At the dealer I use, only the two people I know well drive it. If your car is tuned I would be careful. Not for the warranty, but that the added power could cause a lot person to crash.A lawyer would have no trouble getting that tossed. One advantage to having a manual is that I've found valets are increasingly more likely to let me just park my own car and pick it up when I'm done. I've actually considered getting the shift knob for my Mk8 with no gear shift pattern, just to further confuse folks. Or maybe get it like a Parisian giving directions, just all of the gears in random order, even add a few.
4 - 5 - R - 8
2 - 1 - 3 - 6
Ha, goes both ways. When I was a kid, my dad had a 560SEL that had the most sensitive fuel filters, they'd clog up and kill one bank of the V8 and put the other bank in limp mode. It probably made 50hp at that point. Was a delight to drive a two plus ton sled with the power of a riding mower.At the dealer I use, only the two people I know well drive it. If your car is tuned I would be careful. Not for the warranty, but that the added power could cause a lot person to crash.
Sorry, that's nice in theory, but that's not how the law works.Owner of the vehicle shouldn't have to do anything. Case against vehicle owner should be thrown out immediately and plaintiff should have to pay any legal fees for even filing a lawsuit against him. This is just stupid. Doesn't matter if dealership will cover any adjudication against owner. There should be no case against owner period.
Frivolous lawsuits are still frivolous lawsuits. A counter suit is well within reason.Sorry, that's nice in theory, but that's not how the law works.
Yeah. I guess you can sue for anything. Doesn't make it right or within the realm of common sense.Sorry, that's nice in theory, but that's not how the law works.
This is what i would be doing immediately.Frivolous lawsuits are still frivolous lawsuits. A counter suit is well within reason.
Did you read the story? Based on state law, including workers comp rules, the lawsuit is the appropriate manner to recover damages. A counter suit against whom?Frivolous lawsuits are still frivolous lawsuits. A counter suit is well within reason.
The dealership would be the start and end of responsibility. Once it's in their hands, the vehicle owner is absolved of all responsibility. The stupid argument that it's like lending a car to a friend is not the case at all. The car was taken to a dealership service department. If you park your car in a service area and walk away from it after handing the keys to a representative of the dealership, then that's where your responsibility ends, the same way that if they damage it from that point until you drive off with it, it's on the dealership. Unless you run over the person taking the keys, everything from that moment forward is now on the dealership and the service staff. It's ridiculous to claim that the vehicle owner is culpable in any manner and a counter suit against that lawyer for frivolous charges would be warranted.Did you read the story? Based on state law, including workers comp rules, the lawsuit is the appropriate manner to recover damages. A counter suit against whom?
That's all nice, but that's not reality. It is not correct that "the owner is absolved of all responsibility". Maybe in some imaginary world. Or can you document this?The dealership would be the start and end of responsibility. Once it's in their hands, the vehicle owner is absolved of all responsibility. The stupid argument that it's like lending a car to a friend is not the case at all. The car was taken to a dealership service department. If you park your car in a service area and walk away from it after handing the keys to a representative of the dealership, then that's where your responsibility ends, the same way that if they damage it from that point until you drive off with it, it's on the dealership. Unless you run over the person taking the keys, everything from that moment forward is now on the dealership and the service staff. It's ridiculous to claim that the vehicle owner is culpable in any manner and a counter suit against that lawyer for frivolous charges would be warranted.
It's unfortunate that the technician lost their life, but it sounds like safety protocols were not followed by that technician and the service person moving the vehicle. If the technician driving the vehicle at the time the event happened wasn't comfortable operating a manual transmission, than that raises a question as to why they attempted to in the first place and a qualified operator wasn't sought. But again, this is all down to the dealership and their practices.
The last time I took my car in for service, the guy who took the keys looked in, saw it was a manual and hung the keys up on the board until someone that could drive it moved it back to the bay. That's not difficult and an increasingly familiar situation at valets, service appointments or any other situation where you let other people drive your car.
Can you show me one case where your silly fantasy actually played out?That's all nice, but that's not reality. It is not correct that "the owner is absolved of all responsibility". Maybe in some imaginary world. Or can you document this?