normal wear item. Plus the condition of a clutch is almost impossible to determine from driving a car. I've driven cars with clutches that felt shot and the guy got another 75K miles out of it. Honestly, if you have already talked to the guy who sold you the car and he is determined not to pay then I honestly think you're just out the money. Small claims court or not. In court they are just going to say that you're a 17 year old kid and you smoked the clutch either racing the car or because you didn't know how to drive stick well and abused it.
-
ricebike
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2003 7:03 pm
- Car: 1989 240sx se 5spd (donated to my brother in law)
2002 Quest
2005 Altima - Location: CNJ
u should have gotten everything in writing... type up a list of stuff donea to the car & have it signed in front of the other mechanics (heck, use them as witnesses & make them sign that piece of paper as well...attain all service records...etc. before the final transaction.
Thank goodness I did all that before picking up my baby!
Thank goodness I did all that before picking up my baby!
Yeah I am realizing I just may end up having to do that. Oh well. People suck. Shows you all what the people at SWA are like though.
AARON_ILIKE****S or whatever you name is, first, I read the laws from AZ, there is another section on private sales, I assumed you were taking ones from missippi because you obviously were too stupid to read all the laws, and find the ones on used private sales? Yeah. **** you. Second. I am not really concerned about my spelling on a freaking online messageboard. If it was oh say a term paper or resume, yeah, guess one, MSWord has this crazy **** called spell check, so it doesn't matter either way. You have no idea of my legal backround, knowledge or abilities.
AARON_ILIKE****S or whatever you name is, first, I read the laws from AZ, there is another section on private sales, I assumed you were taking ones from missippi because you obviously were too stupid to read all the laws, and find the ones on used private sales? Yeah. **** you. Second. I am not really concerned about my spelling on a freaking online messageboard. If it was oh say a term paper or resume, yeah, guess one, MSWord has this crazy **** called spell check, so it doesn't matter either way. You have no idea of my legal backround, knowledge or abilities.
-
C-Kwik
- Moderator
- Posts: 8070
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 9:28 pm
- Car: 2013 Chevy Volt, 1991 Honda CRX DX
toki wrote:You all also seem to not understand that all I have to do is convince a judge, and aside from me asking you to refrain from commenting on whether or not you think I have a case, you still did. I'm not looking for your supposed legal input. The law can be construed many ways, and if watching Judge Judy has taught me anything, small claims court judges dont really have any rules. they can not like the way you look at them and rule against you.
And C-Kwik, no, no damage has been incurred, but that's only because I have the presence of mind to not drive it until I am trying to make a left turn at a green light and finally crapps out with me in the middle of an intersection and I get T-Boned by a guy eating a jelly doughnut trying to shave and call his wife in his F-450 and am killed along with my passengers.
HOW. CAN. I. AVOID. TAKING. THIS. TO. COURT.
1. Convincing a judge is not necessarily a walk in the park. It depends on the evidence you present, and how credible you and your evidence are. As Denzel said in 'Training Day', "It's not what you know, it's what you can prove." This is absolutely true. And if you watch any of the TV court shows, you'll notice judges will listen to credibility, but they still apply civil law. Small claims court does tend to be somewhat of an open book but is still subject to law. It's the interpretation of law where a judge can be more liberal. But it's a coin toss as to what kind of judge you will get.
My whole point about damages, is that because you didn't incur any damages. You can argue assumptions, and theoretical possibilities and what ifs, but none of these will hold much water if any in court. If you actually had an accident as a result, it would be different. But the fact is, you did not. You won't see award in court for someone suing another party for almost causing an accident.
There are essentially 4 key elements to legal liability. 1. a duty owed - civil duty to reasonably protect the welfare of others. An example would be if you are coming up to a red light, you stop.
2. Duty breached - you run the red light. In other words you did something wrong.
3. Causation - running the red light causes an accident. If the law you broke didn't cause the accident, you can't be liable. An example in this case is you are running a red light, but you get rear ended by someone else who runs the same red light.
