Taking Mechanic to QCAT - Mediator Says I Need to Have Argument of Law or Point of Law

Lswaffi on 16/06/2020 - 10:46
Last edited 16/06/2020 - 10:55 by 1 other user

Hi guys.

I have a phone hearing (QCAT) tomorrow against an automatic mechanic franchise owner in Queensland (far north Queensland to be more precise) Now, my argument is that they misdiagnosed a part (front left wheel bearing) that they said that I needed (because of the part was "howling" and "grinding") in order to pass their safety inspection (they failed the inspection).

Anyway, I bought a new front left wheel bearing and got it installed by my regular mechanic. After a day or two, I took it back to them in order to get it passed because it was within the two weeks so I didn't have to pay extra (another $85 for safety inspection). They failed the inspection again because they said the same grinding and howling was still there. Now, I don't really want to get into the nitty-gritty of absolutely everything that went on because time is of the essence.

Now, at mediation, I was told by the mediator (who said he was also a lawyer) said that I needed an argument of law or point of law that I need to have in order to have a case. All I can think of now is a faulty diagnosis and the fact that having to buy a front left wheel bearing and have it installed to pass a safety inspection was an unnecessary cost because it did not fix the problem. This was by their own admission.

I'm hoping that I can have some helpful input from anyone out there that can give me a legal argument, a legal term to base my defence or argument on. Oh by the way, I am only going for $245.

Automotive

Comments

  • Euphemistic on 17/06/2020 - 05:57
    +1

    I don’t get what he problem is. Typically mechanics diagnose by trial and error, using experience to limit what trialling and errors occur. If the inspectors had got the job they probably would have found the bearing OK then gone on to fix something else after consulting you. This May have been as simple as putting it on a hoist and spinning the left front wheel, then checking the other wheels as the left front was OK.

    It appears you normal mechanic did what you told them to do rather than to diagnose a fault and fix the problem. May not have taken it for a test drive, or might be hard or heading and didn’t notice the grumbling noise from another wheel. If you went in and said can you fix he grumbling noise other work may have been done and the re-inspection passed.

    You’ve probably wasted more than $245 chasing around for all of this being a bit Karen.

    Is the car fixed and roadworthy yet?

  • briony on 17/06/2020 - 08:35

    Can I ask why you need a RWC? Just curious?

    • Cliche Guevara on 17/06/2020 - 13:49

      Some states require a RWC every year (depending on vehicle age) not just when you are selling it.

  • mikekiwimike on 17/06/2020 - 10:26
    +3

    One mechanic will often see something different to another mechanic when doing an RWC. Taking a car that fails at one mechanic shop to another will often get a different fault or a pass.

    Both mechanics saw something different, ‘your’ mechanic by not checking that the wheel bearing needed replacing was just as negligent as an incorrect diagnosis, but you are defending him by saying you asked for the wheel bearing to be replaced…… I wouldn’t replace something that didn’t need replacing, therefore it probably DID need to be replaced. It is your responsibility to maintain a car in a roadworthy state, a faulty wheel bearing is not roadworthy. BTW a grinding noise in a gearbox is a pretty bad noise to have.

    You surely do not believe that suing someone for giving you their professional advice is a good way to spend your time, be an adult and understand that mechanics are not perfect and cars are not simple. Do you sue your GP when he/she says you have the flu but infact you had a cold? They are professionals but they can only go on the information presented to them to make an educated guess based on their experience.

    Honestly I hope you lose and I hope you learn about respect for others, this person did nothing wrong and you take him away from his business because of what you don’t even know is an incorrect diagnosis, otherwise why did your mechanic replace it? He is just as negligent if it wasn’t faulty.

    • Dumax on 17/06/2020 - 10:37

      Do you sue your GP when he/she says you have the flu but infact you had a cold? They are professionals but they can only go on the information presented to them to make an educated guess based on their experience.

      If this was true then why does Professional Indemnity Insurance exist? It isn't unreasonable to expect that a properly licenced professional exercise their job with due care and skill.

      • Euphemistic on 17/06/2020 - 11:24
        +1

        It isn't unreasonable to expect that a properly licenced professional exercise their job with due care and skill.

        No it’s not unreasonable, but medical and mechanical repairs are typically trial and error. Start with the easiest/most common solution and work your way from there.

        Carrying out every conceivable test available and confirming what was reasonably obvious at first is a waste of time and effort as much as assuming it is one thing based on the evidence available and finding out later the diagnosis was incorrect. That’s why we trust experts with their knowledge and experience. Of course, that level of trust needs to be earned.

