4 ms·

Your peddling FUD. Just because you touched something in a way that wasn't specifically authorized by the original manufacturer of that something doesn't make

Your peddling FUD. Just because you touched something in a way that wasn't specifically authorized by the original manufacturer of that something doesn't make you liable for anything that something does in perpetuity unless there is evidence that it's actually your fault. Homeowners insurance covers the fire. They probably don't go after anyone unless they have specific reason to believe the loss was probably caused by a pattern of action that could result in a winnable lawsuit (good luck figuring that out when you have a melted lump of car to to work with). If someone does somehow go after the shop their insurance goes to bat for them and digs up all the reasons they're not liable and this was a reasonable repair that their customer performed.

toomuchtodo 5y ago
I highly recommend you ask an attorney about it, that's what I did (and paid for) and I'm reiterating the opinion they provided. Not an attorney, not your attorney, not legal advice. I'm not in the repair business, and I own no TSLA stock; I have no incentive to peddle FUD, and actively support right to repair. Crucially, right to repair does not mean an absence of or indemnification from liability.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >I highly recommend you ask an attorney about it, Funny, that's exactly what I did. > I'm reiterating the opinion they provided So am I. I repair and modify things, typically light commercial vehicles and the equipment mounted to or towed by them. I work on the economic low end of the market so I get all the stuff that real shops want nothing to do with and have had to consider how liable I am for my work. I have had these sorts of discussions in a non-professional context (i.e no money changed hands) with an attorney who specializes in businesses in social services settings (so the advice is probably biased toward whatever he finds his clients defending against most often) and aside from the typical disclaimers[0][1][2][3][4][5] that any responsible lawyer will give you I feel confident enough in my analysis that I put my money where my mouth is making similiar repairs in my day to day life. The general gist of things is that for a successful lawsuit there has to be some evidence that the work you performed caused the injury and even if so there then also needs to be a precedent of strict liability or you would to have had to do something negligent or check the boxes for some other tort, but I've been advised negligence is the one you really have to watch out for in a professional setting. Negligence is a fuzzy concept but it suffices to say that proving it to the standard required for a civil suit would be a very uphill battle for a reasonably standard repair procedure performed in a reasonably standard setting. Strict liability scares me far more than a lawsuit arising out of alleged negligence. I can do good, defensible work and stand by it. I cannot know all the areas of law where strict liability may be an issue. I cannot control whether my customers use the things I have repaired for them in a strict liability context (e.g. fumigation, overhead lifting) which could make my party to a lawsuit. No I didn't pay for the advice but for the volume and riskiness of work I do I'm content. [0] if you're not paying for it it's not legal advice [1] nobody can make guarantees about what will happen in court [2] you have the wrong demographics to get sympathy from judges in this state, they'll expect you to know better than to cut corners so don't cut corners [3] bad facts, bad case law, hope your malpractice kills a skinhead and not a single mother or you'll be the case law [4] just defending yourself can be no more than a consultation fee or it can be ruinously expensive [5] if a megacorp or the state sues you everything goes out the window because the playing field is so unlevel.
  - privateSFacct 5y ago
    There is a fair bit wrong with this advice. CA is a joint and several liability state. Joint and several liability is the legal doctrine that each defendant in a personal injury claim may be held responsible for ALL the victim's economic damages. Importantly this can occur if you are fractionally at fault. You've parked 10 feet off the side of the freeway, 16 feet away from any lane. Someone is going 80 miles an hour, passing cars, then (likely) falls asleep and veers sharply off the road, then along the side of the road and hits your parked truck. Even though you are fractionally at fault you are on the hook for everything. From actually seeing cases first hand 1) If you have money 2) you have a connection to an accident however small, particularly a fatal one, and very particularly with any kind of sympathetic angle (wife and children bereaved and at risk of being homeless etc then you will be named in the lawsuit. And at least in CA - even if the husband was 90% at fault (to a normal person the one who did things wrong). YOU could pay out everything
    - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
      I kind of took for granted the fact that my customers are typically the party with the money by several orders of magnitude so I don't have to worry much about joint liability even though I live in one of those states. You're definitely not wrong, "don't be the only party with the money" was one of the things my law professor drilled into us but for a consumer getting their car (or whatever) repaired they don't really have to worry about being the guy with the money since any shop will have a ton of money via insurance and insurance will have a ton of practice defending frivolous claims. I also forgot the "anyone can sue anyone for anything, doesn't mean they win, doesn't mean it won't cost you money to fight them" disclaimer.