4. DAMAGES - As a result of the accident, there was damage. If there is no damage, there is no legal liability.
Now as far as you not driving the vehicle, that is your duty as a reasonable and prudent person. If you chose to drive knowing an unsafe condition exists and you get into an accident, you assume a risk. Say it was a fuel line that was leaking and you knew it. Suddenly the car explodes injuring or even killing you. Guess what? The issue would come up. If you knew of the situation, why did you continue to drive it? It's called damage mitigation - or preventing further damage or injury. I think it's good you recognized that perhaps you should not drive the car, but it's a poor argument for what you are looking for. It just adds no value.
As far as your language and name calling, keep in mind we are only offering our opinions. Do with it what you will. Just because you don't like what you hear, or you don't agree with it, does not mean you have to be disrespectful. If you think you can win, feel free to pursue it. You have that choice and that right. But so far, I think a jury of your peers feel you will lose. But like you said, anything can happen in small claims. But I think the odds are against you.
As far as avoiding taking it to court, again, it's your choice. You can always choose not to go. Aside from that, you will have to convince the shop otherwise.
Lastly, you mention that there are another set of laws and bring up your legal background, knowledge and abilities. If that is a factor to be considered and our advice and opinions mean nothing, then why ask us in the first place? And if we are so inferior when it comes to law, why does it bother you that we might be wrong?
I say do whatever you think is right and necessary. You have the right to choose. Exercise it.
True, and while educated opinions and suggestions are taken to note and valued, I also, as you quoted, didn't really ask or want to know people opinions on the legal side of it. I don't think you are in any way "inferior" just maybe less knowledgable. The more I think about it, the most I realize going to court we be a hassle, and this is just a lesson learned. I am done with this here for the most part unless something mind blowing is said. I'll let you all know what if anything happens with this resolution. Peace.
-
AZhitman
- Administrator
- Posts: 54542
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
- Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
- Location: Surprise, Arizona
- Contact:
Since I'm here, let me clear up a few things:
Judge Judy is NOT a judge. She is a mediator. I work for the highest Court in AZ (Supreme Court), and she wouldn't last 30 seconds in a real courtroom.
Your statement that "that judge could have been disbarred" is ridiculous. Judges aren't "disbarred", for starters, and the judge acted within his authority.
You said: "You have no idea of my legal backround, knowledge or abilities". Toki, you're 17. Please. I think we can be reasonably sure you're not Johnnie Freaking Cochran. :rolleyes
Finally, SWA is a performance accessories shop. The guy who sold you the car is an employee of that shop. Whether those guys are mechanics is irrelevant. They sell parts. Period. If you buy my car, and it breaks down are you gonna sue the State of Arizona? No.
I'm glad you saw the light - Good thing. I was getting ready to take you out back for saying *** you when you didn't get the answer you wanted.
Don't let it happen again.
Welcome to reality kid - Just be glad you're not a Q45 driver looking at a busted transmission and a $2500 repair estimate... Think about it.
Judge Judy is NOT a judge. She is a mediator. I work for the highest Court in AZ (Supreme Court), and she wouldn't last 30 seconds in a real courtroom.
Your statement that "that judge could have been disbarred" is ridiculous. Judges aren't "disbarred", for starters, and the judge acted within his authority.
You said: "You have no idea of my legal backround, knowledge or abilities". Toki, you're 17. Please. I think we can be reasonably sure you're not Johnnie Freaking Cochran. :rolleyes
Finally, SWA is a performance accessories shop. The guy who sold you the car is an employee of that shop. Whether those guys are mechanics is irrelevant. They sell parts. Period. If you buy my car, and it breaks down are you gonna sue the State of Arizona? No.
I'm glad you saw the light - Good thing. I was getting ready to take you out back for saying *** you when you didn't get the answer you wanted.
Don't let it happen again.
Welcome to reality kid - Just be glad you're not a Q45 driver looking at a busted transmission and a $2500 repair estimate... Think about it.
