Re: I want to contest quality of repair
Doug Jewell
> I think it is all hogwash. I now need to know what reasons the
> repairer could put forward to the court so that to neutralise my
> claims that he did a substandard job. I just do not want to wind up in
> the court with the inspection report in my hand and find out that the
> judge ignores it and instead pays attention to something which the
> repairer puts forward. In other words, what are the pitfalls ?
Small claims court is a crapshoot at the best of times. My
brother took his house builder to small claims because of
some dodgy building. He had inspection reports etc that the
building was substandard, and the builder didn't really
offer anything in his defence. The same day, the builder had
several other appearances for the same sort of stuff, and
had already had his licence revoked.
Should be an open and shut case right? Unfortunately the
magistrate was very obviously pissed and in his ruling got
the claimant and defendent arse about face. So despite my
brother suing the builder for several thousand, the
magistrate ruled that my brother had to PAY several thousand
to the builder. He didn't even notice until he tried to
enforce the ruling, and was informed that he had to pay the
builder. Despite there being a clear error in the judgement,
there was no recourse for appeal. Fortunately, the builder
was obviously not aware of the error either, so didn't
pursue the payment from my brother.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
What is the difference between a duck?
veritas
>
> I think it is all hogwash. I now need to know what reasons the
> repairer could put forward to the court so that to neutralise my
> claims that he did a substandard job. I just do not want to wind up in
> the court with the inspection report in my hand and find out that the
> judge ignores it and instead pays attention to something which the
> repairer puts forward. In other words,
That is exactly what could happen.....
what are the pitfalls ?
Small Claims Tribunals are notorious for unexpected outcomes. To find a
judgement, it is not required to rely on any law or fact that might
relate to the matter in hand however it is more likely to make a
decision in favour of the claimant regardless of the evidence or
argument before it although I wouldn't bet on that either.
The sitting Tribunal Judicial Officer is not required to keep a record
of the proceedings nor give a reason his/her decision and there is no
recourse against those officers who abuse their powers.
From my experience, small claims tribunals are a horribly sick joke!!!
Good-luck.
D Walford
> I think it is all hogwash. I now need to know what reasons the
> repairer could put forward to the court so that to neutralise my
> claims that he did a substandard job. I just do not want to wind up in
> the court with the inspection report in my hand and find out that the
> judge ignores it and instead pays attention to something which the
> repairer puts forward. In other words, what are the pitfalls ?
>
My guess is you have no case because you didn't allow the panel beater
to rectify his original faulty workmanship.
He offered to respray the car for free which you declined so to me it
looks like he did the right thing and you screwed up by not giving him
the opportunity to make it good.
I doubt you have any chance of a successful claim against the repairer.
Daryl
Clocky
I agree.
From what I understand, the repairer will always be given first option to do
the repair again, and the small claims system would almost certainly have
decided that way too.
If, after a second attempt the job is still unsatisfactory and you can get
independant assessments stating that, there might be other options open to
you.
atec77
> On 23/10/2010 1:17 AM, Antonio Huerta wrote:
>
>> I think it is all hogwash. I now need to know what reasons the
>> repairer could put forward to the court so that to neutralise my
>> claims that he did a substandard job. I just do not want to wind up in
>> the court with the inspection report in my hand and find out that the
>> judge ignores it and instead pays attention to something which the
>> repairer puts forward. In other words, what are the pitfalls ?
>>
>
> My guess is you have no case because you didn't allow the panel beater
> to rectify his original faulty workmanship.
> He offered to respray the car for free
I get the impression that's merely an allegation ?
which you declined so to me it
did he ?
> looks like he did the right thing and you screwed up by not giving him
> the opportunity to make it good.
> I doubt you have any chance of a successful claim against the repairer.
correctly presented he has a good chance of winning but the cost of
doing so outweighs any potential gains .
Personally I would quite and select another repairer to avoid reprisal
on the free repair >
>
> Daryl
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
Clocky
> On 23/10/2010 9:38 AM, D Walford wrote:
>> On 23/10/2010 1:17 AM, Antonio Huerta wrote:
>>
>>> I think it is all hogwash. I now need to know what reasons the
>>> repairer could put forward to the court so that to neutralise my
>>> claims that he did a substandard job. I just do not want to wind up
>>> in the court with the inspection report in my hand and find out
>>> that the judge ignores it and instead pays attention to something
>>> which the repairer puts forward. In other words, what are the
>>> pitfalls ?
>>
>> My guess is you have no case because you didn't allow the panel
>> beater to rectify his original faulty workmanship.
>> He offered to respray the car for free
>
> I get the impression that's merely an allegation ?
> which you declined so to me it
> did he ?
Comprehend much?
Antonio Huerta
> Should be an open and shut case right? Unfortunately the
> magistrate was very obviously pissed and in his ruling got
> the claimant and defendent arse about face. So despite my
> brother suing the builder for several thousand, the
> magistrate ruled that my brother had to PAY several thousand
> to the builder. He didn't even notice until he tried to
> enforce the ruling, and was informed that he had to pay the
> builder. Despite there being a clear error in the judgement,
> there was no recourse for appeal. Fortunately, the builder
> was obviously not aware of the error either, so didn't
> pursue the payment from my brother.
Does your brother have assets worth a few $k or a have a steady job ?
If so, then your brother should be careful. The builder can sell the
debt to the debt collector at half price for quick cash. It is then
the debt collector who will come to your brother with the court
judgement and will garnish his wages or will take his car away or even
will sell your brother's house.From your description, the builder is a
shrewed person, and can do it easily.
Epsilon
> I contracted a panel beater to spray my car for cash. He gave me a
> quotation with the price below what they usually put on an invoice to
> the insurance companies. The repair was badly done. I took the car to
> the automotive association and obtained an inspection report from them
> saying that the quality of repair was below of the professional
> standard. The inspector told me that I could sue the guy.
>
> I did it differently. The repairer was an "approved repairer" and thus
> the automotive association could conduct their own "mediation
> tribunal" between him and me. That's what I asked them to do. The
> clerk contacted the repairer with my request to repaint the car for
> free, and got back to me with the repairer's reply that he did a good
> job and would respray my car at an additional cost. Essentially, the
> clerk became the repairer's representative. I was told that the panel
> beater was a respected repairer, and that he charged me less than what
> he is supposed to charge and that I got my money's worth, and that I
> left the car for too short time, and I got a corresponding level of
> repair.
>
> I sent a letter to the repairer saying that I got a quotation from
> another repairer to respray my car, and requested that amount of money
> from him, and if he does not pay within 21 day, I'd lodge a claim
> against him in the small claims division of the magistrate court.
> After 21 days, I contacted him. He told me that he actually offered to
> me via the automotive association clerk to respray my car for free,
> but he alleged I did not take up his offer. So that the repairer
> offered to me again to respray my car. I declined the offer, as during
> all these course he was aggressive and seemed to consider it as a
> personal offence (he is from Southern Europe). I thought that the
> respray would be badly done again, or he would inflict a hidden damage
> to my car.
>
> I now want to go all the way, and sue him in the small claims
> magistrate court. On my side, I will give to the court a copy of his
> quotation and a report from the inspector that the quality of work was
> substandard. I had a brief discussion of it with the clerk of the
> automotive association. He advised me against that saying that I would
> not be successful, and he gave me the same reasons as I described in
> the beginning. Essentially, he informed me that I was not entitled to
> a better quality job because I paid too little, and that the repairer
> would bring his tradie mates who would give an expert advice during
> the court hearing that the given the circumstances the quality was
> actually within the trade standard.