      - whoknowswhat11 5y ago
        Perfect - the best defense BY FAR is to have less / little / no $$. This is unique in CA - other party can be 90% at fault - so you’d think they’d have to pay (some states do whoever is 51%+ pays). But you can actually be the one paying rather than getting paid even if they hit you.
- mindslight 5y ago
  To be fair when you ask an attorney "how to", their default answer is "don't".
- cma 5y ago
  I would bet a lawyer would tell you not plug a third party phone into the AT&T phone system either in case you damaged it, as AT&T disingenuously argued would happen.
mcguire 5y ago
"Just because you touched something in a way that wasn't specifically authorized by the original manufacturer of that something doesn't make you liable for anything that something does in perpetuity unless there is evidence that it's actually your fault." That would technically be part of "right to repair" legislation.
kbenson 5y ago
> Your peddling FUD. Just because you touched something in a way that wasn't specifically authorized by the original manufacturer of that something doesn't make you liable for anything that something does in perpetuity unless there is evidence that it's actually your fault. I dunno. I think if I walked in with some random "brake rotor" that wasn't like any of the OEM or aftermarket ones they were used to seeing, the mechanic didn't know much about and couldn't verify would work sufficiently, even if it bolted into place, they might tell me to take a hike. I expect they would do a similar thing if I wanted airbags that went off replaced with something that looked like it wouldn't work right. Or a gas tank that looked suspect. I know I would turn people away if I was a mechanic and they came to me with those requests. Maybe those items worked perfectly fine, but if I don't have assurance I'm making a good call (like, for example, by knowing I'm replacing components with parts that are trusted by the OEM or have a proven rack record), why would I take that risk, legally or morally (if I think the person is making a bad decision)? Some decisions impact safety (especially when dealing with components that have a lot to do with safety), and I think those deserve some consideration. That doesn't mean Tesla should be the only entity allowed to repair though. Perhaps some of these components are perfectly fine, and you just need to find a mechanic that has enough experience with them to know that (but good luck finding the experienced mechanic instead of the one that doesn't care when looking around I guess, I'm not sure how you tell them apart). Competition is generally good.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >I dunno. I think if I walked in with some random... They'd tell you not to bring your own parts because they make money off parts and it's a variable they can't control and can introduce warranty headaches for them if it fails and it can waste their time if it's not rich (which is a real PITA for the tech in a flat rate pay system, they lose money directly). They have suppliers they like to deal with and want to stick to. As you get into less cookie cutter, higher dollar or more informal work it is much more common for the customer to provide parts. Oddball or obsolete heavy equipment is often dropped off with a rebuild-able core the repair shop is expected to use and/or modify because that's more economically efficient than having the repair entity source parts. Of course this can create hang-ups but these businesses expect that to happen sometimes. It's not super streamlined for high speed parts swapping on consumer automobile repair is. For side gig type work the mechanic might just tell the customer to go to the car parts store or Rockauto and buy it himself. >wasn't like any of the OEM or aftermarket ones they were used to seeing >couldn't verify would work sufficiently You're giving examples where the professional using their judgement is assessing the parts to be suspect causing the potential work to be sub par and not something they can stand behind. That's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about a case where the professional used their judgement and called the repair (tap the plastic, install a nipple) good enough and there was no reason to believe it wasn't other than pure speculation. >but if I don't have assurance I'm making a good call That's the thing, the guy tapping the plastic does have fairly good assurance he is making a good call because he has training and or experience repairing vehicles. He's going to have a good idea what does and doesn't work. At some point someone has to stick their neck out and make a judgement call. That's why people get paid, to make decisions. You can try and be a drone kick all the thinking up the chain to corporate but you're leaving money and satisfied customers on the table. You can run a business that way. It's perfectly valid. But you can also be the independent shop that just uses their professional judgement to do things like repair the battery on a Tesla or, a drain and fill plug to a Ford PTU or replace the Toyota oil filter cap with the metal one after the plastic one gets chewed up.
cyanydeez 5y ago
insurance companies underwrite warranties. thats enough to frighten anyone. insurance companies live on FUD

