Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The costs of litigation in the US have increased so much that it is not worthwhile to sue over a loss less than about $50,000 nowadays. (This of course does not apply to small claims, but that's a different kettle of fish).
If your loss is greater than $50,000, then perhaps move forward with a lawyer. If not, I would look to my insurance company to pay for the damage, and they would possibly subrogate the claim to the mechanic's liability insurer.
Be careful of "expert" witnesses.
Many years ago I had a Dodge W150 pickup with the 318 engine. That engine has a "silent" cam gear (nylon covered gear teeth) running against a steel crankshaft gear. When the nylon covering gets worn, it can jump time. I had that happen. I replaced the timing gears, and the engine would not start, so I did a compression test. No compression. I removed the heads and found several bent valves, and a few dents in piston crowns. Installed rebuilt heads, and the engine ran perfectly.
Fast forward a few years, and I responded to a question about the Dodge/Chrysler 318 jumping time with a warning about it being an interference engine. An "expert" in Dodge/Chrysler engines jumped all over me, saying that the 273/318/360 engines were NOT interference engines, and I had no idea what I was talking about. His "expertise" was better than my personal experience, obviously.
My point is, "experts" often leave a great deal to be desired! Be very careful who you pick for "expert" testimony.
Good luck.
Are you 100% sure that the engine was truly "non-interference"? You never stated what engine that you are talking about, only that "many experts have said". The reality is that just because an engine is non-interference, in that the piston and valve have adequate clearance, it does not mean that it is universally non-interference. In any multi-cam engine there is a very high chance that a timing belt/chain failure could cause valves to contact other valves, resulting in them being bent. Many engines are listed as non-interference (meaning that the pistons will not contact the valves) that could in fact suffer severe damage from valve-to-valve interference in the event of a timing belt/chain failure.
Just make sure you really have all of your i's dotted and t's crossed before you assume that your mechanic did in fact rip you off.
This is not legal advice. The only legal advice here that is valid is: "hire a lawyer" (except that is probably too expensive). Trying to DIY can very easily go south for you.
The odds of you actually going to trial ont his are very slim. It will almost definitely settle. But just for fun, here are my tactics in cross examination and how I would apply them to this case.
Second only to your opening statement, Cross-examination is where most cases are won or lost. By the time you get to closing argument most of the time, your judge or jury has already made up their minds. Getting someone to change their mind after they are convinced of something borders on impossible. Direct testimony is often viewed with skepticism. However a really effective cross very often decides the case. In cross, you are really presenting your arguments and forcing the other witness to agree, or you are setting them up to conclusively prove they are lying. If you are not doing one of those two things, do not bother with the line of questioning.
Ask only questions you already know the answer to, or where any answer other than the one you want will make him look like an idiot or a liar.
Do not ask open ended questions like Why . . . . ? Ask leading questions where their answer should be yes or no. If they answer with other than yes or no, you can ask the judge to instruct them to stop evading your question.
So, if unauthorized repairs was the issue: "Did anyone authorize you to do these repairs in writing?"
Rather than "Why did you do these repairs?"
Or "In a non-interference engine it is not possible for the pistons to hit the valves is it?"
Rather than "Why did you tell me the piston had hit the valves? "
Be prepared with a book or two that clearly diagrams the difference and/or clearly says non interference engine pistons cannot hit the valves. You might be able to get a judge to accept an affidavit from a dealer mechanic if the affidavit clearly qualifies the mechanic as an expert on your car, and is signed under oath, and is used only as impeachment evidence.
It seems unlikely you are going to hire an expert for this unless it is a Bugatti Veyron or a Koenigsegg Agera RS
Figure out what you need him to say, and then work backwards to develop a path of questions that he cannot answer adverse to you that will lead you to the answer you need.
In other words:
You are a mechanic?
You have a car repair business called Shady Car repair int he city of Bugatti?
I brought my car to you for repair is that correct?
Did my car have a broken timing belt?
You said the engine had to be replaced because the piston had hit the valves and bent them right?
You replaced the engine in my car?
You charged me for the full engine replacement?
And that was $10?
DO NOT ASK "There was nothing else wrong with my engine was there?"
Replacing the timing belt would cost $2 right?
Have you ever heard of a non-interference engine? (if he says no, then he is saying he is an incompetent mechanic and you can make a scene of it. You know nothing about non-interference engines? All shocked and surprised - don't over do it).
