Advise please


Nardo GT

Well-known member
Jul 15, 2006
2,300
Texas
Dropped my GT off at the local Ford dealer who has always done my work. Same technician every time. The dealer calls me after having the car for 5 hours and asks if I have "road hazard" on my tires. They were just replaced with correct GY's immediately before Rally III. He said the car has a flat. He said the tech was driving it and the tire went flat and it ruined the sidewall and chipped the rim. Wants to send the rim to Wheel Technologies to have "recoated". I left the car at noon and parked it in the parts dept parking area. All tires up at that time and no prior issues with this set of tires at all. I went and grabbed lunch and returned an hour later to see if it had been moved and it had. No one called me then to tell me it had a flat. It was 4 hrs later that he called me. What do I do/ or expect?
 
Last edited:
You must expect to have the car returned to you in the exact condition dropped off - good tires, unblemished rims etc... I make a point of making sure they write down on my work order receipt the number of miles on the odometer when I drop the car off, and no unauthorized road tests etc... without prior approval.
 
Why was he driving your car? I would not allow any Ford TECH to drive my GT. Second, if he was infact driving it when this occurred I would think they would be responsible for it. Further, if my car got damaged while someone else had it, I would expect the damaged part be REPLACED, not repaired. Now, This may sound a little harsh, but when it comes to a car like this, I dont expect anything else. I would do the right thing if I was working on a customers car and this type of thing happened. Just part of the territory when you agree to work on a car like the GT.
 
That's a tough one. First, I'd check the odometer to make sure no one was joyriding. Second, ask to look at the bad tire and see if it is some kind of car part that caused the flat (i.e. if it's a roofing nail, I don't think you have a prayer). Next, chipping a wheel implies hitting a bump or hole. Several guys here have had wheels repaired to their satisfaction, so you need to assess the damage and get a feeling if it's an easy fix or not. Lastly, I'd sure be in contact with the service manager AND the owner. A good customer is better than a squeky wheel, and my dealer usually goes out of his way to make things right.
 
Bailment

Bailment describes a legal relationship in common law where physical possession of personal property (chattels) is transferred from one person (the 'bailor') to another person (the 'bailee') who subsequently holds possession of the property. However, it is distinguished from a contract of sale or a gift of property, as it only involves the transfer of possession and not its ownership. In order to create a bailment, the bailee must both intend to possess, and actually physically possess, the bailable chattel.

In addition, unlike a lease or rental, where ownership remains with the leasor but the lessee is allowed to use the property, the bailee is generally not entitled to the use of the property while it is in his possession. Moreover, unlike a security agreement or pawn at a pawnbroker, where the secured party is entitled to the possession and use of the property only on default of payment, a bailor can demand the return of the property at any reasonable time, without prior notice. A common example of bailment is leaving your car with a valet. Leaving your car in a parking garage is typically a license, as the car park's intent to possess your car cannot be shown. However, it arises in many other situations, including terminated leases of property, or warehousing (including store-it-yourself).

No matter how a bailment arises, the bailee has both a duty of care and duty to re-deliver the bailment. The bailee is expected to take (as a minimum) reasonable precautions to safeguard the property, although this standard sometimes varies depending upon who benefits from the bailment. In most of the United States, for example, if the bailment is to the primary benefit of the bailor, the bailee must be found grossly negligent in order to be liable for damage done to the bailment, while if the bailee primarily benefits, such as if you borrow your neighbor's rake to clean your lawn, the bailee is liable for any damages arising from slight neligence. If both bailor and bailee are found to benefit from the relationship, such as leaving your clothes at the dry cleaners, then the bailee is only held to a standard of ordinary care. Bailees are typically strictly liable for any mis-delivery of a bailment, although, in the case of involuntary bailments (see below), the bailee is only held to a standard of due care regarding re-delivery. Moreover, a bailee may be liable in conversion if the property is not returned upon the request of the bailor, or if the property is used without permission of the bailor.
 
that sucks, I hate hearing stories like this, they make me more paronoid than I already am, sorry to hear this, on the bright side it could have been worst, I would ask to replace the wheel and tire, although they probobly would not agree, if you really want to put pressure on them tell them if the fix the rim and patch the tire, if something should happen to the car or worst yet you or anyone in the car as resulf of their fix then you would hold them responsible and sue the sh*t out of them, If you have a lawyer friend have him call they seem to speak a different language that the dealer might undrestant better, sorry for you trouble.
 
Bailment

Bailment describes a legal relationship in common law where physical possession of personal property (chattels) is transferred from one person (the 'bailor') to another person (the 'bailee') who subsequently holds possession of the property. However, it is distinguished from a contract of sale or a gift of property, as it only involves the transfer of possession and not its ownership. In order to create a bailment, the bailee must both intend to possess, and actually physically possess, the bailable chattel.