Quote »I'm glad you saw the light - Good thing. I was getting ready to take you out back for saying *** you when you didn't get the answer you wanted.[/quote]That's time number 2 i've narowly avoided a beating by the Hitman.................................................................
and i'm 15 not 17. Chalk me up another point on the he-must-not-have-a-valid-argument-ever-he-just-has-teen-angst-scale. I remember now why I previously stopped telling people how old I was.
And yes I know judges arn't disbarred, it's rather called losing ones "judgeship" or wtf ever. I dont really care whats it's called, but judges are aloud to blatently contradict written laws? wow...when did this happen? I guess if a judge really likes me I can shoot the Balif in the face and he can pronounce me not guilty!
P.S. Names such as Son, Kid, Boy, Little Brother, Champ, Sport, etc. need not apply, as I find downtalking one of the most disrespectful things one person can do to another. That is no joke.
and i'm 15 not 17. Chalk me up another point on the he-must-not-have-a-valid-argument-ever-he-just-has-teen-angst-scale. I remember now why I previously stopped telling people how old I was.
And yes I know judges arn't disbarred, it's rather called losing ones "judgeship" or wtf ever. I dont really care whats it's called, but judges are aloud to blatently contradict written laws? wow...when did this happen? I guess if a judge really likes me I can shoot the Balif in the face and he can pronounce me not guilty!
P.S. Names such as Son, Kid, Boy, Little Brother, Champ, Sport, etc. need not apply, as I find downtalking one of the most disrespectful things one person can do to another. That is no joke.
-
MasterMan
- Posts: 2849
- Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 11:11 am
- Car: nothing running at the moment city buses "uck here
- Contact:
well man if your only 15 its not like you can really drive the car anyways.. so its not THAT big of a deal.. order a cluch and learn how to put it in, it will teach u somthing... and that in its self is worth the money.. he|| i can do brakes like a pro now.. 200$ later.. thats life.. these cars are old, alot of stuff is gonna brake..
-
AZhitman
- Administrator
- Posts: 54542
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
- Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
- Location: Surprise, Arizona
- Contact:
toki, it's all good. But when discussing the matter of disrespect, consider that several of us are adults, some with kids of our own, almost your age, and have earned a measure of respect befitting our years.
What has happened to the world where a 15-year-old suddenly DEMANDS respect from an adult? Please.
You'll earn my respect. And I'll be glad to help you with it.
In the meantime, we're all still here to help you with whatever.
What has happened to the world where a 15-year-old suddenly DEMANDS respect from an adult? Please.
You'll earn my respect. And I'll be glad to help you with it.
In the meantime, we're all still here to help you with whatever.
-
Bubba1
- Moderator
- Posts: 16082
- Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:42 pm
- Car: 2003 Nissan 350z
2024 Honda HR-V
2008 Toyota Corolla S
2001 Toyota Avalon XLS
Agree 100% with Hitman. I feel bad for your experience. But $300 may seem a lot to you now, but in the overall ownership experience with a high mileage older car, you'll find that's pretty minor, and not worth the time/hassle about suing. Remember cars are not zero maintenance, and a clutches on high mileage old cars where you don't know how the previous owner drove/maintained it) do wear out.
If a calm rational discussion with the owner of the shop is fruitless, I suppose you could complain to the BBB. But if I were in your shoes, I'd simply consider it a lesson learned and the next time you consider purchasing a used car, have a mechanic (not one that works for the owner) look it over first. Could save you a lot of grief and money.
By the way, does AZ really give drivers licenses to 15 yr olds??? That's young. Good luck
If a calm rational discussion with the owner of the shop is fruitless, I suppose you could complain to the BBB. But if I were in your shoes, I'd simply consider it a lesson learned and the next time you consider purchasing a used car, have a mechanic (not one that works for the owner) look it over first. Could save you a lot of grief and money.
By the way, does AZ really give drivers licenses to 15 yr olds??? That's young. Good luck