PDA

View Full Version : Questions about Dealership Ethics (help!)



Nsoentgerath
02-19-2013, 06:32 PM
Hello!


I am a university student who is naive when it comes to cars. I have some questions for the awesome people of this forum and would love if some of you could help me, or point me in the right direction. Here is my story:

January 13, 2013

I went into the Kramer Mazda dealership to inquire about a car, I ended up finding a 2011 Volvo S40 and made a deposit. I was told at this time that I could come back into Kramer Mazda and pick up the car on January 15, 2013, I was also informed at this time that the car would have brand new tires put onto it because the tires that were currently on the vehicle did not pass inspection (tread levels were too low).

January 15, 2013

I pick up the car, inspected to see that the tires were in fact new. They were new, I then left the dealership and began driving my great new car. I was never informed of what kind of tires were put on my vehicle, but seeing as it is the middle of January and I am living in Calgary I expected all season tires and didn't think about asking.

January 31, 2013 - 10:05 am

I hit a patch of snow and slide into a median causing $5000 in damage to my car.

January 31, 2013 - 12:00pm

Volvo dealership (where the car was towed after the accident) calls me and informs me of the damages. They also tell me that the tires Kramer Mazda put on the car are in fact Summer Performance Tires with a load index of 89 and a speed rating of W.

My cars OEM specs are 93V for my tires.


Basically Kramer Mazda sold me a vehicle with Summer tires that do not meet my cars OEM specs in the middle of winter.

I realize they do not have to legally inform me that they are putting summer tires on the vehicle, but I am curious to know if they are legally allowed to put tires that are not specified for my car onto a vehicle and then sell it. Especially without informing me (the customer) about this.

If anyone has any information they can provide me that would be great, as well if I do have some rights here as a customer then if someone could tell me who I would talk to that would be great.

Let me state that I am not looking to sue the company over the fact that I crashed the car, but I am looking to see if the company is legally allowed to sell me a vehicle with tires that do not meet the manufactures specs. In my opinion the least they could do is exchange the tires for ones that do meet my requirements.

Thank you in advance for any help that may come from this, I really appreciate it.

Nick Soentgerath

FraserB
02-19-2013, 06:38 PM
They have zero obligation to you. You should have addressed any issues you had prior to accepting delivery.

swak
02-19-2013, 06:44 PM
you're sol, Nick.

Should have checked your tires before taking it off the lot.

If you don't tie your shoes and trip and break your arm - is the shoe store liable?
Not at all... Its a fault of your due diligence.... or lack thereof

Nsoentgerath
02-19-2013, 06:46 PM
Okay thanks guys! I was just curious.

Seems like a really unethical thing to do as a dealership though!

AE92_TreunoSC
02-19-2013, 06:47 PM
It sucks but you're outta luck, the speed or load rating has nothing to do with the accident. You were going too fast for the vehicle's ability for the condition.

I'd go after a tire exchange for sure. They should have sold the proper specification and proper all seasons. They simply threw on the cheapest tires they could find. Very typical story from a Mazda dealership.

As a tech I would have objected to installing summer performance tires on a make ready order for a vehicle that has an owner. No idea what happened there.

baygirl
02-19-2013, 06:48 PM
I am not so sure Fraser.

(this is spikers btw)

I would think that the dealer is obligated to replace the tires with OEM spec tires, or replace the sticker in the door, and inform the client that this has been done. Changing the load requirements could put him over weight in some cases, and if he ever gets checked, could result in traffic fines, or even an accident resulting in serious injury or death.

In my opinion, FWIW, I would be expecting some response from the dealer over this. Also, what the hell are they doing putting summer tires on a car in the middle of January? Seriously? My money is on that they had some spare tires kicking around that they opted to put on the car, and save some cash, instead of getting the proper ones. I mean seriously, who checks the load rating of the tires when they purchase a new vehicle?

ExtraSlow
02-19-2013, 07:49 PM
Dealerships have no ethics.

black13
02-19-2013, 07:59 PM
Originally posted by ExtraSlow
Dealerships have no ethics.

lol basically this. They are out to make money. They will all lie/sweet talk you till they get your signiture/money then say be careful not to let the door hit your ass on the way out.