>
> I think it is all hogwash. I now need to know what reasons the
> repairer could put forward to the court so that to neutralise my
> claims that he did a substandard job. I just do not want to wind up in
> the court with the inspection report in my hand and find out that the
> judge ignores it and instead pays attention to something which the
> repairer puts forward. In other words, what are the pitfalls ?
Your evidence is the inspection report of the quality of repair being below
professional
standards. Everything else is background noise. What you have to show is a
breach of contract, and the report shows that.
You have absolutely no obligation to let the repairer have another go, so
that's not a problem.
So, you appear to have a good case. Don't get carried away with all the
irrelevant stuff. And bear in mind that any litigation is a toss of the
coin - there are no guarantees. On the other hand, most traders in this
situation would much rather make a deal to settle the dispute than waste
time and money on going to court. That's up to you, of course.
Antonio Huerta
> On 23/10/2010 9:38 AM, D Walford wrote:
> > I doubt you have any chance of a successful claim against the repairer.
>
> correctly presented he has a good chance of winning but the cost of
> doing so outweighs any potential gains .
Well, if my matter is correctly presented, then I'd have the chance to
win. I am thinking about going to a "paralegal" or "commercial agent"
who routinely does the preparations of small claims for the
magistrates for his clients and knows what is happening at hearings,
and ask him what the judge is likely to do, and what the defendant is
likely to present, and what I should present to the court to win. I'd
be prepared to pay $100 for the advice (or, better, for free). So,
what would be my strategy at finding such a knowledgeable person ? If
I just pick up the Yellow Pages and go for an arbitrary commercial
agent, he would just offer me to prepare a court claim for an
expensive fee (which I would like to do myself) ?
Epsilon
Simple advice about that - don't bother. Just get on with it. You have at
least a reasonable chance that the repairer will want to resolve the matter
as quickly as possible, and will try to settle. And that's what his lawyers
will be telling him, if your case is what you say.
Atheist Chaplain
"Antonio Huerta" <ahu...@inbox.com> wrote in message
news:7f821397-2ea0-43a0...@x4g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
A lawyer once told me there are two Casinos in NSW, the one at Darling
Harbour and the NSW Courts
I think the same would apply regardless of the State or territory you are
in.
--
[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Church of
Scientology International]
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your
Christ"
Sylvia Else
> he is supposed to charge
Well, there's no such thing. He agrees a price to do a job, and absent
express terms to the contrary, the job has to be done with a normal
level of professional skill.
If there's to be quick and dirty job for a low price, this has to be
clearly stated in advance.
Sylvia.
Epsilon
>
>
> A lawyer once told me there are two Casinos in NSW, the one at Darling
> Harbour and the NSW Courts
> I think the same would apply regardless of the State or territory you
> are in.
Well, ok.
I'm a lawyer, and I tell you that you're a fuckwit.
The same would apply regardless of the State or territory you are in.
Clocky
He will likely offer to redo the repair, and then the magistrate will agree
and then you're back where you started.
At least, that's the way these kind of claims have played out in the past
that I've heard about. Often then the repairer only fixes what he deems
necessary and repeat until you give up and cut your losses.
OTOH, the repairer may not wish to bother and might go for a settlement, and
in that case you can come out in front. It's small claims, so you have
little to lose so could be worth a try.
If it was a cashy job and it's sub-standard (and priced accordingly), well I
don't think you will get much sympathy.
Phil Allison
"Epsilon is a Lying pig"
>
> You have absolutely no obligation to let the repairer have another go, so
> that's not a problem.
** Complete bollocks.
..... Phil
Epsilon
Nonsense. In the OP's situation, regarding a breach of contract by poor
repairs, the law does not require anyone to have to submit to the repairer
having another go. It's the OP's choice, and he can ask for his money back.
You are confusing the situation of a breach of contract in a consumer
transaction for defective goods, where a repair is a possible remedy under
the Trade Practices Act. But even in that case, the consumer is not obliged
to that to submit to a repair. They can ask for their money back, ask for a
replacement, seek damages, or accept a repair, at their option.
> At least, that's the way these kind of claims have played out in the
> past that I've heard about.
So, you admit to peddling bullshit.
> Often then the repairer only fixes what
> he deems necessary and repeat until you give up and cut your losses.
No! Do they really? Shocking!!
> OTOH, the repairer may not wish to bother and might go for a
> settlement, and in that case you can come out in front. It's small
> claims, so you have little to lose so could be worth a try.
I see that you have been reading the thread...
> If it was a cashy job and it's sub-standard (and priced accordingly),
> well I don't think you will get much sympathy.
Don't you? Well, there's an end to it, eh? But the OP asked about the
legal position, not what passes for your thoughts.
Atheist Chaplain
"Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
news:i9te65$sa1$1...@news.albasani.net...
And I'm an Astronaut (you can be anything you want on the internet)
and you�re a fuckwit and just for the record, that�s planetary!!
Atheist Chaplain
"Sylvia Else" <syl...@not.here.invalid> wrote in message
news:8ieset...@mid.individual.net...
Seems like the voice of reason here :-)
Epsilon
> "Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
> news:i9te65$sa1$1...@news.albasani.net...
>> Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> A lawyer once told me there are two Casinos in NSW, the one at
>>> Darling Harbour and the NSW Courts
>>> I think the same would apply regardless of the State or territory
>>> you are in.
>>
>> Well, ok.
>> I'm a lawyer, and I tell you that you're a fuckwit.
>> The same would apply regardless of the State or territory you are in.
>
> And I'm an Astronaut (you can be anything you want on the internet)
Indeed, you can. And I agree that you are off the planet.
terryc
> Small claims court is a crapshoot at the best of times.
> Unfortunately the magistrate was very obviously pissed and
> in his ruling got the claimant and defendent arse about face.
There is also the issue of feather beadding likely future employers.
terryc
> If it was a cashy job
Yep, no paperwork and you can be screwed as either can say anything and
neither has paperwork to back up their story.
terryc
> What you have to show is a breach of contract,
What contract?
Go along to some small claims sessions and see how much the prescence or
abscence of one piece of paper makes.
terryc
> Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>>
>>
>> A lawyer once told me there are two Casinos in NSW, the one at Darling
>> Harbour and the NSW Courts
>> I think the same would apply regardless of the State or territory you
>> are in.
>
> Well, ok.
> I'm a lawyer, and I tell you that you're a fuckwit.
But you would say that wouldn't you? {:-).
terryc
>> If there's to be quick and dirty job for a low price, this has to be
>> clearly stated in advance.
Do you put that on your quotes?
> Seems like the voice of reason here :-)
Nope, cash is the doco for substandard.
The supply of people who expect a top quality repair/item and do not
want to pay a fair price for it is endless.
Phil Allison
"terryc"
>
> The supply of people who expect a top quality repair/item and do not want
> to pay a fair price for it is endless.
** You must do repairs for a living - right ??
... Phil
Sylvia Else
It's a bit late for the repairer to claim that there was no contract. He
has clearly already conceded to the automotive association that there was.
Sylvia.
Sylvia Else
> Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>
>>> If there's to be quick and dirty job for a low price, this has to be
>>> clearly stated in advance.
>
> Do you put that on your quotes?
>
>> Seems like the voice of reason here :-)
>
> Nope, cash is the doco for substandard.