With a non-interference engine the pistons do not hit the valves when the timing belt breaks do they? (This you have to be prepared to prove with an expert or a plethora of clear statements from recognized books and/or an affidavit from a dealer mechanic in case he says that is not true).
My car has a non interference engine doesn't it? (easy to prove).
You are pretty much done at this point.
Be very careful when you score a point, do not press it or give him the opportunity to clarify it or qualify a prior answer. Move on to another subject immediately and without a pause.
This is just an example, not specifically what you should do. You will have to work out your path on your own. You should spend at least a day or two working out the path of questioning. Preparing your questions and your proof of each question. When I was trying cases, on a big case, I would spend literally hundreds of hours preparing for the key cross examination int he case. Obviously you are not going to spend hundreds of hours, but 10 - 30 would not be out of line.
The best cross is short and pointed. Most attorneys screw up cross by asking too many follow up questions when they score a point or by asking opened ended questions like why. . .? or simply "really?" or "did you just say . . . . ?"
Cross is for you to make your points, not for him to state his side of things. Do not give him the opportunity. Be super prepared and fire off the next question as soon as you get an answer. The more time he has to think, the more he will think of ways to prevaricate.
Look at the judge, not at him, this allows you to see how the judge is reacting to your questions. Only look at him for dramatic effect, like a sudden stare when you know he just lied. You can also use silence very effectively because it makes people uncomfortable. However you do not have time to learn to use this tool effectively so it is probably better to not try. It can be seen as an invitation to add to an answer if it is not used correctly.
Practice, get your biggest smart-ass friend to play the mechanic. You will get snide answers, evasive answers ect. Figure out how to ask questions differently in order to minimize this. Learn to revise your questions ont he fly. Learn to react to surprises. OK it took me 5 years to get good at this part, but you can at least work on it and improve some. Edit: Forget the smart-ass friend, get NJGoat to play the mechanic. He just gave you the perfect example of what can happen if you ask the wrong question. Asking the wrong question is very often the nail in the coffin for many lawyers. Sometime I have almost jumped out of my seat with glee when I heard a cross question. the answer has so much more impact when it comes in response to a smug question by the other side.
Poker face. Never look surprised or shocked or panicked. If you are surprised shocked or panicked, ask the Judge "Your honor may I please take a minute?" Then go pretend to look through some papers while you figure out what to do. You can even ask for a fifteen minute break, but many judges will say no. Only the worst judges will refuse to give you a minute to organize your thoughts or look for a document though.
Organize your documents into a notebook and have them ready to present. Have the right number of copies at hand. Have the title page or whatever you have to prove a given book is considered a valid resource.
You will have to look at the court rules to ensure your documents are properly marked. You may have to exchange the documents ahead of time. Sometimes only direct evidence needs to be exchanged which allows you to sandbag with rebuttal documents. Be careful though, having your document excluded can be disastrous.
Be prepared to get answers you do not expect, or to have the judge tell you you cannot ask a certain question. What he really means is you cannot ask the question in the way you are asking it. Most questions you can ask if you figure to the right way to ask them.
Read the rules of evidence for your State (they are pretty much the same in every state), especially try to figure out the hearsay rule. You will not understand it completely (no one does, not even your judge) but at least have some understanding of some of the exceptions.
Understand the difference between direct evidence (evidence of what you claim), rebuttal evidence (evidence the disproves what he claims), and impeachment evidence (evidence that proves he just lied). Almost anything can be used for impeachment, so it is a good way to get things in that you otherwise could not get admitted.
Understand the concept of foundation evidence. before you can use a document, you must establish what it is and that is is an accurate copy etc. Before you can ask a witness a question you must establish that he has reason to know what you are asking him. So for example 'You are a mechanic?" before you can ask him any questions about what an interference engine is.
It can be very complicated and difficult. Some judges will help you along, some will crack down on you and stop every question you try to ask. I have seen cases where a DIY party, or even a lawyer is unable to ask anything, because they do not understand what the need to do to get the question allowed. I have seen lawyers sit down in the middle of opening statement because objections were sustained. I even saw one lawyer start crying because I shut down his opening with objections. I felt bad, but it was necessary and correct. Some judges will just sit and say nothing. Some will work on other things and only listen with half an ear. One judge used to go on the internet and look at porn during long boring trials. Watch your judge, cater to them. If they are bored, change topics or move along faster. Never be rude or condescending to a judge. Never lie to a judge. You can ruin your entire case if you make the judge hate you.
