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.
I remember those days when one car emergency could set you back. It truly must be nice to not have that frame of reference.
No need for that frame of reference - she borrowed someone's car for two months. Did she pay car insurance on it? Did she have her own insurance in case of an accident? She wouldn't have had transportation otherwise. How much would it have cost her to get around without the car? Putting in some transmission fluid and paying for the cheapest battery you can buy is not much when you consider that just the insurance to cover the car was costing the owner more money for those two months.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mochamajesty
Well, since everyone wants to make assumptions, I will also.
Let's assume that the OP made the repairs with full expectation of reimbursement from her aunt.
No one is obligated to REPAIR someone's vehicle if they weren't directly responsible , period.
And you get signs that your battery is going dead (Low headlights and interior lights, etc.) and again, the transmission leak came as no surprise.
My car battery has gone dead without any signs of it. And if the OP is in a cold climate and didn't turn the car on for a few days, that could cause the battery to go dead. Also, the OP didn't repair a transmission leak, nor should she have expected a free car to be in perfect condition. The OP gave up her car without apparently having any backup plan - it was really kind of her aunt to lend her the vehicle. If she had to pay for a battery and some transmission fluid, then so be it - it would have cost her less than any other option.
As to the OP's vehicle - did she really give up a car because it required $100 of maintenance? That would seem silly, since alternate transportation would cost her far more than that. It's more likely the car required a very high repair cost, or needed more maintenance/repairs than it was worth. And it's not her aunt's fault that the OP gave up her car.
Anyhow - the cost of two months of insurance would have likely cost at least $120 total (or more). That's something the owner wouldn't have had to pay if the OP wasn't driving the car around. Having to put out something similar for a cheap battery and some transmission fluid may not have made the OP happy, but it's less than any other option she could have come up with for transportation, and it's the same or less cost than what her aunt paid for insurance during the time OP was driving it.
The OP got a fantastic deal. She should just be happy instead of complaining about it. And in the future, she may need to readjust her expectations - it's not too often that people get something for nothing, especially something that lasts for two months.
I can't believe almost everyone is attacking the OP. Replacing a battery and transmission fluid is something that the owner of the vehicle should have been taking care of all along. Would everyone still be attacking OP if these repairs were needed if they had only borrowed the car one day? Then it's no different just because they happened to be borrowing the car for a longer period of time.
This wasn't a rental car - and if it was, then you can be damn sure that the rental car company is the one who would have paid for these repairs.
Just because someone does a favor of lending you something doesn't mean that you now take responsibility for pre-existing problems, not something that was caused by the borrower's use. If OP had been house sitting and it turned out that because of lack of maintenance, the house needed a new roof while they happened to be the one staying there, does that mean the house sitter is supposed to pay for a roof??
Batteries just have a way of running until they don't. I mean, heck, I replaced a battery two months ago. No sign of it running down until, one day, it died. So? Was the family member supposed to run diagnostics before handing the keys over to the OP? The car was in running condition when she provided it. It was up to the OP to return it in precisely the same way, short of the transmission falling out.
Your analogy of the rental car doesn't work, by the way, because she isn't actually paying for the use of the car. If you pay money -- the operative phrase -- for the use of the car, then you expect a car working in tip-top condition. But since the OP is getting use of a car for two months for free, she is on the receiving end of a lot of generosity. I mean, heck, what if she drove the car enough miles over those two months to warrant an oil change? Is the car owner on the hook for that, too?
While we're talking about bad analogies, let's move onto the one regarding the house. Replacement of a battery and transmission fluid are minor issues, while the replacement of a roof is a major structural one. The better analogy would be if several light bulbs went out and the flapper in the toilet needed replacing.
The other problem is one of attitude. The OP wants all the privileges of borrowing a large and expensive piece of machinery for an extended period of time without feeling she should do anything in return. As a result, she comes off as unbelievably petty.
Personally, if I were in her shoes, I would have happily paid for the transmission fluid and battery without even thinking about it. Because that would be my way of expressing a small bit of gratitude for unbelievable generosity, not to mention a way of recompensing the car's owner. To me, handing one's benefactor an itemized list and saying, "Thanks for the car. Here's what you owe me," is an insult to that person's kindness and consideration. It is the attitude of a person far more interested in taking than giving, a person who thinks the world revolves around herself.
Well, since everyone wants to make assumptions, I will also.
Let's assume that the OP made the repairs with full expectation of reimbursement from her aunt.
No one is obligated to REPAIR someone's vehicle if they weren't directly responsible , period.
Precisely. No one is responsible for the repair, and yet OP made the conscientious choice to do so because being mobile was more valuable than the price of a battery and transmission fluid.
Quote:
And you get signs that your battery is going dead (Low headlights and interior lights, etc.) and again, the transmission leak came as no surprise.
If the car came in that condition, then why did the OP not just let the relative know that they appreciate the kind gesture, but that they could not afford to repair it after having seen these signs of trouble?
