How liable are auto mechanics for wrong inspections?

LOL - where do you live? "Not just an air conditioner". How's the weather up there?

If you like filing frivolous lawsuits.

LMAO

IANAL, but I presume they didn't guarantee the car for you - they merely checked it out and didn't find these problems you're finding now.

To me, it sounds like you didn't do due diligence to figure out if you were getting a good deal on a car and now you want to hold someone else responsible.

Let me ask you this - WHO bought the car? Was it you or was it the auto shop you asked to check it out?

Ok, let me ask you this - what didn't I do properly to figure out if I was getting a good deal on the car?

And how do you know the second mechanic isn't pulling your puddin and trying to sell you a brake job?

Look at the car with the first mechanic and the second one. Why did you get a second opinion? Did you actually buy the car? If so, your rights in this matter depend a lot on the laws in the state where you live. Check your state's web site for a consumer affairs office.

Binba,

I'm not sure what this brake rating system is or why there is such a discrepancy between the 2 mechanics. The big deal is that you have a leak that the first guy may have missed. Your legal recourse is to ask the first mechanic for your money back. When he says no you may sue but you don't have a strong case. When folks ask you to recommend a good mechanic don't recommend the first guy if you think he's bad.

Good luck, Dave M.

How much did the first shop charge you for the inspection?

If you can prove that the first mechanic deliberately gave you faulty information to entice you to buy the car, then you have a case for fraud.

Just how many mechanics do you figure he should take the car to before he buys it?

Hey, thanks for all the useful replies, unlike Fred's. Btw, this is just part of the story - the second mechanic found problems in $1500. What I'm gonna do first is take it to a third guy - he doesn't specialize in Mazdas but at least I have a recommendation for him (apparently at least as important). I just moved into a new city, so one has to get to know the area's mechanics too... For now, I decided I'm not even gonna bother with the misjudging shop

- the test cost $80 and they were generally pricey with fixes ($75 for wheel alignment opossed to $50 everywhere else); if they did a sloppy job, why would I want my brakes fixed with them? Even for a $80 discount.

Depends on the state, but most mechanics have an obligation to consumers to perform their work as a reasonably prudent mechanic would under the same circumstances. So if, for example, you had paid a mechanic to check out a low-mileage car and he heard a knock that was a bad rod, said nothing, and shortly after you bought the car the engine failed, and you had another mechanic testify that the first mechanic should have diagnosed the problem and informed you of it, you'd prolly have a pretty good claim to recover all or part of the cost to replace the engine. A number of states have consumer protection laws that provide even greater protections and damages.

In your case, it sounds like the mechanic did a poor job but it's not so clear cut. As a practical matter, you might bring the written findings of other mechanics to the first mechanic and ask for an explanation, and if you don't get a good one, ask them to reimburse you for the repairs and/or the fee you paid. You might get a hostile response but ya never know. OTOH, sometimes it's not worth the hassle and you just move on. Good luck.

I agree with Fred. You took it to a shop for an opinion. Is is a shop that you always go to? Go back to the original shop and ask them to look at it again. See if they will do something for you. If it is a quality shop, they should stand behind there work. If you go in there and start acting like an idiot and telling them you are going to sue them, you will get nowhere.

One of the shops is obviously lying to you...

If the first shop did a legal safety inspection, the kind needed to get plates and insurance, they are 'Very' liable for the report they made. They can have their license pulled for a fake report.

Seeing as they 'didn't' find all these troubles when it is a perfect chance to pad the bill up makes me more inclined to believe the first shop...

I think the second shop is the scam artist shop.

Things like the tires wear. A bad alignment and regular tire rotation makes 'all' the tire wear bad. You need an alignment first, tires when they wear out...

The squirt of brake fluid on the cylinder is an old trick. (note the reservoir will be down a little in both because of normal wear) If it is indeed leaking, the reservoir will go down in fluid and it will make a stain on the back side of the rim and tire. Do you see any dirty wet oil marks there? I would closely monitor that and watch for stains.

Again 'easy money' for the inspection shop, so?????

An exhaust leak is a safety violation. If you had one, the safety inspection 'would' have found that. That is the easiest money they can scam for if a scam shop.

Clean the oil pan??? Why? I have never seen an oily pan rust out, but have seen a pile including my current engine's oil pan rust out...

If it doesn't drip on the ground.... Again an oil leak will fail a safety inspection up here in Canada.

My $0.02,

Mike

86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: N> I bought a car two weeks ago, after having it inspected by a

How do you know it isn't the 2nd mechanic that is in error and trying to RIP YOU OFF for un-needed repairs, eh moron?

What if the Queen of England was really a man ?

Were you damaged in the millions, fool?

And you're too pig-ignorant to be able to look at tires yourself, eh imbecile?

You're a moron, you deserve to be perpetually victimized in life.

He doesn't. But I think the original post raised some valid points, and it's reasonable to assume that not all people are familiar enough with cars to evaluate condition themselves. Thus, the reasonable and prudent thing to do is to pay for a PPI to identify any serious issues with a vehicle, which the OP did. Now the OP is apparently being told that there are issues that one would assume have been checked in the PPI... what the OP needs now is guidance as to how to proceed from here (i.e. properly identify whether or not he really has these issues that would appear to need immediate correction) not insults.

Brakes: what is the current thickness of the brake pads or shoes? As another poster suggested, do you see any evidence of leaking on the wheels? Any unusual brake performance?

Tires: how deep is the tread? Describe any unusual wear that you may see, and any cracking - how deep, how wide, where?

nate

Tires?

Is he blind?

Yep, and now, out of blind ignorance, he is not only doubting their expert opinion, but accusing them of willful malfeasance.

Told by whom?

Is this fool going to sue the Pope because the Jews have told him that jesus wasn't the christ?

Stupid people don't need coddling, they need a swift kick in the ass ...

He's obviously too stupid to even look at tires, or comprehend what he's looking at.

And why wouldn't you assume, that if there is a conflict of opinion between 2 shops, that the second shop, the one that stands to make a FINANCIAL gain on any repairs, is the one overstating the deterioration ?

To what advantage would the first shop gain financially from deliberately understating the needed repairs?

Take it some where and have it inspected ONLY. Make it clear that they will not be doing repairs.

Are you certain it was the first shop that tried to somehow con you? I don't see telling someone who needs work that they don't, thereby ensuring the potential customer doesn't spend their money with them. I *can* see the second place claiming you needed work in an effort to get you to spend more money with them. Based on what you've presented here, I would suspect the second guy over the first.

taking it to the "other" mechanic in the first place.

How much did you pay for this car that you're so upset over a $300 brake job?

And the less you pay for a used car, the more you should anticipate problems like this.

Since he seems to expect it should come with the same type of warranty that people who buy new cars get, I would say at least 5.