Mako Marine disaster!!!!! Help
David Smalley
>
> OK, now I need some of your honest advice.
>
> 6 weeks ago I bought a Mako 293 Walkaround with twin 225 optis. The
> boat came from Bass pro shops in my area, and was brought to my house
> for an open water test at the local inlet. The boat was acceptable,
> and was sent back for some detailing and repairs of caulk, etc. The
> boat was returned after repairs and installation of electronics began.
> During the installation of the electronics the tech noticed that there
> were cracks under the decking, where the liner and hull are joined as
> well as considerable delamination of the liner throughout the boat.
> Bass pro shops was contacted and they came and retrieved the boat for
> inspection. A day later they called and indicated that the boat would
> need to be returned to Miami for the manufacturer to inspect and
> repair. Mako's inspection confirmed the delamination but said that
> the boat would not be replaced, but would be made as good as new by
> re-adhering the liner to the hull. I am not comfortable with spending
> $100,000 on a boat that is substandard. It is my desire to have Mako
> either replace the boat with a new unit or refund the money paid for
> the boat (cash). This boat has less than 10 hours on it, four of
> which are partial sea trial and subsequent shake down run with dealer
> personnel on the boat. I used the boat one time, for five hours with
> family and friends. It has been six weeks now and I have had the boat
> at my house for a total of two weeks and now it is gone again. Am I
> being unreasonable in wanting a new unit?? I am trying not to be a
> asshole about this but......I am getting very frustrated. By the way,
> I am an attorney and am contemplating pursuing this through my office
> but I would like to avoid hammering these guys in circuit court.
> Should I just go after them?, What would you do?
Mako will fight hard. If I were you I would demand every penny back.
Good luck.
Brett
Craig A
I would accept this. You are bound to have more problems down the line with
this boat. There may be underlying reasons why the delamination was
occurring that will not be solved by patching it up.
They will without a doubt try and get you to accept the repaired boat. I
would go to great lengths to make them understand the negative publicity
they will receive if they don't get you a new boat. If the boat really is
"good as new", then they should be thrilled at the chance to get it back
with only a few hours on it. They'll have no problem getting rid of it
through their dealer network. I'd also get Bass Pro Shops involved; write
them some letters and cc: Mako. Set up a web site with detailed logs and
pictures relating your experience - let them know that if they don't make
things right, you'll publicize the website.
I think if you are tough with them, they will see they have no choice but to
do the right thing and get you a new boat.
Craig
"Brett" <bret...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3a13433a...@news.mindspring.com...
> OK, now I need some of your honest advice.
>
> 6 weeks ago I bought a Mako 293 Walkaround with twin 225 optis. The
> boat came from Bass pro shops in my area, and was brought to my house
...
Mako's inspection confirmed the delamination but said that
> the boat would not be replaced, but would be made as good as new by
> re-adhering the liner to the hull. I am not comfortable with spending
> $100,000 on a boat that is substandard. It is my desire to have Mako
> either replace the boat with a new unit or refund the money paid for
> the boat (cash). This boat has less than 10 hours on it, four of
> which are partial sea trial and subsequent shake down run with dealer
> personnel on the boat. I used the boat one time, for five hours with
...
NOYB
Clinton-appointed judges until they give you a new Mako. Oh wait, wrong
thread...I keep forgetting this isn't a political newgroup.
"Brett" <bret...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3a13433a...@news.mindspring.com...
Larry W4CSC
wrote:
>OK, now I need some of your honest advice.
>
Sorry you had trouble. My recommendation stands.
EVERY new boat needs to be surveyed by a competent marine surveyor and
independent mechanic BEFORE the check changes hands while dealer is
STILL interested. I think new boats, of late, need surveying worse
than a used boat owned by a proud captain who has already fixed
everything wrong with it.
Yeah, for 100 grand, I'd have my attorney talk to their attorney about
the REPLACEMENT boat, or else.
larry
Craig A
knowledge to help your case. There may be precedents in your state that
might scare the bejeesus out of Mako and make them settle up quick.
Craig
"Larry W4CSC" <nob...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:3a135d24...@news.rdc1.sfba.home.com...
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 02:48:02 GMT, bret...@mindspring.com (Brett)
> wrote:
>
...
Waterlou4
I am an attorney and am contemplating pursuing this through my office
but I would like to avoid hammering these guys in circuit court.
