Go Back   iRV2 Forums > MOTORHOME FORUMS > Class A Motorhome Discussions
Click Here to Login
Join iRV2 Today

Mission Statement: Supporting thoughtful exchange of knowledge, values and experience among RV enthusiasts.
Reply
  This discussion is proudly sponsored by:
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about their products on iRV2
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-31-2015, 04:07 PM   #43
Senior Member
 
gemini5362's Avatar
 
Tiffin Owners Club
Freightliner Owners Club
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by TQ60 View Post
None of that matters at all in any way period.

What I mean is in simple terms is that a tire shop is expected to have and use their tools to do the work they are charging for.

In Court the judge should understand that.

One would not go into a diner to order breakfast and the cook expect the customer to provide the spatula cook the eggs with.

Cannot change tire without a jack and hard to cook without tools.

If owner tries to claim that he even asked you state that tire shop is expected to use their jacks and they were told not only heck no but #/#!\no!
TQ luckily for your It does not seem like you have been in front of many judges. I do not go in front of a judge but 90 per cent of the people I appear in front of are either lawyers retired judges or in a lot of cases Law School professors. In every case be it criminal court, civil court, in my case arbitration or as I advocated for these people small claims court the moving party has to prove its case. In criminal court the government has alleged you have done something illegal and they have the burden of proving it. In civil cases you such as small court the moving party ( plaintiff) is alleging the other party did something wrong. In the situation here the MH owner would be alleging that the tire shop did something wrong by utilizing the leveling jacks. They are going to have to prove that to the judge. The judge is not going to automatically know what is correct the moving party has to prove their case. Then as I have said several times even if they prove the tire company was in the wrong they have to prove how they were damaged. That is not as easy as you seem to think it would be. I have done a lot of contract issues in front of a legal authority and it is not as cut and dried as you would think. My hope is that the OP is telling the MH owner what I am saying or someone in similar circumstances reads this thread and knows what they need to have ready when they go into some kind of court action. Peoples court used to be a good place to learn how to do this but now peoples court, judge judy etc have gotten to the point where it really does not reflect how the system really works. By the way, peoples court, judge judy etc are actually examples of an Arbitration even though they fancy it up to make it look like a court it is still an agreed upon arbitrator making a decision.
__________________

__________________
2005 Allegro Bus 38DP
2012 Enclave tow vehicle
No Dogs, No cats.
gemini5362 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 RV Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

iRV2.com RV Community - Are you about to start a new improvement on your RV or need some help with some maintenance? Do you need advice on what products to buy? Or maybe you can give others some advice? No matter where you fit in you'll find that iRV2 is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with other RV owners, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create an RV blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 08-31-2015, 04:11 PM   #44
Senior Member
 
gemini5362's Avatar
 
Tiffin Owners Club
Freightliner Owners Club
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by vfauto View Post
After reading all this I've come to the conclusion that these are all opinions and everyone thinks their opinion is correct. Unfortunately when it comes to a court case only one opinion counts. But for the heck of it I will throw my opinion out there . The leveling jacks are factory equipment so with that being said if the tire shop got in the coach to move it and the brakes failed whose fault would it be? How would the technician know that the brakes or for that matter the leveling jacks are about to fail.
I agree that is what I was saying earlier. The MH owner is going to have to prove that the failure was caused by the tire shop improperly using their equipment. The lippert handbook saying that you cannot use the leveling jacks for changing a tire would be the first step in that proof. But then you get into the argument is that a safety issue in that the jacks could fail and drop the chassis onto someone working rather than a safety issue that utilizing them in this manner could cause damage to the jack.
__________________

__________________
2005 Allegro Bus 38DP
2012 Enclave tow vehicle
No Dogs, No cats.
gemini5362 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2015, 05:50 PM   #45
Member
 
