It's a Honda Accord and its' not that they are aluminum, just that they are clear-coated not painted.
Shop chewed up my rims!
- Thread starter Audi Junkie
- Start date
- Status
May be I can add my experience. I am not an attorney, but I've appeared in several small claims courts as an expert witness for the defense. So I may say some things that aren't technically correct, but that's only because I'm not schooled in "The Law".
The basic principles are:
1) There has to be a "loss".
2) The burden of proof is on the plaintiff
3) The evidence has to be weighted in favor of the plaintiff.
4) The remedy is "to make them whole".
"Loss" - Well, corrosion by itself is not enough. The corrosion has to be a "problem". If the problem is "appearance", then this isn't a very costly "loss". If the problem is "rim wouldn't hold air", then that's a bit more costly, but it could be argued that this is a common problem with alloy rims and that it is inevitable. That the corrosion is part of the "normal wear and tear".
"Burden of proof" - the time element has been extensively discussed. But the plaintiff has to say HOW the tire shop damaged the rims - and unless the plaintiff watched the procedure, there is going to be a disconnect there.
If the plaintiff was there, then he should have pointed out the damage at the time. If the plaintiff wasn't there, then it is conjecture that the rims were damaged at the time of mounting the tires.
"Make him whole" - In other words, put the plaintiff back in exactly in same position before the incident. In this case, that would mean "rims without corrosion with some usage on them." This does not mean "NEW". Since the current rims are "serviceable", this reduces the monetary value of the "loss" to a great extent.
If I were the shop owner I would argue:
- That alloy wheels are prone to corrosion, That it is only a matter of time before it appears.
- That the mounting machine doesn't touch the rim where it was damaged. Only the tire does, and the tire is ALWAYS going to touch the rim during the mouting process - there is no other way.
- That the problem occurred in the subsequent use of the rim and that would explain the time lag.
- That the monetary loss is pretty low. New rims cost (say) $600, that used rims (even in almost perfect condition) would sell for $200, and damaged by serviceable rims can be purchased for $100. That would make the "loss" a total of $200.
- That the problem is only "appearance" and to fix that only takes an hour of buffing and clear coating to return the appearance to its "Before" state - may be $100.
My experience is that Judges bend over backwards for the "Average Joe" (I'm sure there's a Joe the Plumber joke in there somewhere!). Judges will allow all kinds of evidence and testimony in a small claims court where there aren't attorney's present (I don't know what the requirements are in Pennsylvania, but most states ban attorney's from small claims courts.)
So, AJ, make sure you have a receipt showing the transaction and it's date. Try to find a way to explain the connection between the damage and the tire mounting machine. Bring an estimate for a new rim so the Judge has a cost basis from which to work. (Small claims court judges don't want complexity - they want money to exchange hands.)
And lastly, be prepared to walk out of court with very little, if anything, to show for your efforts.
The basic principles are:
1) There has to be a "loss".
2) The burden of proof is on the plaintiff
3) The evidence has to be weighted in favor of the plaintiff.
4) The remedy is "to make them whole".
"Loss" - Well, corrosion by itself is not enough. The corrosion has to be a "problem". If the problem is "appearance", then this isn't a very costly "loss". If the problem is "rim wouldn't hold air", then that's a bit more costly, but it could be argued that this is a common problem with alloy rims and that it is inevitable. That the corrosion is part of the "normal wear and tear".
"Burden of proof" - the time element has been extensively discussed. But the plaintiff has to say HOW the tire shop damaged the rims - and unless the plaintiff watched the procedure, there is going to be a disconnect there.
If the plaintiff was there, then he should have pointed out the damage at the time. If the plaintiff wasn't there, then it is conjecture that the rims were damaged at the time of mounting the tires.
"Make him whole" - In other words, put the plaintiff back in exactly in same position before the incident. In this case, that would mean "rims without corrosion with some usage on them." This does not mean "NEW". Since the current rims are "serviceable", this reduces the monetary value of the "loss" to a great extent.