It's shorthand for tax-avoidance, with the tacit understanding that the
supplier and purchaser of the service split the benefit. There's no
reason a person should assume that a cash deal is a substandard deal.
> The supply of people who expect a top quality repair/item and do not
> want to pay a fair price for it is endless.
What is a "fair price"?
The repairer has the option of accepting an offered price, and doing the
job to a normal standard, rejecting the offer, and not doing the job at
all, or agreeing with the customer that a lower price will be paid for a
lower quality job.
What the repairer cannot do is make a unilateral decision that since the
price paid is less that the repairer would have liked, the work can be
done to a lower quality.
Sylvia.
Phil Allison
"Sylvia Else"
>terryc
>> Nope, cash is the doco for substandard.
>
> It's shorthand for tax-avoidance, with the tacit understanding that the
> supplier and purchaser of the service split the benefit. There's no reason
> a person should assume that a cash deal is a substandard deal.
** Certainly is when the price is way below the going rate.
BTW:
Few repairers ever make it into the higher tax brackets anyhow.
>> The supply of people who expect a top quality repair/item and do not
>> want to pay a fair price for it is endless.
>
> What is a "fair price"?
** Something repairers all know and fuckwits like Sylvia have no clue about.
> The repairer has the option of accepting an offered price, and doing the
> job to a normal standard, rejecting the offer, and not doing the job at
> all, or agreeing with the customer that a lower price will be paid for a
> lower quality job.
** Got nothing whatever to do with being paid a fair price for the time
spent, materials used and overheads involved.
( snip rest of this asinine troll's usual putrid crap )
... Phil
Sylvia Else
> "Sylvia Else"
>> terryc
>>> Nope, cash is the doco for substandard.
>>
>> It's shorthand for tax-avoidance, with the tacit understanding that the
>> supplier and purchaser of the service split the benefit. There's no reason
>> a person should assume that a cash deal is a substandard deal.
>
> ** Certainly is when the price is way below the going rate.
>
> BTW:
>
> Few repairers ever make it into the higher tax brackets anyhow.
So? Or are you saying they earn so little that they don't have to pay
tax at all.
>
>
>>> The supply of people who expect a top quality repair/item and do not
>>> want to pay a fair price for it is endless.
>>
>> What is a "fair price"?
>
>
> ** Something repairers all know and fuckwits like Sylvia have no clue about.
It was a rhetorical question. People have notions about the value of the
services they provide, but those notions are not necessarily shared by
others. Any price that is freely negotiated is a fair price. If you
consider a price unfair, then don't accept it. No one's forcing you.
>
>
>> The repairer has the option of accepting an offered price, and doing the
>> job to a normal standard, rejecting the offer, and not doing the job at
>> all, or agreeing with the customer that a lower price will be paid for a
>> lower quality job.
>
>
> ** Got nothing whatever to do with being paid a fair price for the time
> spent, materials used and overheads involved.
All of which you should assess, or otherwise provide for, at the time
the contract is entered into. It may be that when the costs are properly
taken into account, you can't perform the job at a price the customer
will accept. Essentially this indicates that the customer doesn't
consider the job worth doing. Not having it done at all is clearly a
choice that's open to them, as is finding someone else who's willing to
do it for a lower price.
Don't like competition? Too bad.
But nothing entitles a repairer to do a lower quality job because they
don't think they're being paid enough.
Sylvia.
Atheist Chaplain
and your still universally a fuckwit
Phil Allison
"Stupider than anyone Else Alive"
>> Few repairers ever make it into the higher tax brackets anyhow.
>
> So?
** So there is little financial advantage to be split - you stupid
fuckwit.
>>> What is a "fair price"?
>>
>>
>> ** Something repairers all know and fuckwits like Sylvia have no clue
>> about.
>
> It was a rhetorical question.
** Only because Sylvia has no fucking idea what " fair" is.
>> ** Got nothing whatever to do with being paid a fair price for the time
>> spent, materials used and overheads involved.
>
> All of which you should assess,
** Got nothing to do with the concept of "fair".
Nothing stops the going rate for services from becoming an appalling
exploitation of service providers.
Ask the next 17 year old Asian student working in some sleazy Lebanese run
brothel what she thinks of getting maybe $25 a time in hand for letting the
scum of the male population fuck her.
> Don't like competition? Too bad.
** Got nothing do with the concept of fair.
See above.
> But nothing entitles a repairer to do a lower quality job because they
> don't think they're being paid enough.
** Fraid you are DEAD wrong there.
The quality to be reasonably expected of any goods or services IS related
to the amount being paid for them.
The FTAs and the TPA state this concept clearly.
..... Phil
Epsilon
> "Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
> news:i9tfc9$t29$1...@news.albasani.net...
>> Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>>> "Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
>>> news:i9te65$sa1$1...@news.albasani.net...
>>>> Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A lawyer once told me there are two Casinos in NSW, the one at
>>>>> Darling Harbour and the NSW Courts
>>>>> I think the same would apply regardless of the State or territory
>>>>> you are in.
>>>>
>>>> Well, ok.
>>>> I'm a lawyer, and I tell you that you're a fuckwit.
>>>> The same would apply regardless of the State or territory you are
>>>> in.
>>>
>>> And I'm an Astronaut (you can be anything you want on the internet)
>>
>> Indeed, you can. And I agree that you are off the planet.
>
> and your still universally a fuckwit
While you are both illiterate and a fuckwit.
Sylvia Else
>
> Nothing stops the going rate for services from becoming an appalling
> exploitation of service providers.
>
> Ask the next 17 year old Asian student working in some sleazy Lebanese run
> brothel what she thinks of getting maybe $25 a time in hand for letting the
> scum of the male population fuck her.
Before you can conclude that a particular rate is unfair and constitutes
appalling exploitation, you need to determine what the rate should be in
non-exploitative situation. But how are you going to do that?
How much should a prostitute get paid? Why that amount, and not some
other amount?
Sylvia.
D Walford
> On 23/10/2010 1:17 AM, Antonio Huerta wrote:
>> less than what
>> he is supposed to charge
>
> Well, there's no such thing. He agrees a price to do a job, and absent
> express terms to the contrary, the job has to be done with a normal
> level of professional skill.
>
What is "normal level of professional skill"?
Price makes all the difference.
For example you wouldn't expect the same quality paint work on a cheap
Chinese car as you would expect on a RR or a top of the range Benz or BMW.
> If there's to be quick and dirty job for a low price, this has to be
> clearly stated in advance.
You can pay a very high price for a show car standard paint job or you
can pay less than $1000 for a rough job so the price paid and what the
customer expected will tell the story.
Maybe the OP should tell us what sort of car and its condition before
the respray and how much he paid for the respray.
Daryl
Antonio Huerta
I called to the court registry, and asked if I could go to anyone's
hearing in a small claims division. I wanted to see the standard to
which it occurs. The person on the phone told me that it was not
allowed for anybody to attend any hearing. Is he pulling my leg ?
Antonio Huerta
OK, here is more information to clear misunderstanding. The repairer
said he was priding himself on a quality of the jobs he does. He gave
me a written quotation for a cash job (it did not have any quilifiers
as to the quality of the job). When later I paid for the job, he did
not give me a receipt, but after a phone call and an argument he
agreed to give me the receipt, and I obtained it. He had turned out to
be not familiar with this brand of car, and when I was picking the car
up, he told me it took him more time to finish the job, and he
complained he was not making money on my job and that he was making me
a favour by spraying the car for such a price.