      • parsimonious one on 18/06/2020 - 12:38

        Do you sue your GP when he/she says you have the flu but infact you had a cold? They are professionals but they can only go on the information presented to them to make an educated guess based on their experience.

        If, for instance, you had some difficulty breathing and your GP told you “that sounds like sleep apnoea, go get a CPAP machine” and then it turns out you actually had a tumour in your nose/ throat, I reckon you’d probably have a pretty good case against the GP

    • Herbse on 18/06/2020 - 00:07
      +1

      Have to agree with this completely

      Normally if a mechanic makes a diagnosis and attempts to fix it but it later turns out to be wrong, he has to absorb the cost of that mistake.

      The difference here is that the first mechanic made a a suggestion, but the second mechanic either didn't check it properly or it couldn't be known (like mentioned earlier), but now he doesn't want to take fault for his work and is now blaming the first mechanic because he made the recommendation originally and the OP is following his lead.

      • kiitos on 18/06/2020 - 09:02

        Normally if a mechanic makes a diagnosis and attempts to fix it but it later turns out to be wrong, he has to absorb the cost of that mistake.

        Do they though? Would they pull out the part they replaced and put the old one back? Would they absorb the 2 X labour to do that? I imagine some would, at least, bill the labour involved.

        • Herbse on 18/06/2020 - 09:04

          They generally overcharge anyway to cover some of these costs. But that extra time and parts wouldn't be shown on the bill, or else the customer can argue that the mechanic should know better and is trying to rip them off for frivolous testing and replacing of parts that didn't need replacing.

  • Bargainbattles on 17/06/2020 - 16:17

    What did your mechanic say about the wheel bearing when you removed it ? Was it a problem? How don't you know that your car was making a noise and then the same noise was still there when you returned for the inspection?

  • MS Paint on 17/06/2020 - 22:03
    +2

    How did the hearing go today?

    • Loopenip on 17/06/2020 - 23:42

      Personally I'm interested in how it went so we can see what advice was good / not good

  • Taine on 17/06/2020 - 22:09

    I would probably just leave it at a scathing review, but always good to see someone standing up for the little guy

    • Herbse on 18/06/2020 - 00:04
      +5

      A scathing review for the mechanic who was paid $85 to check the car and found a noise but wasn't paid to look into what it was exactly because that's not part of the check

      Or a scathing review for the second mechanic who was paid $245 specifically for fixing the noise, but he didn't do the right job and turns out it was something else. Which happens regularly with any mechanical work.

  • Herbse on 17/06/2020 - 23:57

    When getting a roadworthy, the mechanic will say "noise from bearing, replace this part". With mechanics it's a best guess until you actually replace it, especially when it comes to noises and wheels because of all the different parts involved.

    If you had left it with the original person, they would have had to gone through the pain of figuring out where the noise is coming from and fix it eventually. But you went elsewhere and they didn't do the job correctly. Your argument should be with your second mechanic, not the person doing the check.

  • iknowtj on 18/06/2020 - 09:36
    +1

    Keen to hear about how this went.

  • Hangryuman on 18/06/2020 - 09:57
    +7

    OP said on 16th hearing was 'tomorrow' - and last commented here at 14:32 on the 16th

    it's now 18th and I didn't see the result - guess it didn't go the way Karen hoped ?

    sorry - unemployed Karen - who had the time, and wasn't worried about the money, just the principle …

  • Scantu on 18/06/2020 - 10:18
    +2

    I think that is misconduct by the mediator - you should report it. The mediator should not be telling you about those sorts of things, they are there to MEDIATE only, and in my experience they aren't actually good at their only function.

    Unless you requested that advice (To which the mediator should have declined, regardless) they should not have told you what you do or don't need for the hearing.

    QCAT doesn't take points of law, their decisions are a little on the arbitrary side - they are not a court.

    • brendanm on 19/06/2020 - 19:57
      +3

      I suggest taking the mediator to qcat.

      • pegaxs on 19/06/2020 - 22:10
        +2

        Not before you ask another mediator to mediate the mediation that was advised from the initial mediator…

  • Herbse on 18/06/2020 - 13:44
    +1

    any update?

    • pegaxs on 18/06/2020 - 16:50
      +7

      Member since and last seen are the same date… This is never being put to bed. Don't hold your breath waiting for a troll to fill in the results.