The fancy showroom and "warranty" gives people the sense of security so they keep going there.

Nsoentgerath
02-19-2013, 10:44 PM
Thanks for the feedback guys, when I first talked to the dealership they basically told me to **** off as I was passed my 7 day return policy.

I am going to talk to the manager tomorrow and let him know that his mechanics are doing this and hopefully someone else wont have this happen to them.

I am just never going to buy a Mazda and avoid Kramer Mazda for the rest of my life haha.

m10-power
02-19-2013, 11:14 PM
Originally posted by Nsoentgerath
I am just never going to buy a Mazda and avoid Kramer Mazda for the rest of my life haha.

Why because you're smart enough for university but can't read a label on your tires? Tires don't cause you to crash your car, driving in the winter on summer tires was your choice. Perhaps you should stop blaming others and take some responsibility for crashing your car.

dj_rice
02-19-2013, 11:17 PM
Originally posted by Nsoentgerath
Thanks for the feedback guys, when I first talked to the dealership they basically told me to **** off as I was passed my 7 day return policy.

I am going to talk to the manager tomorrow and let him know that his mechanics are doing this and hopefully someone else wont have this happen to them.

I am just never going to buy a Mazda and avoid Kramer Mazda for the rest of my life haha.



In some cases, its not really the mechanics fault. They are just given the work order and told to install tires and thats about it. Its not really they're duty to check if its the right tires or etc etc. They just assume Parts did their job.

If anything, the buck should fall onto the Parts Dept and the Parts Manager and some blame on the Sales Dept. Whoever was doing the ordering of tires, should of made sure to order the correct speed rating/load rating to OEM specs. Also should of said HEY, its winter right now, shouldn't we order all-seasons instead of winters. But could be his superior said just order whats the cheapest tire and get er done upon pressure from the Sales Dept.
I work in Parts and when ordering tires for customers or for sold vehicles, I make sure to get the exact year/make/model and check my tire book to get the right speed rating/load guide and etc.

At the end of the day, this dealership isn't looking at the big picture. Sure, they made the sale and cashed the cheque already but your an upset customer and will not be recommending them to anyone else nor buying a car from them ever again in the future. In the car dealership world, its all about customer service and word of mouth.

As well, you should always go over everything and be pro-active rather than re-active, and since you have already taken delivery of the car and had an accident, your SOL. Even if it was their mistake about the tires, because you had an accident, they will DENY DENY DENY.

Kramerica
02-19-2013, 11:35 PM
Just out of curiosity, did you not notice the fact that the tread looked completely different to a typical all season/winter tire when you inspected them to see that they were replaced?

I may be a bit biased because I do know the difference, but I've gotta hope that if you showed the average person on the street a summer and an all season they would be able to tell that the summer would do nothing for snowy conditions.

skylinegtr20
02-20-2013, 12:54 AM
Very typical story from a Mazda dealership.

As a tech I would have objected to installing summer performance tires on a make ready order for a vehicle that has an owner. No idea what happened there. [/B]

Little judgemental on the first part there... But from what I have heard about Calgary dealers it doesnt surprise me.

As a tech myself I agree with the above statement and would question why I am putting summer tires on a vehicle in winter... As frankly if a situation like this occured and the customer complained everyone involved points fingers at the tech, its all about covering your ass.

Nsoentgerath
02-20-2013, 01:25 AM
Hey guys,

It was my first time buying a vehicle from a dealership, I had put too much trust in the dealership to have the brains to put all season tires on a car in the middle of January. I fully admit this was partly a fault of mine for not double checking the car to make sure everything was okay.

To be honest I did see the tread and noticed it wasn't a normal style I didn't however say anything as I don't know a whole lot about tires. I was paying for their competence because I don't have the knowledge base they do when it comes to cars.

I never blamed them for the accident, I do however know that if I had an adequate set of all seasons on the vehicle I would not have felt like I was on a skating rink the second I hit a patch of snow, this may however not have been enough to prevent my crash.

The thing I find upsetting is that they did not bother to inform me that "Hey, ya so we put summer tires on your car, make sure you drive safe and if you want a set of winters for it you can buy them for $***". I would have gladly paid extra for proper tires had I been given the choice.