Quote:
And what do you mean 'if' it is a lot of money? The OP specifically stated that she gave up her car because she couldn't afford the maintenance. Why is it a stretch to assume that she couldn't afford to maintain her aunt's car as well?
OP gave up their own car because the cost of repairs was likely much more than that of a transmission fluid exchange and a battery. Otherwise why not just put the money into repairing their own car? As already written several times: OP valued being able to get around via the borrowed car more than the cost of repairs, in exactly the same way that selling their own car provided more value than repairing it for continued use.
Quote:
In your second paragraph, you admit that you would have offered to reimburse (why split the cost? It's your car) but since the aunt didn't, it's automatically the OP's fault?
What you left out was the conditional preceding my offer of reimbursement. At any rate OP did not clearly shared how the subject of reimbursement was broached.
OP - did you not have a way to contact the aunt to discuss the options?
At the time the battery went dead, why not call the aunt and work out the details then? A short conversation could have prevented you spending money on a new battery.
Instead, you took it upon yourself to service the car with the battery (which IS a maintenance item - just ask any car dealer) and the transmission fluid assuming, erroneously, that she would be obligated to repay you.
Even free things can cost money. Granted, this cost more than you were prepared to dish out, but you have to be prepared in the event an emergency arose - and it did.
I'm on a limited budget, so the money spent was a big deal to me. Right now, a new battery isn't "minor" maintenance to me! I would have accepted the transmission fluid costs. No, I'm not going to do this again. If the situation were reversed, I'd feel responsible to reimburse someone who spent $$ to maintain MY property. I returned the car washed, cleaned with a full tank of gas, in addition to "effusive" thanks, which were more that I got it with. I'm aware of the insurance implications had I been in an accident, was careful to only drive when necessary, and checked that I would be covered in the eventuality of an accident.
No, I'm not entitled or a "brat," and I've helped this relative A LOT in the past. Now that I'm in a position of needing help, it hurts, and I can't believe the extremely negative words typed here by others--hope you're never in reduced circumstances!
My I (as kindly as possible) suggest that when you start a thread (especially what is essentially a rant thread) you include every bit of information that you can in the OP or be available to respond to every post that brings up new questions/issues immediately so that people don't have to feel that they are prying out information from you bit by bit and being chastised when they make a comment that you disagree with.
Yours is not the only or worst thread that has done this recently but it is a bit annoying to those of us who want to respond with truly helpful posts so please think carefully before you hit submit on your initial post. If you let people jump to conclusions they will. It just seems cruel to me (because each added piece of information can make the last poster seem like a fool just because they didn't have all the information to base their assessment on and then you come back to add some critical things or to just refute their 'opinion' which was innocently based on incomplete knowledge of your situation) - and I am sure it doesn't make people want to read your threads in future.
I think for a battery and some transmission fluid you should just eat the cost since you went and paid for it in the first place. Though if it were me, I would have replaced the battery since that's a maintenance thing, but as soon as it needed transmission fluid, that would have been the end of me borrowing that car. I'm not a car person, but the last time I checked cars don't just run low on transmission fluid unless something is wrong with it and the transmission needs replaced/repaired, and that's no cheap fix. Also, I would have shopped around at junkyards for a battery, might seem cheap of me, but I know plenty of people who get still good batteries from wrecked cars that last for 5+ years for $40 to $60. If it were something big (radiator, fuel pump, ect) and it wasn't caused by you, then yes she should pay for it because those are costly repairs, but for a battery and some tranny fluid, meh.
The biggest problem here is that the OP fixed the car without checking with the owner then assumed the owner would reimburse. Perhaps the owner would have not wanted the car fixed. Or had a spare battery ready to install. Or does the work themselves and would have saved money. And the list goes on and on. When the car needed fixing the OP should have contacted the owner and discussed if it needs to be done, who's paying, who will be or not be reimbursed etc..
You should never assume someone is going to reimburse you for something you paid on their behalf unless it was pre-agreed. Perhaps the aunt had a maintenance plan that would have covered the cost of the battery if she had just asked. Even the transmission fluid. I have to say that I am having a hard time understanding why the OP did not contact the aunt to let her know that her car had trouble in the first place. If I were to lend my car to someone and it suddenly needed repairs, I would want to know. Then again I don't lend my car to people, for many many reasons. Nightmare stories like this are a good example.
OP whether or not you were responsible for the costs, and you probably weren't, it is ungrateful and impolite to ask for reimbursement of such a small sum. Yes I realize it isnt a small amount to you, but you made the choices you did and now you have to live with the result. If you couldn't afford it, you should have let her know and told her that you were leaving the car until she returned and could take care of it.
The biggest problem here is that the OP fixed the car without checking with the owner then assumed the owner would reimburse. Perhaps the owner would have not wanted the car fixed. Or had a spare battery ready to install. Or does the work themselves and would have saved money. And the list goes on and on. When the car needed fixing the OP should have contacted the owner and discussed if it needs to be done, who's paying, who will be or not be reimbursed etc..
This. Exactly. The whole situation could have been avoided if the OP had just discussed the fixes with the aunt first.
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.