If the other side objects to your question say nothing and look at the judge. If he does not speak, explain why your question is valid. If he says "overruled," say nothing and turn to the witness for an answer. If he says sustained - ask a different question. It is ok to ask the judge what is wrong with the question, but you may not understand the answer. You can argue with his decision on an objection, but you will almost always lose. If so, just try to think of a different way to get to the subject. There is always a way. I have never ever been unable to get to the line of questioning I want, just sometimes you have to go backwards and establish better foundation, or come at it from the side. Make the judge want to hear the answer and he will be more likely to guide you to the correct way to ask.
you can object the witnesses answer if it is non-responsive or hearsay. Otherwise for the most part, you can only object to questions asked by the other party. I have no idea how you can possibly figure out objections. Sometimes you cna just say"Objection" and the judge will already know the question is bad and sustain the objection without you ever having to say what is wrong with the question. if you do object to his questions, do so only very very rarely, otherwise you will lose credibility.
Most important, you have better make absolutely 200% certain you are right that there is no way the piston can hit the valves in your engine. No way no matter what. Ask ten people. Read ten books. Be super prepared on this. Know more about it than anyone - period.
It is all about preparation but also being flexible and able to think on your feet - and about not asking the one question too many when you just landed a "Gotchya" Almost everyone does this even seasoned lawyers.
This is one tenth of what actually goes into a good cross. There are a lot of psychology issues. Timing can be critical. Even the time of day the examination takes place can make a world of difference. Very very few lawyers even with decades of experience are good at cross examination. Most turn it into a waste of time. While I had other issues to improve on, I was phenomenally good at cross. Mostly becasue I was super well prepared for it.
If you do actually go to trial on this, let us know how it comes out.
"I talked to attorneys. They recommend for self representation due to cost."
There's your problem. You will be playing on a ball field in which you have no prior experience, training or even understanding of the game's rules. Welcome to civil litigation.
Just curious, what is the value of the vehicle, and how much in dollar damages are we speaking about here?
Best of luck,
Rich
(As an expert witness, in a totally different field, I bill out at $250 an hour. Justice ain't cheap...)
Yeah, it's hard to believe a lawyer would give this advice especially if the other side has an attorney. If they do the OP has zero chance of winning.
Timing belt slip of spindle. It happened on a non-interference engine. The mechanic steer the customer to put a new engine and sold piston hit valve story. The non-interference engine has enough clearance between piston & valves, so piston hit valve story is BS and replacing the engine unnecessary repair. Only timing belt & associate items replacement is enough to put the car back on the road (as per many expert).
Thanks for sharing.
What you really need is a mechanic who will testify for you during your case in chief. He needs to have good qualifications. However, he needs to say that the repair that was done was totally unnecessary and explain why. You're explaining this yourself is probably insufficient.
If I were a judge, unless you had a witness like that I probably wouldn't rule for you.
This is not legal advice. The only legal advice here that is valid is: "hire a lawyer" (except that is probably too expensive). Trying to DIY can very easily go south for you.
The odds of you actually going to trial ont his are very slim. It will almost definitely settle. But just for fun, here are my tactics in cross examination and how I would apply them to this case.
Second only to your opening statement, Cross-examination is where most cases are won or lost. By the time you get to closing argument most of the time, your judge or jury has already made up their minds. Getting someone to change their mind after they are convinced of something borders on impossible. Direct testimony is often viewed with skepticism. However a really effective cross very often decides the case. In cross, you are really presenting your arguments and forcing the other witness to agree, or you are setting them up to conclusively prove they are lying. If you are not doing one of those two things, do not bother with the line of questioning.
Ask only questions you already know the answer to, or where any answer other than the one you want will make him look like an idiot or a liar.
Do not ask open ended questions like Why . . . . ? Ask leading questions where their answer should be yes or no. If they answer with other than yes or no, you can ask the judge to instruct them to stop evading your question.
So, if unauthorized repairs was the issue: "Did anyone authorize you to do these repairs in writing?"
Rather than "Why did you do these repairs?"
Or "In a non-interference engine it is not possible for the pistons to hit the valves is it?"