On a slightly different note. I am experienced with the Australian
judicial system to a very limited degree, but from what I know, the
judge at the trial is not interested to find out who is truly at
fault. What he cares is to close the case based on the submitted
documents. And they have some kind of simplified set of rules to
decide who is wrong. For example, if the plaintiff shows a document
from some official authority that the defendant was wrong at something
associated with the case to some degree, the judge does not dig any
deeper, and assumes that the defendant is guilty in the case.
atec77
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
Doug Jewell
> On Oct 23, 4:25 am, Doug Jewell<a...@and.maybe.ill.tell.you> wrote:
>
>> Should be an open and shut case right? Unfortunately the
>> magistrate was very obviously pissed and in his ruling got
>> brother suing the builder for several thousand, the
>> magistrate ruled that my brother had to PAY several thousand
>> to the builder. He didn't even notice until he tried to
>> enforce the ruling, and was informed that he had to pay the
>> builder. Despite there being a clear error in the judgement,
>> there was no recourse for appeal. Fortunately, the builder
>> was obviously not aware of the error either, so didn't
>> pursue the payment from my brother.
>
> Does your brother have assets worth a few $k or a have a steady job ?
> If so, then your brother should be careful. The builder can sell the
> debt to the debt collector at half price for quick cash. It is then
> the debt collector who will come to your brother with the court
> judgement and will garnish his wages or will take his car away or even
> will sell your brother's house.From your description, the builder is a
> shrewed person, and can do it easily.
In QLD you have 6 years from the original ruling to enforce
the ruling. That time has now past. The builder obviously
didn't realise that he had won the case or he would have
sought enforcement. It was only when my brother went to seek
enforcement that he discovered he was meant to pay up, not
get paid.
--
What is the difference between a duck?
Doug Jewell
> Doug Jewell wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Should be an open and shut case right?
>
> prepare and argue their matter carefully and listen carefully to the
> judgment.
>
>
>> Unfortunately the magistrate
>> was very obviously pissed and in his ruling got the claimant and
>> defendent arse about face.
>
>
> brother does in fact work out how to have a judicial mistake corrected,
> it would be rather said if his comment got back to the maggie wouldn't
> it.
Too much time has now passed, the magistrate has probably
drunken himself to death by now. He was drinking during the
hearing, so it's not defamation it's a statement of fact.
>
>
>> So despite my brother suing the builder
>> for several thousand, the magistrate ruled that my brother had to PAY
>> several thousand to the builder. He didn't even notice until he tried
>> to enforce the ruling, and was informed that he had to pay the
>> builder. Despite there being a clear error in the judgement, there
>> was no recourse for appeal.
>
>
> Whilst there are some courts/tribunals that have no "as of right"
> appeal path, one of the reasons Australia runs an "Apex" court system
> is that superior courts and tribunals can look over the shoulder and
> review/re-hear matters that came before lesser courts/tribunals.
Now, QLD has the QCAT (I think I got those letters around
the right way), where there is right of appeal. But the old
Small Claims court had no such right. The magistrates
decision was final. They did investigate options, and the
best they could achieve was discipline against the
magistrate, but the ruling couldn't be overturned and the
case couldn't be re-heard/appealled. The QCAT has changed
those previous guidelines, but that is how it was in QLD.
>
> There are also ways in which the original presiding maggie can be
> requested to either vacate or reopen his/her original decision - even
> judicial review is possibly available.
>
>
>> Fortunately, the builder was obviously
>> not aware of the error either, so didn't pursue the payment from my
>> brother.
>>>
>
> night to frighten gullible youngsters. Did you hold a torch under your
> chin while typing it?
You're being a smartarse. The builder was defending several
cases that day, all of which went against him. In my
brothers case, the amount awarded was the exact amount my
brother had claimed, and the builder hadn't lodged a
counter-claim, but the wording of the ruling was that the
claimant had to pay the defendent. As I said, my brother
didn't discover until he tried to seek enforcement. He
obviously didn't ring the builder and say "ahh you know that
court case we had a few months back, well you won so I owe
you money". He couldn't get enforcement, but once the 6
years were up, the builder couldn't seek enforcement either.
So fortunately my brother didn't end up out of pocket even
more, but it could have ended up that way.
Clocky
Good luck with that.
> You are confusing the situation of a breach of contract in a consumer
> transaction for defective goods, where a repair is a possible remedy under
> the Trade Practices Act. But even in that case, the consumer is not
> obliged to that to submit to a repair. They can ask for their money back,
> ask for a replacement, seek damages, or accept a repair, at their option.
>
Yeah they can ask alright.
>> At least, that's the way these kind of claims have played out in the
>> past that I've heard about.
>
> So, you admit to peddling bullshit.
>
It's not bullshit, it's just the way things panned out.
>> Often then the repairer only fixes what
>> he deems necessary and repeat until you give up and cut your losses.
>
> No! Do they really? Shocking!!
>
Idiot.
>> OTOH, the repairer may not wish to bother and might go for a
>> settlement, and in that case you can come out in front. It's small
>> claims, so you have little to lose so could be worth a try.
>
> I see that you have been reading the thread...
>
>> If it was a cashy job and it's sub-standard (and priced accordingly),
>> well I don't think you will get much sympathy.
>
> Don't you? Well, there's an end to it, eh? But the OP asked about the
> legal position, not what passes for your thoughts.
Your opinion on his legal position after hearing one side of the story and
not having seen any evidence is assuming an awful lot isn't it?
I'm just talking about my experience with people who have gone through the
same thing and didn't get a satisfactory outcome.
Clocky
Why is a lawyer trolling usenet?
Clocky
"Sylvia Else" <syl...@not.here.invalid> wrote in message
You get what you pay for, and the OP may well have gotten exactly what he
paid for.
Sylvia Else
So his question is "Are small claims division court hearings open?"
Sylvia.
Sylvia Else
That's often a practical reality, but you meant to get what you
contracted to get.
Sylvia.
Epsilon
First document - a written quote.
> When later I paid for the job, he did
> not give me a receipt, but after a phone call and an argument he
> agreed to give me the receipt, and I obtained it.
Written receipt for payment of the work done.
> He had turned out to
> be not familiar with this brand of car, and when I was picking the car
> up, he told me it took him more time to finish the job, and he
> complained he was not making money on my job and that he was making me
> a favour by spraying the car for such a price.
Evidence by the OP of what the repairer said.
You also have the report from the inspector that the work done was not up to
scatch.
On the face of it, a straight-forward case. The repairer took on a job for
a price, but found it was a bit too much for him, and ended up doing a
bodgey job because he is the usual bludging tradey who blames everyone else
for his own shortcomings. An all-too-familiar story.
He will be done like a dinner in the small claims court. Even he has any
sense whatsoever, he will do his damnest to try to settle the matter with
the OP. That's what his lawyers will be telling him. And he will start
shitting himself as soon as he gets the paperwork from the court.
> On a slightly different note. I am experienced with the Australian
> judicial system to a very limited degree, but from what I know, the
> judge at the trial is not interested to find out who is truly at
> fault. What he cares is to close the case based on the submitted
> documents. And they have some kind of simplified set of rules to
> decide who is wrong. For example, if the plaintiff shows a document
> from some official authority that the defendant was wrong at something
> associated with the case to some degree, the judge does not dig any
> deeper, and assumes that the defendant is guilty in the case.
Forget all that bullshit about what you think you know based on tv and what
ill-informed jobbos think they know. Start the case, and keep it simple.