Schrimscher's Avatar
 
Monaco Owners Club
Ford Super Duty Owner
Heartland RV Club
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Redding, Ca.
Posts: 91
Had a similiar experience with my 40 Monaco Diplomat. I bought 4 new rear tires from a tire shop and they mounted them,,,,they used their jacks. I later had a slow leak from a valve stem and unknown to me they used the coach leveler for that rear side to repair the leak. When I climbed aboard to leave I found the drivers windshield cracked !! They had used the coach levelers to jack up that right rear side and in so doing it twisted the coach body enough to crack the winshield $800.
We settled the matter on the spot and they paid in full for replacing with a new windshield. So, yes your shop should pay in my opinion and never use the coach levelers for jacking. My manual clearly said it's a no-no.
Best of luck and hope you get satisfaction.
Schrimscher
__________________
Schrimscher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2015, 07:52 PM   #46
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Yakima, WA
Posts: 363
As i went through the various posts in this thread, I didn't see anything discussing what struck me right out the gate......

How on earth did the tire shop personnel get access into the coach? Even if the door was inadvertently left unlocked, on mine you gotta have the key?

No shop ever ever ever has access to my coach, and the idea a worker would have a key and be able to start it or activate systems is beyond impossible in my universe! Period.

Getting tires was easy. I did not pick by brand; I picked by vendor I have been happy with for my cars. They have a substantial commercial tire business and a nice level hanger like facility. I said, "I get to help." They said, "Absolutely."

I put the coach in the air using the jacks, they secured the jack stands at each corner, and I relaxed the jacks some. (I've used the jacks to rotate my own tires annually for many years) Then I helped. Balancing, remounting, fitting my valve extenders and trim in between duals, and bird dogging the torque process. I also slipped the crew a handful of $20s.


Back to my point though - how in the world would a tire store gain access to the coach or even more incredulous, THE KEYS??????
__________________
GySgt USMC (Ret) '79~'99
2005 National RV Dolphin Limited
(w/lots of goodies)
Civdiv99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2015, 08:53 PM   #47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 5,954
Simple. They asked for the keys. No keys no work done.
__________________
nothermark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2015, 08:58 PM   #48
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4,493
Yes the moving party needs to prove case...bla...bla...

Been there in small claims a few times won all but one and that was not a loss so to speak but judge read contract different.

Was about dogs and 2 years of age.

Meant dog and judge stated it was contract.

And is was with a rv dealer but that was 25 years ago.

Back to here.

Proving damages may be tough to explain to judge and I agree.

But assigning fault is a no brain thing.

Plaintiff states he told professional tire servicer to use the shop equipment and not to use mh jacks.

OSHA and a ton of other rules likely prohibit anyone on payroll from using any tools or equipment not covered under business insurance just for this reason.

One may also discover criminal charges if one got creative as the company charged customer for services provided while using customer supplied tools without permission or rent.

Theft of service.
__________________
Tony & Lori
1989 Country Coach Savannah SE
TQ60 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2015, 11:21 PM   #49
Senior Member
 
gemini5362's Avatar
 
Tiffin Owners Club
Freightliner Owners Club
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by TQ60 View Post
Yes the moving party needs to prove case...bla...bla...

Been there in small claims a few times won all but one and that was not a loss so to speak but judge read contract different.

Was about dogs and 2 years of age.

Meant dog and judge stated it was contract.

And is was with a rv dealer but that was 25 years ago.

Back to here.

Proving damages may be tough to explain to judge and I agree.

But assigning fault is a no brain thing.

Plaintiff states he told professional tire servicer to use the shop equipment and not to use mh jacks.

OSHA and a ton of other rules likely prohibit anyone on payroll from using any tools or equipment not covered under business insurance just for this reason.

One may also discover criminal charges if one got creative as the company charged customer for services provided while using customer supplied tools without permission or rent.

