Verbal vs written evidence

aaj123

bris wrote: »

Didnt one of your posts say the engine seized on a test drive? The garage have the right to test drive, the engine may have been part of the problen all along, the garage would be hard pressed to be liable for the engine seizing, why would they be?

And hence I am not intending to hold them liable for engine seizing. But I intend to hold them liable for not informing me of this occurring and instead carrying on with stripping the engine without my authorisation.

What gave them the right to strip the engine of the car without even asking me or even mentioning that the engine had seized on the test run?

unholyangel

Your 2nd point of compensation for not receiving the car back in the same state....

Have you actually suffered a financial loss because of this? If not, you have no claim for this. If yes then you may have a claim providing the engine seized for something which was within their control/down to their negligence. If it wasnt down to them, then you'd still have a car that doesnt work and would still have to pay someone for the work eventually - and possibly a recovery vehicle to take the car to your garage of choice/home so you may want to think very carefully before taking any legal action.

bod1467

bris wrote: »

Didnt one of your posts say the engine seized on a test drive? The garage have the right to test drive, the engine may have been part of the problen all along, the garage would be hard pressed to be liable for the engine seizing, why would they be?

Devil's Advocate - this presumes the garage didn't do something whilst investigating the gearbox issue (e.g. drain all the engine oil to remove the sump, then forget to refill/properly refill the engine oil prior to the test drive) that caused the engine to seize.