Danny Meehan
02-20-2013, 01:27 AM
go in, be nice, and ask them for all seasons

Good luck :)

max_boost
02-20-2013, 01:48 AM
On one hand the dealer should have said something but they didn't. On the other hand you should have asked a few more questions and you didn't. I don't know what to think here lol

sxtasy
02-20-2013, 02:15 AM
Yes dealerships are morons but its more reason to be diligent when buying. Bring someone knowledgable to the deal if you don't know too much about cars. And usually the first thing I will do with a new to me vehicle is safely test it's limits, especially in shitty weather.

Loose
02-20-2013, 07:08 AM
Nick. Can you let us know he make and model of the tire?

heavyD
02-20-2013, 08:04 AM
Originally posted by m10-power


Why because you're smart enough for university but can't read a label on your tires? Tires don't cause you to crash your car, driving in the winter on summer tires was your choice. Perhaps you should stop blaming others and take some responsibility for crashing your car.

No. Because Mazda's suck and their dealers are amongst the shadiest around.

Rat Fink
02-20-2013, 08:29 AM
.

FraserB
02-20-2013, 08:30 AM
Originally posted by Nsoentgerath
Hey guys,

It was my first time buying a vehicle from a dealership, I had put too much trust in the dealership to have the brains to put all season tires on a car in the middle of January. I fully admit this was partly a fault of mine for not double checking the car to make sure everything was okay.

To be honest I did see the tread and noticed it wasn't a normal style I didn't however say anything as I don't know a whole lot about tires. I was paying for their competence because I don't have the knowledge base they do when it comes to cars.



The situation could have been prevented if you had done your due diligence. Something doesn't look normal, most people would question it.

It never ceases to surprise me how people can go drop $20k+ on a car and not have the first idea of what they are getting in to. When I bought my truck in December, I had 50+ hours of research into it, multiple test drives and a full inspection by my mechanic.

spikerS
02-20-2013, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by FraserB


It's not "partly" your fault, it's 110% your fault. You freely admit you know nothing about cars and yet didn't bother to have someone who knows take a look at it. When something doesn't look normal, people question it.

Are we ging to see another thread where something mechanical fails and you admit that you know nothing about the mechanics of a car and never took it to a shop for an inspection?

see this is what is bothering me. He knows nothing about cars, so he does not do a private sale, he goes to a dealership and buys a CERTIFIED used car, that has been inspected by the dealer for him. In other words, the dealer is saying that his car is up to snuff, when the load rating on the tires, clearly, were not. Nor did they inform him that he had summer rated tires on his car, in the middle of winter.

Obviously, both of these things can be overlooked by someone that is not familiar with tires. Hell, I can say that with EVERY vehicle purchase I have made, I have never once checked the load rating on tires. Hell, I just found out about them a week ago. But the problem here lies, is that he requested new tires put on, and AFTER the sale, the dealer put on tires that were not up to OEM spec, thus making the door sill sticker invalid, and never informed the purchaser of this. If the purchaser follows all the rules, and goes camping, and loads the car to the GVWR on the sticker, he is then overloading the car, causing an unsafe, and potentially deadly situation, all while thinking he is perfectly fine.

That is all kinds of wrong, and should never have happened, especially from a dealership.

Honestly, I would probably contact AMVIC over it and see what they say.

Saying he should know better, I don't believe applies in this case, and I normally side with dealers in these types of arguments.

Aleks
02-20-2013, 08:48 AM
The fact Kramer did this shows they don't really care about customer service.

Because this is beyond and most people on here are car people I'm not surprised you're getting these type of responses. I'm willing to bet most people out there can't tell a difference between a summer and an all season tire so I can see how you missed that.

When I went to pick up my car from BMW Gallery they made me sign a waiver acknowledging I was taking the car with summer tires and that I knew they didn't work in winter, this was going into spring too.

lilmira
02-20-2013, 08:50 AM
I agree that the dealership should have provided proper tires but that has very little to do with the accident.