  • lonewolf on 19/06/2020 - 15:51

    My mechanic blatantly caused me to have 2 accidents in my car, where NRMA repairers as well as Toyota service and my new mechanic all looked at the car and tested the car and saw that the mechanic had lied and instead of putting new bendix brakes like i had paid for, had put on a used no frills chinese brand that was pretty much worn out. I noticed the brakes felt weird and didnt seem to stop as well and skidded a lot more, i went back to the mechanics multiple times who "took a look" and said its fine he has it all set up and tuned right. I had 2 accidents directly because of it and the NRMA repairers and toyota told me i was lucky they werent worse and no-one had been injured or killed as the brakes were in a terrible shape. Mechanic was Payless on cosgrove road in South strathfield / Enfield. Problem was i think its hard to really get things done about it so i left it alone after approaching the mechanic about what the others had told me and the mechanic just got angry and told me he has been doing brakes for 20 years and the other guys dont know anything.

    • whooah1979 on 19/06/2020 - 16:21
      +1

      I had 2 accidents directly because of it

      There is big money in this if you can substantiate your claim.

      • lonewolf on 20/06/2020 - 17:53

        Yeah the NRMA repairers even said i should do this as the 2 accidents I had to pay for the excess charges both times as well as who knows what that did to my premiums. But problem is how do i prove it, When i went to the mechanic after the first time he just got angry and said he knows what he is doing and how does he know if the other people havent changed anything or done something themselves or that i havent taken it elsewhere.

        Interestingly i spoke to other mechanics in the area who actually told me that they had heard nothing but complaints about the way he runs his company and that there is always customers coming back with more problems and issues. Then again they are the competition so they may say that…

    • Herbse on 19/06/2020 - 18:34

      skidded a lot more

      Do you mean the tyres skidded a lot more when you pressed the brakes?

      • lonewolf on 20/06/2020 - 17:58

        Sorry i shouldnt say skidded, its hard to explain, it can only be explained when you actually experience it. So the NRMA repairers found the same issue i found, which was when you break very softly at very low speeds, it seems to be fine but when you break quickly or even moderaly quick at normal speeds (say 40km and above) then its like it takes time to catch or take hold. Its like it starts to break then loses traction or something and doesnt properly break for an extra second or 2 than normal. So basically my breaking distance is extended enough to the point that i had 2 accidents where in the past they were normal situations and i wouldnt have had those accidents. Have been driving for 20 years with 2 accidents prior to having 2 in 6 months. After the second accident and the NRMA repairers saying the guy still hasnt fixed the issue and its still there, i took it to toyota to have a professional brake test which it failed miserably due to the crappy used worn out brake pads the guy had put on. Then took it to another mechanic who replaced the brake pads and since then no accidents since. This was a few years ago so i cant really take them to court now, I wasnt sure how to prove it and even NRMA wasnt that interested. They said just go to fair trading or something.

  • payless69 on 19/06/2020 - 17:42

    First post of op, no real detail, so much time wasted. Would have been nice to know model and age of car.

  • immortalbjr on 19/06/2020 - 18:33
    +1

    Get over it. Your wasting your own time and your mechanics.

    Mechanical issues is one of those things sometimes it takes trial and error. I've been using the same 2 mechanics (have several machines, trucks etc) for years and sometimes they replace things that didnt need replacing in the end, but I dont throw a tantrum over it. If your not happy use someone else next time.

  • BartholemewH on 19/06/2020 - 19:47
    +5

    Plot twist. OP's gearbox has straight cut gears.

  • CalmLemons on 20/06/2020 - 00:55

    Point of laws means they need to have violated a law set out by one of the Acts/Regulations in your state or Australia.

    First you need to work out what Act it is, e.g. Consumer Law.

    Second, what part of consumer law they broke?

    The mediator is motioning to the applicant that they have no case and they would most likely award in favour of the mechanic. They do this all the time, as it is MEDIATION. You try to resolve things before asking someone else to decide.

    You would need to prove 100% beyond a doubt that there was no chance whatsoever that the ball bearing might not have been the problem. The mechanic could argue that possibly a noisy ball bearing could lead to mechanical failure.

    Just because someone is ugly, doesn't mean they are breaking the law.

    • payless69 on 20/06/2020 - 10:38

      Qcat means it is a tribunal the mediator will not take sides instead wants the 2 parties to mediate. Their primary purpose in a social state is to rule mostly in fafours of disadvantaged ex tennants, neighbourhood disputes and what its old mame calls it small claims. QLD brought in a new act to scare car dealers by putting up the limit to 100k. However if they think a claim makes no sense they can adjourn. Just another way to say go back to sort it out or spend more legal money than it is worth.

  • Baysew on 11/11/2021 - 16:26

    Any update on this issue?

    • spackbace on 12/11/2021 - 15:23
      +1

      Last Seen
      03/07/2020

      Good luck!

      • Baysew on 12/11/2021 - 15:29

        Surely the OP didn't just join and make one post and won't provide any update to their dilemma?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join