The steps indicated above will be all you need. The repairer will almost
certainly try to get an agreement from you to stop the matter. You need to
decide how much is enough eg your money back, or more, or less.
Epsilon
Which jurisdiction?
atec77
> also closed.
>
I have been to several and not as the defendant
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
terryc
Yes. In NSW, small claims is open. Everyone goes into the room and cases
are called out in order. People usualy leave after their case is heard.
The only time any one takes an interes in who you are is when the case
they have called is not there, so often they go with whomever is in the
room. Just say you are there to see how it works.
terryc
> So his question is "Are small claims division court hearings open?"
IN NSW, yes (or they were 24 months ago).
terryc
> "terryc"
>
>> The supply of people who expect a top quality repair/item and do not want
>> to pay a fair price for it is endless.
>
>
Not any more. I found easier ways to make a living.
terryc
> It's shorthand for tax-avoidance, with the tacit understanding that the
> supplier and purchaser of the service split the benefit.
Damm, that is what I am doing wrong. I should stop declaring it stop and
paying tax on it.
terryc
> Don't like competition? Too bad.
Beautiful own goal. I rest my case.
terryc
> That's often a practical reality, but you meant to get what you
> contracted to get.
That is exactly what I said; if you don't pay the rate for what you
want, then you don't get what you want. What you want has nothing to do
with it.
terryc
> For example you wouldn't expect the same quality paint work on a cheap
> Chinese car as you would expect on a RR or a top of the range Benz or BMW.
I don't know about cars, but the paint jo on chinese and before that
Twaiwanese paint jobs exceeded anything you could get in Australia. the
trick was they could use toxic chemical two paks that were outlawed in
Australia for OH&S reasons.
Also, you "might" find that both those brands now have Chinese produced
models.
terryc
> And he will
> start shitting himself as soon as he gets the paperwork from the court.
Worst case; refund money charged, plus court filing costs plus max ~$600
that the plaintiff can recover for his solicitor to do all the work and
represent him, plus the bill from his own solicitor, if he has one do
the work.
Sylvia Else
What you want, and what you contracted to get, are not the same thing.
You should get what you contracted to get.
Sylvia.
Sylvia Else
How do you figure that?
Sylvia.
Sylvia Else
Depends on your life goals.
If constantly worrying about the next tax audit is your idea of
happiness, then go for it.
But I think in this context "cash" has a specific connection with tax
evasion. In some contexts it can refer to a non-cost bearing payment
method. People have accepted bank cheques from me as being "cash," as
distinct from payment by credit card, for the purpose of a cash discount.
Otherwise payment in folding money is a non-noteworthy way of settling a
bill. I doubt the OP would have mentioned it if that was the intent.
Sylvia.
Clocky
"Blue Heeler" <osd...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0h0qac...@news.individual.net...
> Clocky wrote:
>
>>
>> "Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
>> news:i9tt11$d70$1...@news.albasani.net...
>> > Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>> >>"Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
>> > > news:i9tfc9$t29$1...@news.albasani.net...
>> > > > Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>> >>>>"Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
>> > > > > news:i9te65$sa1$1...@news.albasani.net...
>> > > > > > Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > A lawyer once told me there are two Casinos in NSW, the
>> > > > > > > one at Darling Harbour and the NSW Courts
>> > > > > > > I think the same would apply regardless of the State or
>> > > > > > > territory you are in.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Well, ok.
>> > > > > > I'm a lawyer, and I tell you that you're a fuckwit.
>> > > > > > The same would apply regardless of the State or territory
>> > > > > > you are in.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > And I'm an Astronaut (you can be anything you want on the
>> > > > > internet)
>> > > >
>> > > > Indeed, you can. And I agree that you are off the planet.
>> > >
>> > > and your still universally a fuckwit
>> >
>> > While you are both illiterate and a fuckwit.
>>
>> Why is a lawyer trolling usenet?
>
> provides cheap amusement.
>
Hmmm, you get what you pay for I guess...
Clocky
"Sylvia Else" <syl...@not.here.invalid> wrote in message
He contracted nothing, it was a cash in hand job.
This isn't black and white, preparation in painting a car can reveal all
sort of unforeseeable nasties like bog and previous dodgey repairs that are
labour intensive and would normally incur an additional charge to be
repaired properly.
Since we are only getting one side of the story, and we don't really know
what discussions went on between the painter and the vehicle owner, it's not
a open and shut case.
I'm not defending the painter, just saying that there are two sides of the
story and the truth often lies somewhere inbetween.
Clocky
"Antonio Huerta" <ahu...@inbox.com> wrote in message
news:7cb7c9af-6530-40ab...@42g2000prt.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 23, 3:22 pm, D Walford <dwalf...@internode.on.net> wrote:
> On 23/10/2010 12:35 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>
> > On 23/10/2010 1:17 AM, Antonio Huerta wrote:
> >> less than what
> >> he is supposed to charge
>
> > Well, there's no such thing. He agrees a price to do a job, and absent
> > express terms to the contrary, the job has to be done with a normal
> > level of professional skill.
>
> What is "normal level of professional skill"?
> Price makes all the difference.
> Chinese car as you would expect on a RR or a top of the range Benz or BMW.
>
> > clearly stated in advance.
>
> You can pay a very high price for a show car standard paint job or you
> can pay less than $1000 for a rough job so the price paid and what the
> customer expected will tell the story.
> Maybe the OP should tell us what sort of car and its condition before
> the respray and how much he paid for the respray.
>
> Daryl
OK, here is more information to clear misunderstanding. The repairer
said he was priding himself on a quality of the jobs he does. He gave
me a written quotation for a cash job (it did not have any quilifiers
as to the quality of the job). When later I paid for the job, he did
not give me a receipt, but after a phone call and an argument he
agreed to give me the receipt, and I obtained it. He had turned out to
be not familiar with this brand of car, and when I was picking the car
up, he told me it took him more time to finish the job, and he
complained he was not making money on my job and that he was making me
a favour by spraying the car for such a price.
On a slightly different note. I am experienced with the Australian
judicial system to a very limited degree, but from what I know, the
judge at the trial is not interested to find out who is truly at
fault. What he cares is to close the case based on the submitted
documents. And they have some kind of simplified set of rules to
decide who is wrong. For example, if the plaintiff shows a document
from some official authority that the defendant was wrong at something
associated with the case to some degree, the judge does not dig any
deeper, and assumes that the defendant is guilty in the case.
Out of curiosity, what sort of car is it and, did you not inspect the
vehicle before paying for the work?
Phil Allison
"Stupider than anyone Else Alive"
>> Few repairers ever make it into the higher tax brackets anyhow.
>
> So?
** So there is little financial advantage to be split - you stupid
fuckwit.
>>> What is a "fair price"?
>>
>>
>> ** Something repairers all know and fuckwits like Sylvia have no clue
>> about.
>
> It was a rhetorical question.
** Only because Sylvia has no fucking idea what " fair" is.
>> ** Got nothing whatever to do with being paid a fair price for the time
>> spent, materials used and overheads involved.
>
> All of which you should assess,
** Got nothing to do with the concept of "fair".
Nothing stops the going rate for services from becoming an appalling
exploitation of service providers.
Ask the next 17 year old Asian student working in some sleazy Lebanese run
brothel what she thinks of getting maybe $25 a time in hand for letting the
scum of the male population fuck her.
> Don't like competition? Too bad.
** Got nothing do with the concept of fair.
See above.
> But nothing entitles a repairer to do a lower quality job because they
> don't think they're being paid enough.