Rather than "Why did you tell me the piston had hit the valves? "
Be prepared with a book or two that clearly diagrams the difference and/or clearly says non interference engine pistons cannot hit the valves. You might be able to get a judge to accept an affidavit from a dealer mechanic if the affidavit clearly qualifies the mechanic as an expert on your car, and is signed under oath, and is used only as impeachment evidence.
It seems unlikely you are going to hire an expert for this unless it is a Bugatti Veyron or a Koenigsegg Agera RS
Figure out what you need him to say, and then work backwards to develop a path of questions that he cannot answer adverse to you that will lead you to the answer you need.
In other words:
You are a mechanic?
You have a car repair business called Shady Car repair int he city of Bugatti?
I brought my car to you for repair is that correct?
Did my car have a broken timing belt?
You said the engine had to be replaced because the piston had hit the valves and bent them right?
You replaced the engine in my car?
You charged me for the full engine replacement?
And that was $10?
DO NOT ASK "There was nothing else wrong with my engine was there?"
Replacing the timing belt would cost $2 right?
Have you ever heard of a non-interference engine? (if he says no, then he is saying he is an incompetent mechanic and you can make a scene of it. You know nothing about non-interference engines? All shocked and surprised - don't over do it).
With a non-interference engine the pistons do not hit the valves when the timing belt breaks do they? (This you have to be prepared to prove with an expert or a plethora of clear statements from recognized books and/or an affidavit from a dealer mechanic in case he says that is not true).
My car has a non interference engine doesn't it? (easy to prove).
You are pretty much done at this point.
Be very careful when you score a point, do not press it or give him the opportunity to clarify it or qualify a prior answer. Move on to another subject immediately and without a pause.
This is just an example, not specifically what you should do. You will have to work out your path on your own. You should spend at least a day or two working out the path of questioning. Preparing your questions and your proof of each question. When I was trying cases, on a big case, I would spend literally hundreds of hours preparing for the key cross examination int he case. Obviously you are not going to spend hundreds of hours, but 10 - 30 would not be out of line.
The best cross is short and pointed. Most attorneys screw up cross by asking too many follow up questions when they score a point or by asking opened ended questions like why. . .? or simply "really?" or "did you just say . . . . ?"
Cross is for you to make your points, not for him to state his side of things. Do not give him the opportunity. Be super prepared and fire off the next question as soon as you get an answer. The more time he has to think, the more he will think of ways to prevaricate.
Look at the judge, not at him, this allows you to see how the judge is reacting to your questions. Only look at him for dramatic effect, like a sudden stare when you know he just lied. You can also use silence very effectively because it makes people uncomfortable. However you do not have time to learn to use this tool effectively so it is probably better to not try. It can be seen as an invitation to add to an answer if it is not used correctly.
Practice, get your biggest smart-ass friend to play the mechanic. You will get snide answers, evasive answers ect. Figure out how to ask questions differently in order to minimize this. Learn to revise your questions ont he fly. Learn to react to surprises. OK it took me 5 years to get good at this part, but you can at least work on it and improve some. Edit: Forget the smart-ass friend, get NJGoat to play the mechanic. He just gave you the perfect example of what can happen if you ask the wrong question. Asking the wrong question is very often the nail in the coffin for many lawyers. Sometime I have almost jumped out of my seat with glee when I heard a cross question. the answer has so much more impact when it comes in response to a smug question by the other side.
Poker face. Never look surprised or shocked or panicked. If you are surprised shocked or panicked, ask the Judge "Your honor may I please take a minute?" Then go pretend to look through some papers while you figure out what to do. You can even ask for a fifteen minute break, but many judges will say no. Only the worst judges will refuse to give you a minute to organize your thoughts or look for a document though.
Organize your documents into a notebook and have them ready to present. Have the right number of copies at hand. Have the title page or whatever you have to prove a given book is considered a valid resource.
You will have to look at the court rules to ensure your documents are properly marked. You may have to exchange the documents ahead of time. Sometimes only direct evidence needs to be exchanged which allows you to sandbag with rebuttal documents. Be careful though, having your document excluded can be disastrous.
Be prepared to get answers you do not expect, or to have the judge tell you you cannot ask a certain question. What he really means is you cannot ask the question in the way you are asking it. Most questions you can ask if you figure to the right way to ask them.
Read the rules of evidence for your State (they are pretty much the same in every state), especially try to figure out the hearsay rule. You will not understand it completely (no one does, not even your judge) but at least have some understanding of some of the exceptions.