Tell them you're an attorney. At that point, they will realize they won't be
able to grind you down by running up your legal bill, and might fold without
what Craig A suggests: >>I'd also get Bass Pro Shops involved; write them some
Richard Peace
I had this problem with a new truck. I was ignored by the manufacturer for
months. I wrote all my congressmen, and several other state officials.
Finally, while cruising the word lemon on the web, I ran across my states
attorney general. I wrote and asked for help. Guess what? The manufacturer
repurchased the truck for every penny plus all the money I had spent in
options. A better deal than if I had went to court.
Spend some time writing well placed letters-- lots of them. That's way to
much cash to be playing with. It worked for me. Good luck.
R. Peace
David Smalley
> I think if you are tough with them, they will see they have no choice but to
> do the right thing and get you a new boat.
I disagree. I have never heard of a major American boat company doing
right by the consumer when they have delivered a sub par boat. They will
fight him tooth and nail, just like the rest of the vermin.
(someone please prove me wrong)
David Smalley
I'd get the cash in hand first. Then negotiate a new boat.
hkr...@capu.net
>
> Craig A wrote:
>
> > I think if you are tough with them, they will see they have no choice but to
> > do the right thing and get you a new boat.
>
> right by the consumer when they have delivered a sub par boat. They will
> fight him tooth and nail, just like the rest of the vermin.
>
> (someone please prove me wrong)
>
> --
> DAVe
> http://personal.mia.bellsouth.net/mia/d/r/drsi/
I can prove you wrong.
Some years ago, I bought a new boat. Soon after it was delivered, it
developed "crunchies" at sharp edges when two angles of the hull came
together. That is, the gelcoat would crush in like an eggshell, just the
gelcoat...nothing else.
I complained to the dealer, who got authorization from the manufacturer
to gouge out the crunchies and redo those areas of gel. First class
job...but...
The crunchies kept appearing in different places. The manufacturer
arranged for the boat to be shipped back and dropped off a demo boat for
me to use while my boat was being examined.
About two weeks later, the builder called, said he had discovered the
problem. The line had changed gel coat vendors and the new stuff had to
be applied a little differently than the previous stuff.
The builder told me there was no reason for me to suffer, so he was
*replacing* the boat AND he would move over all my electronics and
rigging at his expense. My only problem would be dealing with the state
on getting a new registration.
Smoke that.
David Smalley
> > > do the right thing and get you a new boat.
> >
> > right by the consumer when they have delivered a sub par boat. They will
> > fight him tooth and nail, just like the rest of the vermin.
> >
> > (someone please prove me wrong)
> I can prove you wrong.
>
> Some years ago, I bought a new boat. Soon after it was delivered, it
> developed "crunchies" at sharp edges when two angles of the hull came
> together.
...
> Smoke that.
Typical Harry stoner delusions. No manufacturer's name. No dealer's
name. No names of human beings who were a part of the transaction in
order to have a third party check the claim's veracity.
Proof and insuation are on different non-intersecting planes.
Spin that.
ref
understanding that "expert advice" is useful in these
cases. I'd get a top marine surveyor to make a sworn
statement about the condition of the boat.
Making up a web page is a good idea. Maybe not make
it public at this point, but refer Mako to it.
In general, give them a chance to screw up, then say,
in effect:
"I am an attorney. I practice law, and this law is
simple: when you pay for something new, you have a
right to receive something new. Either give me the
new boat I paid for, refund my money in full, or
expect to have a second address in the local
courtroom, and enough attorney's fees to buy the
Queen Mary. Legal costs, of course, are not an
issue with me."
That should get their attention.
Ron M.
JDavis1277
Let's review. You paid $100K cash for a Mako? You failed to use a surveyor?
The build quality of the Mako was unacceptable (no surprise there, right?)? You
would accept another Mako to make it right (which very probably will not
happen)? You would also accept a refund (which will not happen, trust me)?
You are an attorney? You bought the boat from Bass Pro Shops? :=)
Now's the time to make the best of an atrocious start with your new boat.
First, forget litigation, you know better than most where that will go.
Second, establish the best possible relationship with Mako.
Third, hire a competent surveyor who has no reason to suck up to Mako. Have
the surveyor do a pre-work survey to ensure all problems are brought to light.
Fourth, make it clear to Mako that you will accept the boat back from them only
when it passes a post-work survey. Also make it clear that you require your
surveyor to be on-site to observe any critical structural repairs.
Fifth, tell Mako you expect to be compensated for your loss of use of the boat.
I suggest you allow them to make it up to you by adding any options to the
boat that may not have been included in the $100K you've already given them.
Sixth, put a poster on your wall that says "Always Use a Surveyor, Stupid".