** Fraid you are DEAD wrong there.
The quality to be reasonably expected of any goods or services IS related
to the amount being paid for them.
The FTAs and the TPA state this concept clearly.
..... Phil
Clocky
We'll see...
Epsilon
>
>
> We'll see...
What?
Atheist Chaplain
"Clocky" <not...@happen.com> wrote in message
news:4cc29ff6$0$29871$c3e8da3$5496...@news.astraweb.com...
>
> "Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
> news:i9tt11$d70$1...@news.albasani.net...
>> Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>>> "Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
>>> news:i9tfc9$t29$1...@news.albasani.net...
>>>> Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>>>>> "Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:i9te65$sa1$1...@news.albasani.net...
>>>>>> Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A lawyer once told me there are two Casinos in NSW, the one at
>>>>>>> Darling Harbour and the NSW Courts
>>>>>>> I think the same would apply regardless of the State or territory
>>>>>>> you are in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, ok.
>>>>>> I'm a lawyer, and I tell you that you're a fuckwit.
>>>>>> The same would apply regardless of the State or territory you are
>>>>>> in.
>>>>>
>>>>> And I'm an Astronaut (you can be anything you want on the internet)
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, you can. And I agree that you are off the planet.
>>>
>>> and your still universally a fuckwit
>>
>> While you are both illiterate and a fuckwit.
>
> Why is a lawyer trolling usenet?
>
>
Any Lawyer who doesn't tell his clients that while they may have a strong
civil case there still exists the possibility of losing, is nothing more
than an ambulance chaser.
--
[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Church of
Scientology International]
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your
Christ"
Atheist Chaplain
"Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
news:i9tt11$d70$1...@news.albasani.net...
> Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>> "Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
>> news:i9tfc9$t29$1...@news.albasani.net...
>>> Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>>>> "Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:i9te65$sa1$1...@news.albasani.net...
>>>>> Atheist Chaplain wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A lawyer once told me there are two Casinos in NSW, the one at
>>>>>> Darling Harbour and the NSW Courts
>>>>>> I think the same would apply regardless of the State or territory
>>>>>> you are in.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, ok.
>>>>> I'm a lawyer, and I tell you that you're a fuckwit.
>>>>> The same would apply regardless of the State or territory you are
>>>>> in.
>>>>
>>>> And I'm an Astronaut (you can be anything you want on the internet)
>>>
>>> Indeed, you can. And I agree that you are off the planet.
>>
>> and your still universally a fuckwit
>
> While you are both illiterate and a fuckwit.
So you have nothing but insults to throw, without providing evidence for any
of your claims.
Must really suck to be one of your misguided and poorly informed clients if
you really are a lawyer.
Any lawyer who doesn�t think that Civil liability is anything other than a
gamble at best is a fool to himself and a burden to his clients and should
have "Professional Ambulance Chaser" printed on all his business cards.
Epsilon
There is plenty of evidence for my claim that you are a fuckwit, including
your admission to being off the planet and your failure to deny the
allegation when first made.
> Must really suck to be one of your misguided and poorly informed
> clients if you really are a lawyer.
If you say so.
> Any lawyer who doesn�t think that Civil liability is anything other
> than a gamble at best is a fool to himself and a burden to his
> clients and should have "Professional Ambulance Chaser" printed on
> all his business cards.
Every single case by way of civil litigation can have that said about them,
either regarding the plaintiff or the defendant. You can say the same thing
about going to your GP, or having surgery. Or driving a car. Life is a
gamble, and there ain't no sure things.
D Walford
> On Oct 23, 3:22 pm, D Walford<dwalf...@internode.on.net> wrote:
>> On 23/10/2010 12:35 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>>
>>> On 23/10/2010 1:17 AM, Antonio Huerta wrote:
>>>> less than what
>>>> he is supposed to charge
>>
>>> Well, there's no such thing. He agrees a price to do a job, and absent
>>> express terms to the contrary, the job has to be done with a normal
>>> level of professional skill.
>>
>> What is "normal level of professional skill"?
>> Price makes all the difference.
>> For example you wouldn't expect the same quality paint work on a cheap
>> Chinese car as you would expect on a RR or a top of the range Benz or BMW.
>>
>>> If there's to be quick and dirty job for a low price, this has to be
>>> clearly stated in advance.
>>
>> You can pay a very high price for a show car standard paint job or you
>> can pay less than $1000 for a rough job so the price paid and what the
>> customer expected will tell the story.
>> Maybe the OP should tell us what sort of car and its condition before
>> the respray and how much he paid for the respray.
>>
>> Daryl
>
> OK, here is more information to clear misunderstanding. The repairer
> said he was priding himself on a quality of the jobs he does. He gave
> me a written quotation for a cash job (it did not have any quilifiers
> not give me a receipt, but after a phone call and an argument he
> be not familiar with this brand of car, and when I was picking the car
> up, he told me it took him more time to finish the job, and he
> complained he was not making money on my job and that he was making me
> a favour by spraying the car for such a price.
What was the price?
Daryl
Sylvia Else
> "Sylvia Else"<syl...@not.here.invalid> wrote in message
> news:8ig15m...@mid.individual.net...
>> On 23/10/2010 10:46 PM, terryc wrote:
>>> Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's often a practical reality, but you meant to get what you
>>>> contracted to get.
>>>
>>> That is exactly what I said; if you don't pay the rate for what you
>>> want, then you don't get what you want. What you want has nothing to do
>>> with it.
>>
>> What you want, and what you contracted to get, are not the same thing. You
>> should get what you contracted to get.
>>
>
> He contracted nothing, it was a cash in hand job.
There's still a contract.
Sylvia.
Atheist Chaplain
never said I was off the planet, you did, a claim I felt neither deserved or
warranted a reply.
I see your finally agreeing with me, after all I was the one who repeated
that a lawyer told me, that taking a case (in this instance a civil case) to
the NSW court system was a gamble by way of comparison with the NSW Casino
at Darling harbour. Now your also saying that "Every single case by way of
civil litigation can have that said about them, either regarding the
plaintiff or the defendant." It seems that this is your own definition of
what a fuckwit thinks, therefore you have also proved my case they you are
indeed a fuckwit. After all that is what you called me for making that
statement.
I my be no lawyer but from what I can see you either wasted a lot of peoples
time and money to become one, or your are full of shit.
Epsilon
>
> Sadly
See a psychiatrist.
> your comprehension is lacking
PKB
> for one who professes to be a
> Lawyer,
This is Usenet, dumpling.
> I never said I was off the planet,
Of course you did.
> you did,
Accepting your claim.
> a claim I felt
> neither deserved or warranted a reply.
Your claim was a statement of fact that I accepted.
> I see your finally agreeing with me, after all I was the one who
> repeated that a lawyer told me,
Exactly - I rest my case.
> that taking a case (in this instance
> a civil case) to the NSW court system was a gamble by way of
> comparison with the NSW Casino at Darling harbour.
Nonsense.
> Now your also
> saying that "Every single case by way of civil litigation can have
> that said about them, either regarding the plaintiff or the
> defendant."
Aee above about your comprehension skills.
> It seems that this is your own definition of what a
> fuckwit thinks, therefore you have also proved my case they you are
> indeed a fuckwit.
Is that what it seems to you?
> After all that is what you called me for making
> that statement.
You don't seem convinced.
> I my be no lawyer
Illiterate, more like.
> but from what I can see
Get youe eyes tested.
> you either wasted a lot of
> peoples time and money to become one,
Another completely unfounded guess?