Understand the difference between direct evidence (evidence of what you claim), rebuttal evidence (evidence the disproves what he claims), and impeachment evidence (evidence that proves he just lied). Almost anything can be used for impeachment, so it is a good way to get things in that you otherwise could not get admitted.
Understand the concept of foundation evidence. before you can use a document, you must establish what it is and that is is an accurate copy etc. Before you can ask a witness a question you must establish that he has reason to know what you are asking him. So for example 'You are a mechanic?" before you can ask him any questions about what an interference engine is.
It can be very complicated and difficult. Some judges will help you along, some will crack down on you and stop every question you try to ask. I have seen cases where a DIY party, or even a lawyer is unable to ask anything, because they do not understand what the need to do to get the question allowed. I have seen lawyers sit down in the middle of opening statement because objections were sustained. I even saw one lawyer start crying because I shut down his opening with objections. I felt bad, but it was necessary and correct. Some judges will just sit and say nothing. Some will work on other things and only listen with half an ear. One judge used to go on the internet and look at porn during long boring trials. Watch your judge, cater to them. If they are bored, change topics or move along faster. Never be rude or condescending to a judge. Never lie to a judge. You can ruin your entire case if you make the judge hate you.
If the other side objects to your question say nothing and look at the judge. If he does not speak, explain why your question is valid. If he says "overruled," say nothing and turn to the witness for an answer. If he says sustained - ask a different question. It is ok to ask the judge what is wrong with the question, but you may not understand the answer. You can argue with his decision on an objection, but you will almost always lose. If so, just try to think of a different way to get to the subject. There is always a way. I have never ever been unable to get to the line of questioning I want, just sometimes you have to go backwards and establish better foundation, or come at it from the side. Make the judge want to hear the answer and he will be more likely to guide you to the correct way to ask.
you can object the witnesses answer if it is non-responsive or hearsay. Otherwise for the most part, you can only object to questions asked by the other party. I have no idea how you can possibly figure out objections. Sometimes you cna just say"Objection" and the judge will already know the question is bad and sustain the objection without you ever having to say what is wrong with the question. if you do object to his questions, do so only very very rarely, otherwise you will lose credibility.
Most important, you have better make absolutely 200% certain you are right that there is no way the piston can hit the valves in your engine. No way no matter what. Ask ten people. Read ten books. Be super prepared on this. Know more about it than anyone - period.
It is all about preparation but also being flexible and able to think on your feet - and about not asking the one question too many when you just landed a "Gotchya" Almost everyone does this even seasoned lawyers.
This is one tenth of what actually goes into a good cross. There are a lot of psychology issues. Timing can be critical. Even the time of day the examination takes place can make a world of difference. Very very few lawyers even with decades of experience are good at cross examination. Most turn it into a waste of time. While I had other issues to improve on, I was phenomenally good at cross. Mostly becasue I was super well prepared for it.
If you do actually go to trial on this, let us know how it comes out.
Yeah, it's hard to believe a lawyer would give this advice especially if the other side has an attorney. If they do the OP has zero chance of winning.
I would not give this advice. If you DIY you will probably lose and then come back and sue me for giving you bad advice. I would simply tell you the case will cost a minimum of r$50,000 and I will need that in a retainer up front. If it ends up costing more than that you will have to increase the payment. If it happens to settle or somehow otherwise cost less than $50,000 you will eventually get a refund of the balance.
Then you will go away on your own, without me giving you advice that you could potentially sue me for.
This is not a case a lawyer wants. If you lose, your client will be very unhappy and possible sue you. If you win, you client will still be unhappy because the lawsuit will cost more than replacing the car and they may sue you. Usually the client talks you into accepting a retainer that is too small promising they will do a lot of the work themselves, or they will add to it if it becomes necessary. Win or lose, you end up with them owing you a bunch of money that you are never going to collect. Even if they do not sue you, they will tell people you are terrible. This is a no win case for an attorney. That is why they told the OP to go away. They just did it the wrong way. Of course a lawsuit based on that "advice" would have little to no chance of succeeding, but the goal is to not get sued and not have a client badmouthing you and not have unpaid and noncollectable fees outstanding. The lawyer only wins here by getting you to leave.
Sorry that may sound callous, but it is true.
Oh wait, was it actually a Koenigsegg? That would change everything. Then they were stupid for telling you to go away.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