JRSC00LUDE
02-20-2013, 08:53 AM
Originally posted by FraserB


It's not "partly" your fault, it's 110% your fault. You freely admit you know nothing about cars and yet didn't bother to have someone who knows take a look at it. When something doesn't look normal, people question it.

Are we ging to see another thread where something mechanical fails and you admit that you know nothing about the mechanics of a car and never took it to a shop for an inspection?

I think you're over-reacting.

There's 1000's of people who honestly wouldn't even think to look at their new dealer supplied tires and not have it cross their mind that they would be summer tires or, not know the difference.

He should have been able to trust the dealership to put appropriate equipment on or, at the very minimum, inform him of that they did not. The dealership was not acting responsibly if they willingly sold, installed, and let him drive away on, summer tires in the dead of winter.



Originally posted by lilmira
I agree that the dealership should have provided proper tires but that has very little to do with the accident.

I would argue the tires had a lot to do with the accident. I'd bet the insurance company would as well. Even though we really don't know the full circumstance of the accident, I'd bet that it very likely would not have happened had the vehicle been properly equipped. Summer tires are completely useless on cold/frozen pavement and you know that.

SJW
02-20-2013, 08:58 AM
Originally posted by JRSC00LUDE


I think you're over-reacting.

There's 1000's of people who honestly wouldn't even think to look at their new dealer supplied tires and not have it cross their mind that they would be summer tires or, not know the difference.

He should have been able to trust the dealership to put appropriate equipment on or, at the very minimum, inform him of that they did not. The dealership was not acting responsibly if they willingly sold, installed, and let him drive away on, summer tires in the dead of winter.




I would argue the tires had a lot to do with the accident. I'd bet the insurance company would as well. Even though we really don't know the full circumstance of the accident, I'd bet that it very likely would not have happened had the vehicle been properly equipped. Summer tires are completely useless on cold/frozen pavement and you know that.



And now we come back full circle to the topic title. ETHICS.

They are poor and Kramer should be ashamed.

lilmira
02-20-2013, 09:00 AM
Having the wrong tires absolutely has a lot to do with the accident but it's up to the driver/owner to make sure that he/she is properly equipped before heading out. That's what I mean.

blitz
02-20-2013, 09:02 AM
Originally posted by spikers


see this is what is bothering me. He knows nothing about cars, so he does not do a private sale, he goes to a dealership and buys a CERTIFIED used car, that has been inspected by the dealer for him. In other words, the dealer is saying that his car is up to snuff, when the load rating on the tires, clearly, were not. Nor did they inform him that he had summer rated tires on his car, in the middle of winter.

Obviously, both of these things can be overlooked by someone that is not familiar with tires. Hell, I can say that with EVERY vehicle purchase I have made, I have never once checked the load rating on tires. Hell, I just found out about them a week ago. But the problem here lies, is that he requested new tires put on, and AFTER the sale, the dealer put on tires that were not up to OEM spec, thus making the door sill sticker invalid, and never informed the purchaser of this. If the purchaser follows all the rules, and goes camping, and loads the car to the GVWR on the sticker, he is then overloading the car, causing an unsafe, and potentially deadly situation, all while thinking he is perfectly fine.

That is all kinds of wrong, and should never have happened, especially from a dealership.

Honestly, I would probably contact AMVIC over it and see what they say.

Saying he should know better, I don't believe applies in this case, and I normally side with dealers in these types of arguments.

I agree 100%

You guys are being really harsh. What if this had happened to your mom or your sister?

90% of people who buy cars would not be able to spot the difference between a summer and an all season tire, and they wouldn't even think to check in this situation. The dealer screwed him to save a few dollars.

HuMz
02-20-2013, 09:04 AM
Originally posted by spikers


see this is what is bothering me. He knows nothing about cars, so he does not do a private sale, he goes to a dealership and buys a CERTIFIED used car, that has been inspected by the dealer for him. In other words, the dealer is saying that his car is up to snuff, when the load rating on the tires, clearly, were not. Nor did they inform him that he had summer rated tires on his car, in the middle of winter.