Finally, enjoy your boat when the repairs have been completed and your surveyor
has signed off on them.
Good luck,
Butch
Brett wrote: >OK, now I need some of your honest advice.
JDavis1277
him/herself in a serious case.
Objectivity, you know.
Butch
Ron said: snip>"I am an attorney. I practice law, and this law is
Ken Hughes
January. It wasn't $100k - but it was a lot of money.
There was a leak under the transmission the first day we had it. I wanted
a new car - not a fixed or new transmission. I called and they said,
"no problem, we'll get you in to the service department as soon as
possible." As soon as possible was in a couple of days. This set me off.
I stopped to think about what I really wanted. I wanted the car. I was
happy with the deal. What could they do to make me happy - short of
taking the car back? Why not ask for something that would make me "whole"
and still be better for the dealership than replacing the car - or going
to court. I asked for the 100k mile extended warranty for free. I called
the owner of the dealership and explained the situation - he understood
that it was a customer satisfaction issue and NOT a service problem
(unlike the service manager who thought he could get if fixed in a few
days). I easily got the 100k warranty (should have asked for more!).
Stop and think about what you really want. Is this the boat (no buyer's
remorse)? Was it the right price? Did the boat feel right?
What, if anything, could they do with this boat, to make you "whole". How
about a written, signed, notorized in stone guarantee that says any
further problems related to this issue are warranteed for the life of your
ownership of the boat. For the manufacturer, this would certainly be
cheaper than getting bad press or going to court. Throw in an annual
inspection at no charge. Get it all from the dealership so they are
behind you with the manufacturer in years to come. Don't know if would
make a difference in the quality of the repair job (it shouldn't - but
couldn't hurt). Ask them to throw in something else that you wanted.....
There are a lot of ways to look at this: will a replacement be any better
- maybe it will start to delaminate the day after the warranty expires?
Is this a quality boat? Do others have this or other problems? What
other problems might there be in this boat? No way to know.
Try not to get too bogged down in the fight. Try to stay positive and
look at it as an opportunity to improve your situation.
Good luck!
Lloyd Sumpter
to be a lawyer in the US...
Lloyd Sumpter
Campion 18
DCarlile
>I can prove you wrong.
>
>Some years ago, I bought a new boat. Soon after it was delivered, it
>developed "crunchies" at sharp edges when two angles of the hull came
>together. That is, the gelcoat would crush in like an eggshell, just the
>gelcoat...nothing else.
>
>I complained to the dealer, who got authorization from the manufacturer
>to gouge out the crunchies and redo those areas of gel. First class
>job...but...
>
>The crunchies kept appearing in different places. The manufacturer
>arranged for the boat to be shipped back and dropped off a demo boat for
>me to use while my boat was being examined.
>
>About two weeks later, the builder called, said he had discovered the
>problem. The line had changed gel coat vendors and the new stuff had to
>be applied a little differently than the previous stuff.
>
>The builder told me there was no reason for me to suffer, so he was
>*replacing* the boat AND he would move over all my electronics and
>rigging at his expense. My only problem would be dealing with the state
>on getting a new registration.
>
>Smoke that.
Which Bayliner dealer was that Harry?
DC
ICW CRUISER
and let them know that they are in the mix as well. Afterall, the dealer is the
one that made the money on your boat and they ceetainly don't want to loose
their profits or you as a customer (well most don't). It is always better to
fight two against one, but then, you know that, you are an attorney right?
I would be hesitate to mention that at this point because how many times do
people jump the gun and scream "I'll sue" ? And then there is always the "my
brother is a lawyer ect.., these people have heard it all.
Good luck and hope you get a new hull out of this. Oh, by the way, this was a
brand new boat right?
Craig Stripling
Maxum SC2300 "MAX 2 SEA"
hkr...@capu.net
>
> hkr...@capu.net wrote:
> >
> > David Smalley wrote:
> > >
> > > Craig A wrote:
> > >
> > > > do the right thing and get you a new boat.
> > >
> > > right by the consumer when they have delivered a sub par boat. They will
> > > fight him tooth and nail, just like the rest of the vermin.
> > >
> > > (someone please prove me wrong)
>
> >
> > Some years ago, I bought a new boat. Soon after it was delivered, it
> > developed "crunchies" at sharp edges when two angles of the hull came
> > together.
> > Smoke that.
>
> Typical Harry stoner delusions. No manufacturer's name. No dealer's
> name. No names of human beings who were a part of the transaction in
> order to have a third party check the claim's veracity.
