Audi dealer acts like douchebag...but I agree with them

[the Teuton]

http://jalopnik.com/5567283/audi-dealership-wont-help-customer-robbed-on-lot

Long story short: A guy can't pick up his car, so he asks the dealer to put his car outside of the gate so he can pick it up. When he gets there, the wheels are missing, and it's up on jacks, damaged. The dealer didn't contact him immediately about this.

He wants them to put up the $500 deductible to get his car fixed. I don't think they should. Here's why:

By putting the car outside of the wall with his permission, they can't be held responsible. Sure, they weren't the most swift with letting him know what was going on, but they did nothing wrong.

At work, we tell people to park at their own risk. A place that does that sort of business cannot be held responsible for having the car taken out of its security. They claim their video cameras were not working, but who knows? OTOH, there were wheels stolen from the BMW dealer where I worked a long time ago. The dealer had to replace them because they were in the storage barn for the dealer, under the dealer's watch.

I don't think this is the same sort of thing. Thoughts?

[AutobahnSHO]

so he asks the dealer to put his car outside of the gate so he can pick it up.

I didn't see that in the story.

[Tave]

I don't think this is the same sort of thing. Thoughts?

I think sometimes you do things to maintain good relationships with your customers. Even if the dealership isn't legally responsible, it may be in their best long-term interest to take care of a customer who just dropped $50,000 in their place of business.


Because I can guarantee he won't be buying another Audi from them any time soon if they don't try to make it right.

[thewizard16]

It's probably technically fine, but it certainly is bad customer service. Luxury car dealerships surely understand their client?le, and know that special requests should be taken seriously. Also, the security cameras weren't working? That seems either like a lie, or just reckless. I can't think of a luxury car company that would be comfortable leaving their lot without any surveillance or security.

At any rate, I understand the dealer's position and I don't disagree, I just think it's a reckless way to run a business that sells luxury cars.

[the Teuton]

At the BMW dealer, I made a point to greet all of the customers who I interacted with. I helped a guy learn how to use his climate control.

One day, there was a couple that had gotten pissed because their car was two hours late for delivery. I talked to a salesman and said that these people were buying a lux car and should be treated like they are, even if it was just a 3 Series. He told me that they were just purchasing a $40,000 car that happened to be at a BMW dealership. The luxury was the BMW itself -- not the dealer's workings.

That made me feel sick.

[Tave]

So it makes you feel sick...but you'd turn around and do the same thing?

[the Teuton]

So it makes you feel sick...but you'd turn around and do the same thing?

I'd explain to the person over the phone BEFOREHAND that authorizing the car to be set outside of the gate would defer any liability on the dealer's part. That's the difference.

It's not the same kind of situation at all.

[Tave]

I'd explain to the person over the phone BEFOREHAND that authorizing the car to be set outside of the gate would defer any liability on the dealer's part. That's the difference.

It's not the same kind of situation at all.

No, it's the same thing.

Your thread title says, "dealer acts like douchebag...but I agree with him."

Acting like a douche is acting like a douche. Just because you have the legal right to act like a douche, doesn't make it a wise move. Especially not for business.


My guess is those salespeople where completely within their rights to make that customer wait two hours.

Maybe they should have read him a disclaimer, "we are not responsible should delivery extend past X:XX o'clock."
Yeah, that would have made them less douchey.

[the Teuton]

But how can they be responsible for this when they were told to put the car outside?

[Tave]

But how can they be responsible for this when they were told to put the car outside?

As you pointed out, they're not. It's called "going the extra mile" = doing something you don't have to to keep your client happy.

[the Teuton]

As you pointed out, they're not. It's called "going the extra mile" = doing something you don't have to to keep your client happy.

I'll agree with that then.

[Rich]

Where in the article does it say they put the car outside the gate?

Just like will asked like 10 responses above...

[GoCougs]

Nah, dealer ain't responsible and the dealer doesn't gain any good will by reinforcing a poor business/legal decision, especially in the car dealer business where repeat business is the last thing on the dealer's mind.

The A4 owner is acting like a sissy cry baby. It sucks but he needs to buck up.

[Cookie Monster]

I don't see where it says they parked it outside the gate.

[Rich]

I don't see where it says they parked it outside the gate.

+1

[Rich]

I didn't see that in the story.