Theft of service.
You must have read something I missed the only thing I read was that the MH owner never gave permission for the tire shop to use his jacks. I did not read he told them not to. I believe you seem to know more about the process than I do. I only argue contract issues a dozen times a year or so. My largest win was 440,000 dollars which I was kind of unhappy with because I thought they owed us 2 million. But we at least won. I just was not happy with the award. I am of the opinion that finding fault is not as much a no brainer as you think but i will bow to your superior knowledge.
__________________
2005 Allegro Bus 38DP
2012 Enclave tow vehicle
No Dogs, No cats.
gemini5362 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2015, 11:26 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
gemini5362's Avatar
 
Tiffin Owners Club
Freightliner Owners Club
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by TQ60 View Post
Yes the moving party needs to prove case...bla...bla...

Been there in small claims a few times won all but one and that was not a loss so to speak but judge read contract different.

Was about dogs and 2 years of age.

Meant dog and judge stated it was contract.

And is was with a rv dealer but that was 25 years ago.

Back to here.

Proving damages may be tough to explain to judge and I agree.

But assigning fault is a no brain thing.

Plaintiff states he told professional tire servicer to use the shop equipment and not to use mh jacks.

OSHA and a ton of other rules likely prohibit anyone on payroll from using any tools or equipment not covered under business insurance just for this reason.

One may also discover criminal charges if one got creative as the company charged customer for services provided while using customer supplied tools without permission or rent.

Theft of service.
You must have read something I missed the only thing I read was that the MH owner never gave permission for the tire shop to use his jacks. I did not read he told them not to. I believe you seem to know more about the process than I do. I only argue contract issues a dozen times a year or so. My largest win was 440,000 dollars which I was kind of unhappy with because I thought they owed us 2 million. But we at least won. I just was not happy with the award. I am of the opinion that finding fault is not as much a no brainer as you think but we each have our opinion.
__________________
2005 Allegro Bus 38DP
2012 Enclave tow vehicle
No Dogs, No cats.
gemini5362 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2015, 08:33 AM   #51
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4,493
I will give it to your long experience that things may and could get stupid as you have clearly indicated and I am not trying to argue with you.

A lot of us have a general common sense look at things that the courts often rule in ways that make no sense.

This event is likely one of those...common sense states tire shop wrong but some court could penalize the owner because the jacks did not raise enough for the worker to work upright when the jacks should not have been used.
__________________
Tony & Lori
1989 Country Coach Savannah SE
TQ60 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2015, 09:52 AM   #52
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 5,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by TQ60 View Post
I will give it to your long experience that things may and could get stupid as you have clearly indicated and I am not trying to argue with you.

A lot of us have a general common sense look at things that the courts often rule in ways that make no sense.

This event is likely one of those...common sense states tire shop wrong but some court could penalize the owner because the jacks did not raise enough for the worker to work upright when the jacks should not have been used.
Common sense is that when you hand them the keys you give them implied permission to use them. That is if you do not sign an estimate/work order that explicitly gives them permission and absolves them of blame in the fine print.

Common sense is that if the pump was faulty, as I think was stated somewhere in the pages, then it was better to fail in a repair facility than out in the woods some where where the bill would have been much higher.

Common sense would be that the lawsuit lottery is really bad for all the non winners because it screws everyone else to pay for the added insurance and legal costs that cover events likely to happen anyway.
__________________

__________________
nothermark is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
install, jacks, leveling, leveling jacks, tires



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hydraulic leveling jacks won't pick up coach rv9apilot Monaco Owner's Forum 9 04-23-2015 08:18 PM
Leveling Jacks question Frankie Z MH-General Discussions & Problems 8 10-11-2014 08:03 PM
Wiring and the leveling jacks: Question Roll RV Systems & Appliances 2 08-08-2014 09:28 PM
Jacks so high the tires are in the air. Really? StevieG Class A Motorhome Discussions 38 07-11-2014 10:16 PM
RVA leveling jacks for Monaco Knight lfischer Class A Motorhome Discussions 4 06-23-2014 09:50 PM

» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.