>
> Proof and insuation are on different non-intersecting planes.
>
> Spin that.
>
> --
> DAVe
> http://personal.mia.bellsouth.net/mia/d/r/drsi/
The problem with posting the dealer's name and the manufacturer's name
is that this newsgroup is plagued with a few flaming asses who will then
take that information and use it to annoy the vendors.
There is no way you would be able to verify what happened, even if I
gave you the dealer's name and the manufacturer's name. The dealer would
tell you an individual warranty claim was none of your business, and the
manufacturer would tell you it doesn't discuss individual warranty
claims.
You think because you are "Dave," you are entitled to specifics?
"Hi, Dealer Jones. I'm Dave Smalley and I understand you helped a
customer with a warranty replacement of a boat. Would you please give me
all the details because...because...because...I'm such a nice guy?"
"Well, Mr. Smalley, we certainly help our customers resolve warranty
issues, but what you are asking is not the kind of information we give
out. Is there any other way we can help you?"
You know, the *entire* transaction of replacing the hull was handled
without a piece of paper changing hands, other than a little bit of
legal registration paperwork. The dealer handled the manufacturer via
the phone and my communications with the manufacturer were through the
dealer and on the phone.
Two nights ago, one of my clients, who runs an international
organization, asked me to revise a brochure I had written for his group.
It's a large piece, many pages, four color. We're through the first
press run of 10,000. He says the reaction has been so favorable, he
wants to have his name appear as the author when I have it reprinted.
So, I'm doing that.
If you ever got a copy and wondered if the guy wrote it, you might call
his organization and ask. What answer do you think you might get? And if
you looked closely and saw my company logo on the back page in tiny
type, you might call and ask me who wrote it. What answer do you think
you might get?
About five years ago, I "edited" a college textbook for a couple of
professors. The reality is, I researched and wrote the textbook, but
their names appear on it. If you heard a rumor that I had written the
book and called me to "verify" the facts, what do you suppose I might
tell you?
The same thing the dealer and manufacturer would tell you. Politely.
"It's really none of your business."
hkr...@capu.net
> >
> >Some years ago, I bought a new boat. Soon after it was delivered, it
> >developed "crunchies" at sharp edges when two angles of the hull came
> >gelcoat...nothing else.
> >
> >I complained to the dealer, who got authorization from the manufacturer
> >to gouge out the crunchies and redo those areas of gel. First class
> >job...but...
> >
> >The crunchies kept appearing in different places. The manufacturer
> >arranged for the boat to be shipped back and dropped off a demo boat for
> >me to use while my boat was being examined.
> >
> >About two weeks later, the builder called, said he had discovered the
> >problem. The line had changed gel coat vendors and the new stuff had to
> >be applied a little differently than the previous stuff.
> >
> >The builder told me there was no reason for me to suffer, so he was
> >*replacing* the boat AND he would move over all my electronics and
> >rigging at his expense. My only problem would be dealing with the state
> >on getting a new registration.
> >
> >Smoke that.
>
> Which Bayliner dealer was that Harry?
>
> DC
Why, the Bayliner dealer in _______________, of course.
Actually, I haven't had many problems with medium to big ticket items
that weren't resolved satisfactorily by either the dealer or the
manufacturer.
Three weeks ago, I took a Eureka vacuum about three years old back to
Monkey Wards because one of the beater motors failed. It was a $400 vac.
For whatever reason, the motor could not be replaced. So Wards replaced
the entire vac.
I guess I get results because I don't wake into a dealership like Larry
must, armed with an Uzi and spraying bullets, spit and venom everywhere.
Jim Kelly
whether or not to take legal action? I don't think I would want you in my
corner if push came to shove!
Brett
>You're a lawyer and you are writing to a news group seeking advice on
>whether or not to take legal action? I don't think I would want you in my
>corner if push came to shove!
Jim,
The question as to whether or not to take legal action is not asked
based my inability to decide on my own but to get some input from
objective third parties. The fact is that I am one a few lawyers left
in this country that dont just sue at the first opportunity. You
would be very fortunate to have me in your corner if push came to
shove because I am cognizant of more than just whether I can sue or
not. I only sought input from fellow boat enthusiasts, not legal
advice. Ahh well........thanks anyways
Craig A
giving cash refunds. And it's not because it never happens.