+1

[Rupert]

As a matter of fact, it says explicitly that the car was parked on the lot, behind the gate. Additionally, it says that the dealer did not tell him his car was ready until three minutes before closing, and so he had to leave it there (since no one was willing to stick around to wait for him).

To me, this screams dealer responsibility.

[Secret Chimp]

I didn't see that in the story.

It isn't. Hell, the picture shows it tipped on its bumper right there in the lot. Two-ton's reading comprehension sucks.

[Rupert]

Two tons of assumptions and fallacy!

[GoCougs]

As a matter of fact, it says explicitly that the car was parked on the lot, behind the gate. Additionally, it says that the dealer did not tell him his car was ready until three minutes before closing, and so he had to leave it there (since no one was willing to stick around to wait for him).

To me, this screams dealer responsibility.

If the A4 owner were a friend of yours and leaves it in your garage and the same thing happens, are you responsible?

[the Teuton]

As a matter of fact, it says explicitly that the car was parked on the lot, behind the gate. Additionally, it says that the dealer did not tell him his car was ready until three minutes before closing, and so he had to leave it there (since no one was willing to stick around to wait for him).

To me, this screams dealer responsibility.

Okay, my bad with the reading comp.

Yeah, the dealer needs to man up in that case.

[Rupert]

If the A4 owner were a friend of yours and leaves it in your garage and the same thing happens, are you responsible?

If I tell him, gosh, I don't really want to open the garage door right now; come back in three days, probably.

[Tave]

If the A4 owner were a friend of yours and leaves it in your garage and the same thing happens, are you responsible?

Yeah, it's called a bailment. Depending on the circumstances you might well be liable.

[GoCougs]

If I tell him, gosh, I don't really want to open the garage door right now; come back in three days, probably.

C'mon, think about it...

OF COURSE you're not responsible (that is, if you didn't do it).

[thewizard16]

Okay, hadn't read the actual article.

It's the dealer's responsibility to help make this situation right. It was on their lot and the customer was not able to pick it up in the narrow time frame they provided. Even if they're not directly liable for the damages (which may be somewhat arguable), they shouldn't have pulled his loaner car and hung up on reporters, particularly since their time windows and "broken" security camera contributed to the problem. This dealer deserves any decline in business this article may cause. If you don't take care of your current customers, you'd damn well better not expect a good reputation for prospective customers.

[Tave]

C'mon, think about it...

OF COURSE you're not responsible (that is, if you didn't do it).

Nope. You'll owe a minimum duty (beyond simply not "doing it") to anyone who entrusts their personal property to you. It's called a bailment. Depending on the circumstances, you might well be liable for the damage to your friend's car. (Is there an echo in here?)

The dealer will be held to a much higher standard of care than two friends.

[GoCougs]

Yeah, it's called a bailment. Depending on the circumstances you might well be liable.

My non-law school self says that there'd have to be gross negligence on Rupert's part - like parking the car on a cliff about to give way - for Rupert to be responsible.

[the Teuton]

What the dealer did wasn't illegal. But they should be willing to help rectify the problem if it did, indeed, happen in closed off territory.

Like I said, at work, we have a park at your own risk policy. But someplace in the boundaries that is closed off is more or less B&E if someone comes in and messes with something like that. And the dealer's insurance should have picked it up.

[Tave]

My non-law school self says that there'd have to be gross negligence on Rupert's part - like parking the car on a cliff about to give way - for Rupert to be responsible.

Rupert isn't entitled to use the bailed property, so he can't park it anywhere.

His standard of care will depend on the situation the bail arises under, as well as the jurisdiction in which the event occurs. Which is why I said "depending on the circumstances."

I think leaving the car unlocked and the garage door open over the weekend while he's out of town would probably get him in hot water, depending on the circumstances.

But your question is pointless, because the dealership likely owes its customers a much greater duty than Rupert owes his friends. Check yer premise.

[GoCougs]

Nope. You'll owe a minimum duty (beyond simply not "doing it") to anyone who entrusts their personal property to you. It's called a bailment. Depending on the circumstances, you might well be liable for the damage to your friend's car. (Is there an echo in here?)

Think about - your girlfriend leaves her car in your driveway for you to change the oil for $20. You change the oil and leave it be. You wake up in the morning and the car is stolen. LOL - of course you're not responsible.

The dealer will be held to a much higher standard of care than two friends.

The dealer already met a higher standard - a locked lot, likely tons of lighting, and the like. I guess it's not to say that every jurisdiction is the same on the subject (but they should be).