In addition, unlike a lease or rental, where ownership remains with the leasor but the lessee is allowed to use the property, the bailee is generally not entitled to the use of the property while it is in his possession. Moreover, unlike a security agreement or pawn at a pawnbroker, where the secured party is entitled to the possession and use of the property only on default of payment, a bailor can demand the return of the property at any reasonable time, without prior notice. A common example of bailment is leaving your car with a valet. Leaving your car in a parking garage is typically a license, as the car park's intent to possess your car cannot be shown. However, it arises in many other situations, including terminated leases of property, or warehousing (including store-it-yourself).

No matter how a bailment arises, the bailee has both a duty of care and duty to re-deliver the bailment. The bailee is expected to take (as a minimum) reasonable precautions to safeguard the property, although this standard sometimes varies depending upon who benefits from the bailment. In most of the United States, for example, if the bailment is to the primary benefit of the bailor, the bailee must be found grossly negligent in order to be liable for damage done to the bailment, while if the bailee primarily benefits, such as if you borrow your neighbor's rake to clean your lawn, the bailee is liable for any damages arising from slight neligence. If both bailor and bailee are found to benefit from the relationship, such as leaving your clothes at the dry cleaners, then the bailee is only held to a standard of ordinary care. Bailees are typically strictly liable for any mis-delivery of a bailment, although, in the case of involuntary bailments (see below), the bailee is only held to a standard of due care regarding re-delivery. Moreover, a bailee may be liable in conversion if the property is not returned upon the request of the bailor, or if the property is used without permission of the bailor.


...OR...in plain 'Englush'...the dealer better pony up.

This sounds like yet ANOTHER case of the ol', "It was like that when you left it with us", responsibility dodge.
 
i'd ask for a new wheel; work down from that bargaining position

-to cash,
-to repaired wheel
-to free service
 
Dropped my GT off at the local Ford dealer who has always done my work. Same technician every time. The dealer calls me after having the car for 5 hours and asks if I have "road hazard" on my tires. They were just replaced with correct GY's immediately before Rally III. He said the car has a flat. He said the tech was driving it and the tire went flat and it ruined the sidewall and chipped the rim. Wants to send the rim to Wheel Technologies to have "recoated". I left the car at noon and parked it in the parts dept parking area. All tires up at that time and no prior issues with this set of tires at all. I went and grabbed lunch and returned an hour later to see if it had been moved and it had. No one called me then to tell me it had a flat. It was 4 hrs later that he called me. What do I do/ or expect?

Earlier I read this thread and started to make a post and then elected to think about it a bit first

For me to make comments I am assuming that permissions were in place for the test drive to occur.

Whenever a gal is taken on the road there is a risk of secondary damage that generally has little or nothing to do with the operator. It could have been a rock to the windshield, a headlight or ? that simply quit working, however in this case it was a flat tire that in the end also resulted in a damaged to the wheel.

Now I am not looking to create an argument but rather pose some food for thought.

If it had been a rock in the windshield would the operator have been at fault or simply party to the event? I dare say that a participant would be a better description. Now using this logic then was the flat tire caused by the operator (assuming no negligence or misuse of the gal) or again was the operator simply party to the event; again I dare say that a participant would be a better description.

Having said this, what would I expect to have happen now that the event has taken place? Certainly my feelings are mixed however because I detest litigation and how quickly folks jump to conclusions even when they were not a material participant as such I would say that a calm heart to heart is in order so as to confirm the basic premise as I outlined it.

You already shared that this person has tended to your gal in the past as such the experience must have been favorable and to some degree there is trust too. If this is in fact the case then as much as what happened is troubling it must have been troubling for the participant as well because I suspect that he/she has come to respect you and wants to provide for you and your gal only the best.

So back to what would I expect; I think (based on the fundamental understanding that I have and presented) that the situation could have happened to anyone as such given best case they elect to repair the damage at no cost to you with worst case being they tell you to fly a kite; in my world a point in-between is what I would consider fair.

Here is another and maybe better example; what if one had taken their gal into a facility because of a rattle and the technician was asked to drive the gal while the owner was in the passenger seat so as to share the concern in real time and this event took place; would the operator or the passenger be culpable hence responsible or neither but rather as defined above; both simple participants as such the ultimate cost remains with the gal’s owner as a component of ownership.

Certainly a malicious act is one thing however if one hired another to provide a service during which something such as a flat tire occurs which was completely beyond their control then the point of defining responsibility versus one's expectation comes into play.

If something happens beyond one’s control their responsibility is to inform one of this immediately and then sadly and all too often the expectation is that since this person was a participant they are also accountable for the (in this case) the repair.

Remember that a tire (even brand new) never give notice prior to going flat as with headlights that always work until they fail.

There are many a great technician that sadly become a party to a crappy chain of events.