> or your are full of shit.
Another bite of the guess cherry.
Doug Jewell
> "Sylvia Else"<syl...@not.here.invalid> wrote in message
> news:8ig15m...@mid.individual.net...
>> On 23/10/2010 10:46 PM, terryc wrote:
>>> Sylvia Else wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's often a practical reality, but you meant to get what you
>>>> contracted to get.
>>>
>>> That is exactly what I said; if you don't pay the rate for what you
>>> want, then you don't get what you want. What you want has nothing to do
>>> with it.
>>
>> What you want, and what you contracted to get, are not the same thing. You
>> should get what you contracted to get.
>>
>
> He contracted nothing, it was a cash in hand job.
there was paperwork etc, there is still a legal contract
formed.
For there to be a contract, you do not need to have signed
paperwork, all you need is for an offer to be made by one
party and accepted by the other. Some aspects of the
contract can be explicit, while others are implicit and can
be based on a number of things including standard practice.
Eg when you fill your car up at the servo, the servo offers
fuel at the displayed price. By dispensing fuel into your
car, you accept that offer and form a contract with the
servo that in return for them supplying fuel you will pay
them the price they are requesting. It is an assumption
that the fuel will be of standard quality, so even if the
servo is offering fuel at 1/2 normal price, it will still be
an assumption to that contract that it will be good quality
fuel. If your car fails because it turns out the fuel is 50%
water, they can't say in their defence "well you get what
you pay for". No, you get what the expectation was when you
entered in the contract. If on the other hand they advertise
"Petrol water mix, 50c per L" you can't come back and
complain that there was water in the petrol.
Even Beer jobs between mates involve a contract, where
either party can then be held responsible for failure to
perform the contract as agreed.
--
What is the difference between a duck?
Sylvia Else
>If on the other hand
> they advertise "Petrol water mix, 50c per L" you can't come back and
> complain that there was water in the petrol.
Though you would have grounds for complaint if the fuel turned out to be
pure petrol and wrecked your patent 50/50 water/petrol engine :)
Sylvia.
Sunny
"Sylvia Else" <syl...@not.here.invalid> wrote in message
Water injection into petrol engines has bee around for years
One market product was the "Mixmaster/Mistmaster?" that used a small tank
with water/metho mix which was sucked into the carby.
(Also stopped excessive build up of carbon in the engine.)
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=72284
http://www.suite101.com/content/how-does-water-injection-work-a203190
Antonio Huerta
disappeared. Did anybody report this posting as violating some
Google's rule ??
Kev
> I contracted a panel beater to spray my car for cash. He gave me a
> quotation with the price below what they usually put on an invoice to
> the insurance companies. The repair was badly done. I took the car to
> the automotive association and obtained an inspection report from them
> saying that the quality of repair was below of the professional
> standard. The inspector told me that I could sue the guy.
>
> I did it differently. The repairer was an "approved repairer" and thus
> the automotive association could conduct their own "mediation
> tribunal" between him and me. That's what I asked them to do. The
> clerk contacted the repairer with my request to repaint the car for
> free, and got back to me with the repairer's reply that he did a good
> job and would respray my car at an additional cost. Essentially, the
> clerk became the repairer's representative. I was told that the panel
> beater was a respected repairer, and that he charged me less than what
> he is supposed to charge and that I got my money's worth, and that I
> left the car for too short time, and I got a corresponding level of
> repair.
>
> I sent a letter to the repairer saying that I got a quotation from
> another repairer to respray my car, and requested that amount of money
> from him, and if he does not pay within 21 day, I'd lodge a claim
> against him in the small claims division of the magistrate court.
> After 21 days, I contacted him. He told me that he actually offered to
> me via the automotive association clerk to respray my car for free,
> but he alleged I did not take up his offer. So that the repairer
> offered to me again to respray my car. I declined the offer, as during
> all these course he was aggressive and seemed to consider it as a
> personal offence (he is from Southern Europe). I thought that the
> respray would be badly done again, or he would inflict a hidden damage
> to my car.
>
> I now want to go all the way, and sue him in the small claims
> magistrate court. On my side, I will give to the court a copy of his
> quotation and a report from the inspector that the quality of work was
> substandard. I had a brief discussion of it with the clerk of the
> automotive association. He advised me against that saying that I would
> not be successful, and he gave me the same reasons as I described in
> the beginning. Essentially, he informed me that I was not entitled to
> a better quality job because I paid too little, and that the repairer
> would bring his tradie mates who would give an expert advice during
> the court hearing that the given the circumstances the quality was
> actually within the trade standard.
>
> I think it is all hogwash. I now need to know what reasons the
> repairer could put forward to the court so that to neutralise my
> claims that he did a substandard job. I just do not want to wind up in
> the court with the inspection report in my hand and find out that the
> judge ignores it and instead pays attention to something which the
> repairer puts forward. In other words, what are the pitfalls ?
you were offered a respray but you declined for some very lame
reasons...... Good luck with that
Kev
Atheist Chaplain
> What happened to my original posting on Google Group ? It has
> disappeared. Did anybody report this posting as violating some
> Google's rule ??
why would Google remove your post when they steadfastly refuse to follow
their own TOS and remove/ban known spammers.
Fraser Johnston
"Phil Allison" <phi...@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:i9tmc5$jp0$1...@news-01.bur.connect.com.au...
> Ask the next 17 year old Asian student working in some sleazy Lebanese run
> brothel what she thinks of getting maybe $25 a time in hand for letting the
> scum of the male population fuck her.
If you feel that strongly about it Phil prehaps you should tip them more?
Fraser
Fraser Johnston
OK, here is more information to clear misunderstanding. The repairer
said he was priding himself on a quality of the jobs he does. He gave
me a written quotation for a cash job (it did not have any quilifiers
as to the quality of the job). When later I paid for the job, he did
not give me a receipt, but after a phone call and an argument he
agreed to give me the receipt, and I obtained it. He had turned out to
be not familiar with this brand of car, and when I was picking the car
up, he told me it took him more time to finish the job, and he
complained he was not making money on my job and that he was making me
a favour by spraying the car for such a price.
What was the car and what was the problem? Orange Peel, overspray, colour
match off???? I hear new Hyundais are painted with 500ml of paint from the
factory and it is so thin it is almost impossible to match the factory paint
job.
Fraser
Epsilon
The toaster-boi wouldn't pass the admission test, so that issue doesn't
arise.
Epsilon
You take the job of a re-spray, and you take on the obligation of doing it
correctly. No-one points a gun at your head about the price you agrred. If
you don't or can't do it correctly, it's down to you. That's the way
contracts work.
Antonio Huerta
> "Antonio Huerta" <ahue...@inbox.com> wrote in message
Colour match off. Japanese car, 10 years old.
Antonio Huerta
That's what I thought, too. He agreed, so that he had to deliver. But
the repairer's objection was that it was hard to do colour match. As a
reason, he cited the age of the car (10 years) and that the car was
previously painted badly (I believe it was not). The repairer said
that the inspector did not take the last fact into consideration (and
a bunch of others). So that the repairer claims the inspector's report
is invalid. I wonder how well this claim will go with the judge,
'cause I have nothing to put against that. The judge may think: "Oh,
yeah, the repairer submitted a report of his good reputation, and he
claims that the specific of the condition of the car were not taken by
the inspector into account -- so let's dismiss the inspection report
as a less important evidence".