When push comes to shove and they aren't confident they can win the case in
court, and they feel they are facing a customer that is pissed off enough or
wealthy enough to see it through trial, they will likely tender a settlement
agreement. Part of this settlement agreement will state that you, the
customer, must never publicly disclose the details of the boat defect(s) or
the settlement. Most people are happy enough to be getting out of a bad
situation that they will accept this. Wouldn't you?
Craig A
"David Smalley" <dr...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:3A13EDBE...@bellsouth.net...
> Craig A wrote:
>
> > I think if you are tough with them, they will see they have no choice
but to
> > do the right thing and get you a new boat.
>
> I disagree. I have never heard of a major American boat company doing
> right by the consumer when they have delivered a sub par boat. They will
> fight him tooth and nail, just like the rest of the vermin.
>
> (someone please prove me wrong)
>
>
> --
> DAVe
> http://personal.mia.bellsouth.net/mia/d/r/drsi/
Waterlou4
whether or not to take legal action? I don't think I would want you in my
Wait - not all lawyers are torts experts. Many are specialists in unrelated
areas. For example, if you need Federal legislation drafted, come to me.
Maybe tort litigation is not Brett's field.
Waterlou4
is, but if it were about legislation or federal administrative law, I could
comment.
Waterlou4
Correct, except that Brett has partners in his firm.
Jim Kelly
know that. I don't think I would want you in my corner either.
hkr...@capu.net
>
> Wait - make that "torts or contracts" - I don't know which one this situation
> is, but if it were about legislation or federal administrative law, I could
> comment.
Wait a minute yourself. You claim to be a lawyer...and you don't know
whether "Boater v. Mako" would be a tort or a contract case?
This is basic, first-semester law, Babe.
You didn't go to law school.
Sheesh.
P.S. It's contract law.
hkr...@capu.net
>
> >>You're a lawyer and you are writing to a news group seeking advice on
> whether or not to take legal action? I don't think I would want you in my
>
> Wait - not all lawyers are torts experts. Many are specialists in unrelated
> areas. For example, if you need Federal legislation drafted, come to me.
> Maybe tort litigation is not Brett's field.
Every lawyer knows a little about torts and contract law and the
differences between the two.
If you don't, you're no lawyer.
And I don't believe a member of Congress would have paid you to write
the language on a STOP sign. I've seen no evidence here you can
write...or think.
Admit it, Delores, you were a receptionish on the Hill. If you had any
dealings with legislation, it was to retype drafts.
JDavis1277
I must have missed the partner information in Brett's post. Thanks for the
correction.
Butch
Lou wrote: >>>And they know full well that only an attorney who is an idiot
Nobody
knowledge. I searched high and low to find a lawyer who could represent my
legal interests while understanding my business needs too. Frankly I wish that
more lawyers had your sense Brett. The world needs lawyers who think broadly
before they act. Legal action should be a last resort, not a first resort in my
opinion.
On that note, I do believe (as I am sure you do) that you have adequate legal
grounds here to seek fair restitution. Problem is...neither of us knows what
the courts would decide is fair resitution.
First I would negatively impact on their public image (of course being 100%
certain that I have documentedevidence so as to avoid slander/defamation law
suits).
There is a well know catamaran manufacturer in France who sold a guy a 600K +
boat that delaminated(!) under the water line shortly after it was delivered.
Apparently his complaints were ignored by the manufacturer.
The manufacturer had a web site xxxx.COM. The guy with the complaint got fed up
with the run around and registered a web site as xxxx.ORG and posted images of
his hull problems (BIG honkin' areas of delam!) and also a description of the
problems and the lack of response from the manufacturer.
It took a while, but I understand that he got his boat fixed completely under
warranty once word got out about his web site. Apparently many competitive
catamaran makers learned about the web page ~somehow~ and were offering the
address to customers who mentioned that they were looking at brand xxxx. No
matter how this finally got resolved for the customer, I can absolutely assure
you that I will be buying a bigger cat one day, and I absolutely KNOW I won't
even give the manufacturer in question consideration...not even in 10 years.
And I am certain that others reacted the same way.
I guess the moral here is hit them where it hurts them, not where it hurts you
(i.e. legal costs, etc.)
If that doesn't work, legal action is your last resort. Like I said, legal
action should always be a last resort. It's just good business sense.
By the way, I'd hire you in a heart beat.
Nobody
Just how does one determine whether this situation involves contract law or tort
law without first reading the contract?
Double sheesh.
Waterlou4
would
It's been over 30 years since I took Torts and Contracts, sorry.
Jim Kelly
breach of contract. ref. Business Law by Wyatt and Wyatt. The fact that you mention
reading the contract indicates that you don't know what a tort is.