If I were the shop owner I would argue:
- That alloy wheels are prone to corrosion, That it is only a matter of time before it appears.
- That the mounting machine doesn't touch the rim where it was damaged. Only the tire does, and the tire is ALWAYS going to touch the rim during the mouting process - there is no other way.
- That the problem occurred in the subsequent use of the rim and that would explain the time lag.
- That the monetary loss is pretty low. New rims cost (say) $600, that used rims (even in almost perfect condition) would sell for $200, and damaged by serviceable rims can be purchased for $100. That would make the "loss" a total of $200.
- That the problem is only "appearance" and to fix that only takes an hour of buffing and clear coating to return the appearance to its "Before" state - may be $100.
My experience is that Judges bend over backwards for the "Average Joe" (I'm sure there's a Joe the Plumber joke in there somewhere!). Judges will allow all kinds of evidence and testimony in a small claims court where there aren't attorney's present (I don't know what the requirements are in Pennsylvania, but most states ban attorney's from small claims courts.)
So, AJ, make sure you have a receipt showing the transaction and it's date. Try to find a way to explain the connection between the damage and the tire mounting machine. Bring an estimate for a new rim so the Judge has a cost basis from which to work. (Small claims court judges don't want complexity - they want money to exchange hands.)
And lastly, be prepared to walk out of court with very little, if anything, to show for your efforts.
I hear you and that's all good info excepting that I have 4 normal perfect wheels with MORE miles and mounts on them to show that the corrosion/cracking I experienced w/the rims in question was in no way "normal".
I'm sizing up some used rims, not the same ones, but the 5-spoke Acura RSX rims that I prefer, but just a plain painted finish. I could get 4 under $200, I might just bag the court case. That'll leave me with more than enough rims to have all the mounted sets I desire.
fwiw, for my wife's CRV she has 3 full mounted sets. I like to have a set of 6 for a fwd car, plus snows....but the more the merrier.
I'm sizing up some used rims, not the same ones, but the 5-spoke Acura RSX rims that I prefer, but just a plain painted finish. I could get 4 under $200, I might just bag the court case. That'll leave me with more than enough rims to have all the mounted sets I desire.
fwiw, for my wife's CRV she has 3 full mounted sets. I like to have a set of 6 for a fwd car, plus snows....but the more the merrier.
File a complaint with the BBB in your area. The shop owner may not give two [censored] about it, since he is not accredited, but BBB is good at trying to arbitrate issues. The shop owner may realize that you have escalated the issue beyond a verbal complaint towards a written one, common sense dictating that you have a legitimate complaint vice the myriad of [censored] ones he sees annually. If you have been a loyal customer of his for some time, logic says that your wheels were very likely damaged by a tire machine of his since IMHO, curb damage as he claims, is not linear like damage a machine would do especially nearly 360 deg around.There is no reason for him to be abrasive about the issue as if you were some arrogant teen-ager, the least he could do is offer you lifetime mounting at no charge.
Hmm. Thanks. Refinished rims are about $130+ shipping ea. I will just hold out for 2 [censored] ones cheaper to match up with my damaged 2 and forget about court. Maybe BBB is a possible, thanks.
Why replace them? They will outlast the car What kind of corrosion you talking about? Alloy wheels get surface corrosion, no harm. powder coating is done to eliminate polishing them to remove the surface corrosion.
This is streaming under the clear coat. About 1/2" of the outer rim is bad.
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
This is streaming under the clear coat. About 1/2" of the outer rim is bad.
This is the thread that just won't die.
You must have a lot of time on your hands to complain about rims for over two weeks now. j/k
This is streaming under the clear coat. About 1/2" of the outer rim is bad.
This is the thread that just won't die.
You must have a lot of time on your hands to complain about rims for over two weeks now. j/k
That is a nice chrome wheel for $20 shipped.
Thanks. It'll go on the back of the CRV as a blinger. At least the chrome will stay nicer than if it went into normal service.
- Status