I understand that I could bring the inspector to the trial as an
expert, but: (a) it is more headache for me; (b) I am not sure what
this inspector will say -- for me or against me.Who knows what he
might think ?
By law, I am required to bring the expert in person to the trial as
well -- just a report is not enough, but if I sent the report to the
defendant and he did not protest it, then the report is OK with the
court (no need to bring the expert in person).
Epsilon
> On Oct 26, 5:59 pm, "Epsilon" <n...@this.address.com> wrote:
>> Fraser Johnston wrote:
>>> "Antonio Huerta" <ahue...@inbox.com> wrote in message
>>> news:7cb7c9af-6530-40ab-bba4-
>>> OK, here is more information to clear misunderstanding. The repairer
>>> said he was priding himself on a quality of the jobs he does. He
>>> gave me a written quotation for a cash job (it did not have any
>>> quilifiers as to the quality of the job). When later I paid for the
>>> job, he did not give me a receipt, but after a phone call and an
>>> argument he agreed to give me the receipt, and I obtained it. He
>>> had turned out to be not familiar with this brand of car, and when
>>> I was picking the car up, he told me it took him more time to
>>> finish the job, and he complained he was not making money on my job
>>> and that he was making me a favour by spraying the car for such a
>>> price. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>>> What was the car and what was the problem? Orange Peel, overspray,
>>> colour match off???? I hear new Hyundais are painted with 500ml of
>>> paint from the factory and it is so thin it is almost impossible to
>>> match the factory paint job.
>>
>> You take the job of a re-spray, and you take on the obligation of
>> doing it correctly. No-one points a gun at your head about the price
>> That's the way contracts work.
>
> That's what I thought, too. He agreed, so that he had to deliver.
End of story.
> But
> the repairer's objection was that it was hard to do colour match.
Tough.
> As a
> reason, he cited the age of the car (10 years) and that the car was
> previously painted badly (I believe it was not).
So what?
> The repairer said
> that the inspector did not take the last fact into consideration (and
> a bunch of others).
It wasn't a relevant fact.
> So that the repairer claims the inspector's report is invalid.
Hmmm. I wonder why?
> I wonder how well this claim will go with the judge,
> 'cause I have nothing to put against that.
The court won't be impressed, and you won't have to deal with it.
> The judge may think: "Oh,
> yeah, the repairer submitted a report of his good reputation, and he
> claims that the specific of the condition of the car were not taken by
> the inspector into account -- so let's dismiss the inspection report
> as a less important evidence".
That's not how it works in a contract.
> I understand that I could bring the inspector to the trial as an
> expert, but: (a) it is more headache for me; (b) I am not sure what
> this inspector will say -- for me or against me.Who knows what he
> might think ?
>
> By law, I am required to bring the expert in person to the trial as
> well -- just a report is not enough, but if I sent the report to the
> defendant and he did not protest it, then the report is OK with the
> court (no need to bring the expert in person).
From what you say, the repairer has admitted that the work is not up to
scratch. He doesn't argue about that. Instead, he makes excuses for his
not doing the work properly. [ Note: the suggestions by others about the
price for the job is not seen by the repairer as relevant. It is not, and
never was. ]
His excuses amount to nothing, legally. If he couldn't handle the job, he
shouldn't have taken it on. But he did, and he is legally responsible for
delivering on the deal. Now, that it seems clear that even he agrees that
the job wasn't satisfactory, he should, at the least, refund the money you
paid, or pay for the job to be completed properly, if that is possible.
D Walford
You seem reluctant to answer my question about how much you paid, the
price makes a huge difference.
Only a fool would expect to get a top quality job for a low price.
Daryl
Epsilon
You are missing the point. If the repairer gives a firm quote for a job,
the repairer is responsible for doing a standard, ordinary, everyday, proper
job. Not necessarily top quality, but standard.
If the repairer had quoted for a top quality job for a low price, the
repairer would have been stuck with that. But, for present purposes, the
assumption is that the repairer quoted for a standard job. He specified his
price for that.
It seems that even the repairer knows that the job wasn't up to scratch, and
is trotting out lame excuses to try to justify a poor effort. He couldn't
have done the job properly at any price. It seems that his reach exceeded
his grasp. That's his problem.
Epsilon
> What might be unacceptable standard to one person might be acceptable
> to another and same in the industry, not even all the "experts" could
> agree on what is standard and what isn't.
You are missing the point that even the repairer knows that his work wasn't
up to an acceptable standard.
> I wouldn't expect a top quality paint job on a car for less than
> $5000.00 whilst others expect to get a top quality job for much less
> so IMHO price is critical.
Irrelevant, and wrong. If a repairer quotes a top quality paint job, but
makes a mistake and under-prices it, that just too bad for the repairer.
>> If the repairer had quoted for a top quality job for a low price, the
>> repairer would have been stuck with that. But, for present purposes,
>> the assumption is that the repairer quoted for a standard job. He
>> specified his price for that.
>>
>> It seems that even the repairer knows that the job wasn't up to
>> scratch, and is trotting out lame excuses to try to justify a poor
>> effort. He couldn't have done the job properly at any price. It
>> seems that his reach exceeded his grasp. That's his problem.
>
> Seems the problem is not the quality of the workmanship but the
> "colour match", if that's the case it seems unreasonable for the OP
> to not allow the repairer to rectify the situation which he offered
> to do for free.
No-one is legally obliged to give the tradesman (or any other supplier of
goods or services) who stuffs-up another bite of the cherry to try to
rectify the situation. Many of us might do that, as an easy option worth
trying if it costs nothing and may fix the problem. But we have no
obligation to do so.
Given the OP's story, is seems that the job it was too much for the skills
of the repairer. The OP doesn't have to waste any more time with him, if he
doesn't want to. That's how breach of contract goes.
Phil Allison
"Epsilon is FULL of SHIT as USUAL "
> No-one is legally obliged to give the tradesman (or any other supplier of
> goods or services) who stuffs-up another bite of the cherry to try to
> rectify the situation. Many of us might do that, as an easy option worth
> trying if it costs nothing and may fix the problem. But we have no
> obligation to do so.
** There is, of course, no legal COMPULSION to give an item back to a
repairer for his assessment and further work - IOW to claim on the
repairer's warranty.
But unless you DO - you will have to demonstrate a DAMN GOOD REASON
that convinces a tribunal or court or else you lose the right to claim
another form of compensation from that repairer.
Epsilon is just SO FULL OF SHIT.
.... Phil
atec77
the very reason the job failed was demonstrably a lack of skills hence
compensation and reference to another tradesperson , only a meat pipe
smoking fool would suggest returning for another go would be palatable
>
>
> .... Phil
>
>
>
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
D Walford
The OP stated the problem was "colour match" which is hardly a good
reason to not allow the original repairer to rectify the problem.
Daryl
atec77
as it is a very basic requirement of painting and touching
>
> Daryl
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
Fraser Johnston
"atec77" <ate...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ia8t79$n6$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Yep. Colour matching is a piece of piss with todays computerised paint
systems.
Fraser
atec77
--
X-No-Archive: Yes
Antonio Huerta
Hm... my initial post on the Google Groups disappeared. I do not know
how did it happen.
Anyway, the repairer did not reply to my "final notice of claim"
letter. I filed the claim in the small claims magistrate court. The
repairer now says that he offered me to respray my car all along. Or,
he says is ready to return the money which I paid to him. However, in
either case he does not want to reimburse the money I spent for the
claim filing fee. I told him: "No deal". He said that then he would
lodge a defence. Hm...