Triple sheesh.
hkr...@capu.net
>
> Sir,
>
> Just how does one determine whether this situation involves contract law or tort
> law without first reading the contract?
>
Do you know what a tort is?
hkr...@capu.net
You don't know the difference between contracts and torts?
hkr...@capu.net
>
> A tort is a wrongful act for which a civil action will lie except one involving a
> breach of contract. ref. Business Law by Wyatt and Wyatt. The fact that you mention
> reading the contract indicates that you don't know what a tort is.
> Triple sheesh.
>
>
> > Sir,
> >
> > Just how does one determine whether this situation involves contract law or tort
> > law without first reading the contract?
> >
> >
> > hkr...@capu.net wrote:
> >
> > > Waterlou4 wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Wait - make that "torts or contracts" - I don't know which one this situation
> > > > is, but if it were about legislation or federal administrative law, I could
> > > > comment.
> > >
> > > Wait a minute yourself. You claim to be a lawyer...and you don't know
> > > whether "Boater v. Mako" would be a tort or a contract case?
> > >
> > > This is basic, first-semester law, Babe.
> > >
> > > You didn't go to law school.
> > >
> > > Sheesh.
> > >
> > > P.S. It's contract law.
Indeed. Contract law. *Any* lawyer, and I mean *any* lawyer, would know
without a second's hesitation the difference between a contract case, as
was presented here by the poster, and a tort.
Waterlogged might want to check out a copy of Prosser and Keeton on
Torts. And have someone read it to her.
Brett
Christ this gives me a headache...........this would be a contract
action for recission, or for material breach due to non conforming
goods or lacking fitness/suitability for a particular purpose. Bootm
line is that the argument will be of the nature that the contract was
not fully performed by Bass Pro. This would not be a tort. Lastly
this was not the conversation that I wanted to have here.
P.S. My area of specialty is federal civil litigation and criminal
litigation, including complex business litigation, for whatever that
is worth!
Waterlou4
litigation, including complex business litigation, for whatever that
Mine's not, so feel free to stomp on any of my comments that are not about
legislative and regulations drafting, or administrative law.
[Personal note to Brett & other rec.boats lawyers: When I was taking Admin Law
and working for USDA, I had the Federal Records Center send me several boxes
containing the entire record from the four Morgan cases. I wrote my paper,
turned it in, and sent the boxes back. The professor asked how I got all the
stuff I quoted. I told him. He threw a fit because I hadn't invited him over
to my office so he could get his hands on the original records, and he was
right. Dumb mistake, but to me it was just another USDA case.]
E. Normus
hkr...@capu.net wrote in message <3A152FCF...@capu.net>...
hkr...@capu.net
Enough to differentiate between simple contract and tort law.
In fact, I once was involved in a contract law dispute and ended up
winning a six figure settlement. That was contract law. The defendant in
that suit turned around and sued me for libel. That was tort law. He
lost that one, too.
I reiterate. Any lawyer will know the difference between simple contract
and tort cases. If he/she doesn't, well, then I submit he or she is not
a lawyer.
Incidentally, the case that started this discussion could have developed
into a contract case *and* a tort case, under certain circumstances.
hkr...@capu.net
>
> When Harry gets to be my age, he will start experiencing little lapses of
> memory. I wonder if that will make him more tolerant.
Oh puh-lease. You claim to be a lawyer and cannot differentiate between
simple contract law and simple tort law. That's like me not being able
to differentiate between the poetry of Lawrence Ferlinghetti and Thomas
Chatterton.
You're a fraud. You're no lawyer. The only job you might have held on
Capitol Hill was as a receptionist or a go-fer.
Waterlou4
Gould 0738
>When Harry gets to be my age, he will start experiencing little lapses of
>memory. I wonder if that will make him more tolerant.
>
Um, judging from your scores of muck raking anti-democrat and ethusiastic
pro-republican postings here lately, I'd have to say that the tolerance thing
may not be closely associated with the memory lapses.
:-) (just jokin)
________
Chuck Gould
Float and let float.
oldw...@my-deja.com
agreed to.
In article <3a13433a...@news.mindspring.com>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jakdawak
Tough situation, but I would demand another hull, I've heard of major problems
with other Makos down here in sfla too. They just lost another big executive
too. Look up past case history in court and go by that. What is your dealer
saying? Good luck.
E. Normus
hkr...@capu.net wrote in message <3A174420...@capu.net>...
hkr...@capu.net
*Any* lawyer knows the difference between contract law and tort law.