Advice Needed ASAP please - company damaged car!

Maxwellcomp12

Today we took our car which was purchased 2 days ago in for window tints. The person who was doing the tinting took over a hour of the estimated time he stated to do the work.

We took the car in to have full tints however the front was not done as he could not get the tints to sit correctly. We payed £95 to have the 3 back windows completed.

After leaving (less than 10 mins down the road) we noticed a chip on the window screen and rang the guy up straight away to tell him. He called us liars and said he accepted no liability.

The chip was not there before - I actually took the tax disk off the window screen today - the chip is now in the same exact spot!

The guy drove our car into his garage and the work wasn't finished until dark - funny he kept us waiting over a hour until it fell dark?

Can any one give us advice... we are looking at £75 to replace the screen not to mention work was half complete.

forgotmyname

They didnt tint the front windows because thats illegal. The standard tint will be close to the legal limit already.

Unless you can prove they damaged the screen your going to be spending good money on wasting your time.

Is the damage inside or outside?

Maxwellcomp12

forgotmyname wrote: »

They didnt tint the front windows because thats illegal. The standard tint will be close to the legal limit already.

Unless you can prove they damaged the screen your going to be spending good money on wasting your time.

Is the damage inside or outside?

Thanks for your reply.

He has actually asked us to go back so he can do the front windows at 35 - partner said he would arrange another appointment another day as he was not happy to have such dark windows - before he was going for a 20! We have scraps of tint left on the fronts because he could not get them on and has taken them off .

We have a photo from 23 hours ago of the car with NO damage - window screen is clearly shown in it.

The damage is outside

photome

35, if you mean 35%, is illegal on the windscreen and on the front side windows

Maxwellcomp12

photome wrote: »

35, if you mean 35%, is illegal on the windscreen and on the front side windows

He knows this hense he said he would arrange a appointment - he was not going to go back to get them done, he was happy to leave them alone if the 20% would not work.

I should have made it more clear that the window screen was not going to be done - it was the front 2 windows, passenger and drivers.

Sorry for the confusion.

JustinR1979

Windscreen!
So how did he damage the windscreen when not working on it?
Doesn't it look like a stonechip?

photome

20 is darker than 35 as they are measured by the amount of light they let through and the front side should let 70%through.

as for proving they did the damage..unless they admit it i think you are struggling

photome

JustinR1979 wrote: »

Windscreen!
So how did he damage the windscreen when not working on it?
Doesn't it look like a stonechip?

he could have dropped something on the screen

Maxwellcomp12

JustinR1979 wrote: »

Windscreen!
So how did he damage the windscreen when not working on it?
Doesn't it look like a stonechip?

I would know if he admitted to damaging our car.

He drove our car into his garage, maybe it happened then? Maybe someone in the work shop managed to do it.. maybe he did it whilst working on the car... all we know was it wasn't there before it went in.

We have photos less than 24 hours old of the car clearly showing the windscreen - no chips. I actually took the tax disc off when we waited outside for him to start doing the the job and where the tax disc was we now have a lovely chip.

I would not blame someone for something unless I knew what I was saying was true. There was no damage to the car before we took it in there.

When we have been to other car companies for work done to our car they have noted down any damages before starting work....

nidO

Maxwellcomp12 wrote: »

I would not blame someone for something unless I knew what I was saying was true. There was no damage to the car before we took it in there.

The problem you have is a windscreen chip is a windscreen chip.

Having a photo of your car 24 hours earlier is meaningless, because a stone might have chipped your windscreen 5 yards down the road before you dropped it off, or 5 yards down the road after you drove off again (you yourself say you didn't notice it for 10 minutes after you picked up the car, that's 10 minutes where a stone could perfectly easily have chipped the car.
Not that i'm saying it did, but i'm saying it could have and you can't prove it didn't.

As an aside, as you have a chip which is evidently not in direct line of sight, can't you get it repaired rather than the screen replaced? That should be more like free through your insurance, or maybe a £10 excess.

Regardless though, i'd just forget about it and not give the guy any more business. You can't prove he damaged your winscreen, he's denying it was him, so you're at a stalemate unless you spend vastly more time and money than the £75 you're arguing over.

forgotmyname

If you have the fronts tinted your going to risk a £60 ticket if stopped and you might be made to remove the tints there and then... Or risk getting it impounded or having to pay for a tow.