As I said at the onset of the reply; I am simply sharing some thoughts/opinions for all to think about

Takes care

Shadowman
 
Last edited:
Shadowman - you're right. AGAIN! :thumbsup :cheers
 
He did have permission to test the car.......but I have had a flat on my GT before and never ruined a sidewall of the tire. It was driven AFTER the tire went flat....the only way to ruin a sidewall imo. He mad it back to the dealership so it is obvious he drove it while leaking down. He said he heard a pop about 2 miles from the dealership. A year ago when I felt a low tire I snuck into the local Chev dealership and used their air hose. I filled it full and could hear the hiss. I drove straight to Discount Tire and problem solved. If I had tried to drive on the flat I would have ruined the tire and quite possibly, the rim. I totally agree that sometimes it is an act of nature and no ones "fault", but I'm not so sure here.
 
That being the case (he drove 2 miles on a flat), we're right back to the dealer 'making it good' again. :willy:willy:willy
 
Bill I would love to agree with you and youre much more articulate with word than I am, but consider what the odds are when you take a car that was perfectly fine, as for the tire and rim, and come back to find the tire and rim damaged, foul play has to be suspected, is there a possibility that this could have been a situation where you describe, no malice involved, purely accidental, yes, but when you consider we get in our cars everyday, time after time and this doesnt happen, then you take the car and leave it with someone and this occurs, if infact they treat your car with the same diligence as a reasonable person would expect things like this, mathematically, are very very rare, and should almost never happen, I have heard and seen too many thing to share your feeling on this one, I would love to give the benefit of the doubt but if it was a flat tire maybe, a damaged rim no way. regardless, to me, I believe you should return everything in better condition than you find it, but thats just me, and I believe if someone takes responsibilty of your possesions than they are resposible for any damage that may occur. I hate litigation too, but sometime people take advantage of others knowing that fact

sorry about the rant but I have strong feelings toward this subject:cheers
 
All comments and opinions are correct as this is an emotionally driven issue.

It was not my desire to present the answer but rather to compel folks to think about variables.

I appreciate the feedback from all

Takes care

Shadowman
 
Shadowman, you're starting to write like an engineer.
 
Unless I missed it what kind of puncture or damage was done to the tire to cause it to go flat?
 
Accidents happen - they had the permission to drive the car.

However, they should not have driven a distance on a flat tyre, that's negligence.

Replace the wheel and bill them for it.
 
Zero Pressure

He did have permission to test the car.......but I have had a flat on my GT before and never ruined a sidewall of the tire. It was driven AFTER the tire went flat....the only way to ruin a sidewall imo. He mad it back to the dealership so it is obvious he drove it while leaking down. He said he heard a pop about 2 miles from the dealership. A year ago when I felt a low tire I snuck into the local Chev dealership and used their air hose. I filled it full and could hear the hiss. I drove straight to Discount Tire and problem solved. If I had tried to drive on the flat I would have ruined the tire and quite possibly, the rim. I totally agree that sometimes it is an act of nature and no ones "fault", but I'm not so sure here.

That is why I run Michelin ZP tires on the street. You are lucky, and should probably verify, there was no damage underneath the vehicle. With a flat, you really have VERY little ground clearance. Just a thought...
 
everyone is right on the mark with legal and ethical thoughts on this issue. however, I think a short meeting with the service manager and dealer principal in the same room will probably resolve the issue in your favor quicker then you may think! ever get a Ford Service survey in the mail? trust me, any negatives on the survey go right to the glass house!
 
I also agree with what everyone has said so far. Remember, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Arrange a meeting with the manager or owner and in your most friendly and controlled voice start asking some questions. Be firm, but polite. Be strong, but don't accuse.

The part of your experience that I find troubling is that you returned from lunch an hour later and the car was gone, but they didn't call you about the damage for 4 hours. Where was the car during these 4 hours? Were they burning some donuts and hit something damaging your tire and rim? Seems suspicious to me. Until you can talk to them and inspect the tire rim, it's anyone's guess as to what caused the tire failure. Maybe take the tire to a Goodyear dealer and let them inspect the tire and rim to see what they say.

I never leave mine with the dealer. I wait for it even if it's an all day event. The dealer I take mine to has a "certified FGT tech" according to them, but he didn't know how to change my oil. I happened to walk into the bay which they don't want me to do and overheard him say, "why is this always happening" then I saw him grab the syphon machine and start syphoning oil out of my dry sump. I asked what he was doing, he said that 9 quarts wouldn't fit in the system and he couldn't figure out why this was always happening so he was removing some. I asked if he had drained all 3 drain plugs. I knew this thanks to all the smart folks on this forum. Yes, you guessed correctly - this "certified FGT mechanic" didn't know there were 3 drain plugs and had changed the oil on other customer's cars and had the same overfill problem. I was polite, calm and collected though and he sat down at his computer and said "you're right, I should have looked it up". They also didn't change my transmission fluid as requested. They had me come back a few days later after they ordered another filter and more oil and gave me a free oil change. Positive side is I got a nice flush with clean oil and new filter after about 50 miles of driving.