Pray for us...

candcallen · Jan 28, 2020

When they put up signs saying they arent liable for something it usually means they are liable. It's not even a toss up regarding if they are liable especially if the placed it somewhere with easy access left unlocked or keys in it. They put up signs and will act indignant cause most people easily.

If you had full coverage.
Your insc company will take care of that. A second suit for any deductible may still be required by you but your insc company will go after them for reimbursement.

If you had only liability insc you will have to go after them yourself. Get a lawyer sooner than later.

avvidclif · Jan 28, 2020

I'm having a problem with seeing how the shop is liable. Just because the vehicle was parked on a piece of property they own/lease and some DA steals a car and then has a wreck. I guess under that way of thinking if your car had been parked in a shopping center parking lot the shopping center would be liable. If the damage was caused by anything the shop owner did (hit it with another car) or didn't do (provide security fencing) that I could understand. But just having it sitting on his lot, no.

It's not a good situation but it is what it is. Sounds like there is a plague of "lawyeritis" lying dormant in this group. "GOTTA SUE SOMEBODY"

Condolences on your MIL, may she rest in peace.

TexasRedneck · Jan 28, 2020

avvidclif said:
I'm having a problem with seeing how the shop is liable. Just because the vehicle was parked on a piece of

It's not a good situation but it is what it is. Sounds like there is a plague of "lawyeritis" lying dormant in this group. "GOTTA SUE SOMEBODY"

Not at all.....but at the point the shop took possession of his vehicle for repairs, they assumed liability for its' security. You'll notice I said "talk with" - because the shop owner would likely feel responsibility (as he should) for parking a vehicle next to a street w/o some kind of protection. THEIR insurance would, in turn, go after the registered owner of the vehicle that actually hit the RV. Bottom line - just because he left the vehicle to be repaired doesn't mean he accepted risk of damage while in their care.

Life Lesson: NEVER own something you can't afford to replace out of pocket unless you DO have insurance on it - it ain't that expensive.

Mowingmaniac 24/7 · Jan 28, 2020

Years ago, I had my boat in for some motor maintenance at the dealership I bought it from. I was to pick it up next morning.

That nite they were burgled.

And so was I for a number of items on my boat.

The dealership owner initially said he wouldn't replace what was stolen off my boat.

I very mildly stated to him, ok, guess I'll have to sue.

He said nothing.

Next day he replaced all stolen off my boat.

Is this a parallel to your situation?

I don't know, but sometimes the mere legal threat goes a long way.....

AZ Refugee · Jan 28, 2020

Interesting Read
https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/automobile-mechanic-liability.html

kbaxter60 · Jan 28, 2020

avvidclif said:
I'm having a problem with seeing how the shop is liable. Just because the vehicle was parked on a piece of property they own/lease and some DA steals a car and then has a wreck. I guess under that way of thinking if your car had been parked in a shopping center parking lot the shopping center would be liable. If the damage was caused by anything the shop owner did (hit it with another car) or didn't do (provide security fencing) that I could understand. But just having it sitting on his lot, no.

Interesting take. But I think your analogies need work. When I leave my car at a repair shop, they are taking possession of something that I value (maybe value highly). I entrust them with it's safekeeping until I can return to get it. That's not how it works at a mall. I have to choose the spot (for me, it's strategy) and hope for the best until I return. I have had a car get hit in a retail parking situation. I did NOT once think to blame the business. Luckily, a witness got the plate of the "hitter" and I could file a report with the cops.

I would expect that a repair business WOULD take precautions to protect my property while in their care. I don't think it's a lot to expect. I don't think they should have to build impenetrable walls around, but I would expect that they would carry insurance to cover issues outside the norm.

Now, I am not of the SUE EVERYBODY crowd. But right is right, and even though I agree that we've gotten too lawsuit-happy, we also have a responsibility deficit. I would expect the repair business to make good. Using their own insurance, if needed. And then I would fully expect that they would go after the GTA person. That's really where this whole mess started.

Responsibility!

FireInTheWire · Jan 28, 2020

Condolences to the family. Sorry to hear about MIL

As for everything else.... all those problems are from long range shooters trying to support their habit

majormadmax · Jan 29, 2020

AZ Refugee said:
Interesting Read
https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/automobile-mechanic-liability.html

Yep (emphasis mine)...

The mechanic is legally required to take reasonable care to protect your vehicle while it is in their possession. The mechanic may be held liable for the theft of your vehicle if they left the keys in the unlocked car. However, if the mechanic and the shop took all reasonable steps in order to ensure the safety of your vehicle, they will not be held liable for your loss. Some repair shops will have insurance coverage that could help cover some of your losses.

Again, this will require talking with a board-certified Texas lawyer to determine what, if any, recourse the OP can take. To me the accident was beyond the control of the shop, so essentially I am not sure of its liability in that it did not cause the damage (the two fleeing felons did). They are the ones culpable for what happened, and under normal circumstances that is who I would expect to be held liable for any and all results of their actions. I am not a lawyer, but if I were to sit on a jury for such a case unless the law stated otherwise or the evidence proved the shop was negligent in their responsibility for protecting the vehicle, that would be my starting viewpoint going into the matter. In other words, I agree with avvidclif in that I don't necessarily believe the shop was at fault for what happened, therefore their insurance should cover the damages.

That said, burden of proof is much lower in a civil court than it is a criminal one...

Pray for us...

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

candcallen

Crotchety, Snarky, Truthful. You'll get over it.

avvidclif

TGT Addict

TexasRedneck

1911 Nut

Mowingmaniac 24/7

TGT Addict

AZ Refugee

TGT Addict

kbaxter60

"Gig 'Em!"

FireInTheWire

Caprock Crusader

majormadmax

Úlfhéðnar

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Forum statistics