toomuchtodo 5y ago

I highly recommend you ask an attorney about it, that's what I did (and paid for) and I'm reiterating the opinion they provided. Not an attorney, not your attorney, not legal advice. I'm not in the repair business, and I own no TSLA stock; I have no incentive to peddle FUD, and actively support right to repair. Crucially, right to repair does not mean an absence of or indemnification from liability.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>I highly recommend you ask an attorney about it, Funny, that's exactly what I did. > I'm reiterating the opinion they provided So am I. I repair and modify things, typically light commercial vehicles and the equipment mounted to or towed by them. I work on the economic low end of the market so I get all the stuff that real shops want nothing to do with and have had to consider how liable I am for my work. I have had these sorts of discussions in a non-professional context (i.e no money changed hands) with an attorney who specializes in businesses in social services settings (so the advice is probably biased toward whatever he finds his clients defending against most often) and aside from the typical disclaimers[0][1][2][3][4][5] that any responsible lawyer will give you I feel confident enough in my analysis that I put my money where my mouth is making similiar repairs in my day to day life. The general gist of things is that for a successful lawsuit there has to be some evidence that the work you performed caused the injury and even if so there then also needs to be a precedent of strict liability or you would to have had to do something negligent or check the boxes for some other tort, but I've been advised negligence is the one you really have to watch out for in a professional setting. Negligence is a fuzzy concept but it suffices to say that proving it to the standard required for a civil suit would be a very uphill battle for a reasonably standard repair procedure performed in a reasonably standard setting. Strict liability scares me far more than a lawsuit arising out of alleged negligence. I can do good, defensible work and stand by it. I cannot know all the areas of law where strict liability may be an issue. I cannot control whether my customers use the things I have repaired for them in a strict liability context (e.g. fumigation, overhead lifting) which could make my party to a lawsuit. No I didn't pay for the advice but for the volume and riskiness of work I do I'm content. [0] if you're not paying for it it's not legal advice [1] nobody can make guarantees about what will happen in court [2] you have the wrong demographics to get sympathy from judges in this state, they'll expect you to know better than to cut corners so don't cut corners [3] bad facts, bad case law, hope your malpractice kills a skinhead and not a single mother or you'll be the case law [4] just defending yourself can be no more than a consultation fee or it can be ruinously expensive [5] if a megacorp or the state sues you everything goes out the window because the playing field is so unlevel.
- privateSFacct 5y ago
  There is a fair bit wrong with this advice. CA is a joint and several liability state. Joint and several liability is the legal doctrine that each defendant in a personal injury claim may be held responsible for ALL the victim's economic damages. Importantly this can occur if you are fractionally at fault. You've parked 10 feet off the side of the freeway, 16 feet away from any lane. Someone is going 80 miles an hour, passing cars, then (likely) falls asleep and veers sharply off the road, then along the side of the road and hits your parked truck. Even though you are fractionally at fault you are on the hook for everything. From actually seeing cases first hand 1) If you have money 2) you have a connection to an accident however small, particularly a fatal one, and very particularly with any kind of sympathetic angle (wife and children bereaved and at risk of being homeless etc then you will be named in the lawsuit. And at least in CA - even if the husband was 90% at fault (to a normal person the one who did things wrong). YOU could pay out everything
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    I kind of took for granted the fact that my customers are typically the party with the money by several orders of magnitude so I don't have to worry much about joint liability even though I live in one of those states. You're definitely not wrong, "don't be the only party with the money" was one of the things my law professor drilled into us but for a consumer getting their car (or whatever) repaired they don't really have to worry about being the guy with the money since any shop will have a ton of money via insurance and insurance will have a ton of practice defending frivolous claims. I also forgot the "anyone can sue anyone for anything, doesn't mean they win, doesn't mean it won't cost you money to fight them" disclaimer.
    - whoknowswhat11 5y ago
      Perfect - the best defense BY FAR is to have less / little / no $$. This is unique in CA - other party can be 90% at fault - so you’d think they’d have to pay (some states do whoever is 51%+ pays). But you can actually be the one paying rather than getting paid even if they hit you.
mindslight 5y ago
To be fair when you ask an attorney "how to", their default answer is "don't".
cma 5y ago
I would bet a lawyer would tell you not plug a third party phone into the AT&T phone system either in case you damaged it, as AT&T disingenuously argued would happen.

