Workshop retaining vehicle after performing unapproved repairs, not even quoted for!

**Darkangelyaya** · 06-Nov-12, 09:36 PM

I need some information please:
My vehicle broke down and was towed in to the company who replaced most of the engine in June, at a cost of R28 000.00. I saw it as a warranty repair, and the vehicle was towed in to the said workshop, two weeks ago.

At NO stage was I ever informed that this was NOT going to be repaired under a warranty claim. I called the Owner of the workshop daily for updates. At NO stage whatsoever was I ever informed that the vehicle is being repaired AT MY OWN COST. At NO stage did I receive any quotation, estimate, or information that an estimate will be done once the engine has been opened. I NEVER signed any CPA forms, or gave any written consent at all; I never even telephonically or verbally consented to repairs being done. (I record important phone conversations).

On Monday, I was informed that they are putting oil in the vehicle and will test it on that day, and that I can then come and fetch it as soon as I have paid the bill. I was blown away, and enquired as to when I actually gave permission for repairs not under warranty, and in fact... where was the quote?!!! I then received the quote, with Monday's date on it - for R 12 000.00.

I have lodged a formal complaint with their Head Office, who referred me to the MIO for arbitration, as the franchise is independantly owned.

The owner, a woman, went into a screaming fit yet again, on the phone today, becoming very abusive, and screaming that 'that f'in vehicle will not go anywhere until it is paid in full'. (Recorded).

They are refusing to hand over my vehicle.

Surely this is a clear case of violation of my rights under the CPA, and I have the law on my side to fetch my vehicle - the workshop must then decide if they want to proceed with legal action towards recovering 'their money' (Sarcasm is mine)???

**sterne.law@gmail.com** · 07-Nov-12, 11:10 AM

Regarding retaining possession - this is allowed without a court order as it is a lien.
It is unclear what you mean by referring to a warranty. Was this an agreed warranty OR is your stance based on the Consumer Protection Act 6 month warranty and your argument is that the repair was a transaction and therefore you believe that you have a 6 month warranty?

**Darkangelyaya** · 07-Nov-12, 10:13 PM

Thanks for the reply, Anthony

I have a written warranty printed on the invoice paid in June, when the major repairs were done. It is a six month, or 10 000km warranty on all repairs done as per stated invoice. I am not relying on the CPA alone in this.

However, after getting a number of different legal opinions from different people, I decided to just do it myself, and go and fetch my vehicle. (Actually, I decided this yesterday afternoon after a phonecall during which I was screamed at, sworn at and verbally abused on record by the deceptively well-groomed, 'honest' and 'religious' owner of the workshop)

So I did. (Not great security there.)

I fail to see how the workshop wil react now, since they have NO records of any type, indicating any agreement for repairs on my vehicle.

What is that thing about possession being 9/10ths of the law again...?
(She did act rather possessed)

Lesson learnt: 'Get everything in writing and record every conversation remotely considered important.' (And err on the side of caution when someone says: 'Really? We'll see about that')

"There is none so dangerous as the one with nothing to lose"

**Citizen X** · 10-Nov-12, 10:58 AM

I need some information please:
My vehicle broke down and was towed in to the company who replaced most of the engine in June, at a cost of R28 000.00. I saw it as a warranty repair, and the vehicle was towed in to the said workshop, two weeks ago.

At NO stage was I ever informed that this was NOT going to be repaired under a warranty claim. I called the Owner of the workshop daily for updates. At NO stage whatsoever was I ever informed that the vehicle is being repaired AT MY OWN COST. At NO stage did I receive any quotation, estimate, or information that an estimate will be done once the engine has been opened. I NEVER signed any CPA forms, or gave any written consent at all; I never even telephonically or verbally consented to repairs being done. (I record important phone conversations).

On Monday, I was informed that they are putting oil in the vehicle and will test it on that day, and that I can then come and fetch it as soon as I have paid the bill. I was blown away, and enquired as to when I actually gave permission for repairs not under warranty, and in fact... where was the quote?!!! I then received the quote, with Monday's date on it - for R 12 000.00.

I have lodged a formal complaint with their Head Office, who referred me to the MIO for arbitration, as the franchise is independantly owned.

The owner, a woman, went into a screaming fit yet again, on the phone today, becoming very abusive, and screaming that 'that f'in vehicle will not go anywhere until it is paid in full'. (Recorded).

They are refusing to hand over my vehicle.

Surely this is a clear case of violation of my rights under the CPA, and I have the law on my side to fetch my vehicle - the workshop must then decide if they want to proceed with legal action towards recovering 'their money' (Sarcasm is mine)???

Good morning Carin,
I would firstly like to impress upon you that the very first thing that I have done is to put myself in your position and ask: How would I react and respond? I would feel robbed, deceived, and very angry!
1. In my opinion you have several valid grounds for a complaint to the Consumer Commissioner. In my opinion there was intentional misrepresentation.
2. Your immediate problem is that you really need and want your car now! The workshop/panel-beater is refusing to hand over the car unless they get payment;
3. The police are likely to tell you that this is a civil matter and that they don’t get involved in a civil matter;
4. Might I suggest that, apart from other dispute resolution mechanisms you’ve already initiated, name and shame this company/business right here! Then, inform them of this and state that you want them to provide right of reply;
5. Any member that then wants to put questions to this business may do so, other affected clients may also happen upon this thread and have similar complaints!
6. The only practical way, in my opinion, that you can really get your car back in the shortest period of time is by a court order.
(As Flaker has correctly pointed out, you've already taken delivery of your vehicle, so what I've shared with you is not really applicable here!(Sorry!)

**adrianh** · 08-Nov-12, 06:32 AM

I think that the problem lies in this statement "I thought it was a warranty repair". Lets say you took the car in and simply said "please fix it" and they did fix it as you requested then it is your own fault for assuming that it is a warranty repair and that they are obliged to quote you first. They did as you asked!

As the saying goes "assumption is the mother of all f*ckups"

**flaker** · 08-Nov-12, 07:04 AM

Did u pay when u fetched your vehicle?

**sterne.law@gmail.com** · 08-Nov-12, 08:34 AM

They were still required to give a quote before doing any work.
Once you took the car, they lost their lien over it.

**adrianh** · 08-Nov-12, 08:54 AM

Why were they required to give a quote if the lady didn't ask for a quote?

I ask this because when I take my car in for a service and don't ask for a quote then they simply go ahead and do whats needed.

**Justloadit** · 08-Nov-12, 01:51 PM

If I am not mistaken, it is now part of the CPA law.
If you give no quote and do the job, and the client does not pay, then you have no right to demand payment, as you were not authorised to do the job.

**Dave A** · 08-Nov-12, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by adrianh

Why were they required to give a quote if the lady didn't ask for a quote?

Read S15 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Having just had a JSE listed company try to prematurely wriggle out of a contract today by trying to invoke a clause in the CPA, I had better mention that the CPA does not apply at all where the consumer is a juristic person with assets or annual turnover exceeding (currently) R2 million in terms of S5 2) b), and many of the other sections start with a clause that can further limit applicability too.

I'll say this too, CPA or not, nowadays I wouldn't do any work for anybody without first giving an estimate and receiving written authorisation to proceed. It's just good practice that stops all kinds of needless nonsense.