mcguire 5y ago

"Just because you touched something in a way that wasn't specifically authorized by the original manufacturer of that something doesn't make you liable for anything that something does in perpetuity unless there is evidence that it's actually your fault." That would technically be part of "right to repair" legislation.

kbenson 5y ago

> Your peddling FUD. Just because you touched something in a way that wasn't specifically authorized by the original manufacturer of that something doesn't make you liable for anything that something does in perpetuity unless there is evidence that it's actually your fault. I dunno. I think if I walked in with some random "brake rotor" that wasn't like any of the OEM or aftermarket ones they were used to seeing, the mechanic didn't know much about and couldn't verify would work sufficiently, even if it bolted into place, they might tell me to take a hike. I expect they would do a similar thing if I wanted airbags that went off replaced with something that looked like it wouldn't work right. Or a gas tank that looked suspect. I know I would turn people away if I was a mechanic and they came to me with those requests. Maybe those items worked perfectly fine, but if I don't have assurance I'm making a good call (like, for example, by knowing I'm replacing components with parts that are trusted by the OEM or have a proven rack record), why would I take that risk, legally or morally (if I think the person is making a bad decision)? Some decisions impact safety (especially when dealing with components that have a lot to do with safety), and I think those deserve some consideration. That doesn't mean Tesla should be the only entity allowed to repair though. Perhaps some of these components are perfectly fine, and you just need to find a mechanic that has enough experience with them to know that (but good luck finding the experienced mechanic instead of the one that doesn't care when looking around I guess, I'm not sure how you tell them apart). Competition is generally good.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>I dunno. I think if I walked in with some random... They'd tell you not to bring your own parts because they make money off parts and it's a variable they can't control and can introduce warranty headaches for them if it fails and it can waste their time if it's not rich (which is a real PITA for the tech in a flat rate pay system, they lose money directly). They have suppliers they like to deal with and want to stick to. As you get into less cookie cutter, higher dollar or more informal work it is much more common for the customer to provide parts. Oddball or obsolete heavy equipment is often dropped off with a rebuild-able core the repair shop is expected to use and/or modify because that's more economically efficient than having the repair entity source parts. Of course this can create hang-ups but these businesses expect that to happen sometimes. It's not super streamlined for high speed parts swapping on consumer automobile repair is. For side gig type work the mechanic might just tell the customer to go to the car parts store or Rockauto and buy it himself. >wasn't like any of the OEM or aftermarket ones they were used to seeing >couldn't verify would work sufficiently You're giving examples where the professional using their judgement is assessing the parts to be suspect causing the potential work to be sub par and not something they can stand behind. That's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about a case where the professional used their judgement and called the repair (tap the plastic, install a nipple) good enough and there was no reason to believe it wasn't other than pure speculation. >but if I don't have assurance I'm making a good call That's the thing, the guy tapping the plastic does have fairly good assurance he is making a good call because he has training and or experience repairing vehicles. He's going to have a good idea what does and doesn't work. At some point someone has to stick their neck out and make a judgement call. That's why people get paid, to make decisions. You can try and be a drone kick all the thinking up the chain to corporate but you're leaving money and satisfied customers on the table. You can run a business that way. It's perfectly valid. But you can also be the independent shop that just uses their professional judgement to do things like repair the battery on a Tesla or, a drain and fill plug to a Ford PTU or replace the Toyota oil filter cap with the metal one after the plastic one gets chewed up.

cyanydeez 5y ago

insurance companies underwrite warranties. thats enough to frighten anyone. insurance companies live on FUD