Obviously, both of these things can be overlooked by someone that is not familiar with tires. Hell, I can say that with EVERY vehicle purchase I have made, I have never once checked the load rating on tires. Hell, I just found out about them a week ago. But the problem here lies, is that he requested new tires put on, and AFTER the sale, the dealer put on tires that were not up to OEM spec, thus making the door sill sticker invalid, and never informed the purchaser of this. If the purchaser follows all the rules, and goes camping, and loads the car to the GVWR on the sticker, he is then overloading the car, causing an unsafe, and potentially deadly situation, all while thinking he is perfectly fine.

That is all kinds of wrong, and should never have happened, especially from a dealership.

Honestly, I would probably contact AMVIC over it and see what they say.

Saying he should know better, I don't believe applies in this case, and I normally side with dealers in these types of arguments.


It's common sense that any dealership selling used cars, there inspections aren't worth the paper there written on. And buying from a dealer doesn't mean you've done any kind of due diligence.

Any car dealer will lie to make money, end of story.

Lex350
02-20-2013, 09:04 AM
Originally posted by heavyD


No. Because Mazda's suck and their dealers are amongst the shadiest around.


Yup! Dey, Deny, Deny......Kramer is the worst. Thy make Chysler dealerships look ethical.

spikerS
02-20-2013, 09:06 AM
Originally posted by HuMz



It's common sense that any dealership selling used cars, there inspections aren't worth the paper there written on. And buying from a dealer doesn't mean you've done any kind of due diligence.

Any car dealer will lie to make money, end of story.

That would be up to a court and amvic to decide if the paper is worthless.

If I provide you with a report saying my shit smells like roses and is a great wrinkle remover, and you go home and spread my shit on your face, and it smells like shit and gives you pink eye, you better believe you are gonna come back waving that sheet of paper.

lilmira
02-20-2013, 09:11 AM
I can sympathize such shitty situation but really the owner has a big responsibility to make sure that both him/herself and the vehicle is ready for the road.

FraserB
02-20-2013, 09:14 AM
Originally posted by spikers


see this is what is bothering me. He knows nothing about cars, so he does not do a private sale, he goes to a dealership and buys a CERTIFIED used car, that has been inspected by the dealer for him. In other words, the dealer is saying that his car is up to snuff, when the load rating on the tires, clearly, were not. Nor did they inform him that he had summer rated tires on his car, in the middle of winter.

Obviously, both of these things can be overlooked by someone that is not familiar with tires. Hell, I can say that with EVERY vehicle purchase I have made, I have never once checked the load rating on tires. Hell, I just found out about them a week ago. But the problem here lies, is that he requested new tires put on, and AFTER the sale, the dealer put on tires that were not up to OEM spec, thus making the door sill sticker invalid, and never informed the purchaser of this. If the purchaser follows all the rules, and goes camping, and loads the car to the GVWR on the sticker, he is then overloading the car, causing an unsafe, and potentially deadly situation, all while thinking he is perfectly fine.

That is all kinds of wrong, and should never have happened, especially from a dealership.

Honestly, I would probably contact AMVIC over it and see what they say.

Saying he should know better, I don't believe applies in this case, and I normally side with dealers in these types of arguments.

So basically I can go back to CMP now and get them to switch out the tires they put on my truck becuase they are not factory?

Certified doesn't mean that everything is factory spec, it means that the points they certify on are within the allowable limit, the tires they put are probably factory sized. The situation is also not about load rating.

OP looked at the tires, thought there was an issue and did nothing about it. Knowing this, he then signed for the car, with the summer tires installed.

Strictly speaking, the dealer did NOTHING wrong. They were required to put new tires on the vehicle after their own inspection showed they needed replacement and they did. If a specific type had been indicated, they would have to install those.

spikerS
02-20-2013, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by lilmira
I can sympathize such shitty situation but really the owner has a big responsibility to make sure that both him/herself and the vehicle is ready for the road.

Disagreed. This is not a private sale.

This is the purchase of a certified used vehicle from an AMVIIC licensed facility.

The vehicle should be road worthy from the moment the purchaser took delivery.

spikerS
02-20-2013, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by FraserB


So basically I can go back to CMP now and get them to switch out the tires they put on my truck becuase they are not factory?

Certified doesn't mean that everything is factory spec, it means that the points they certify on are within the allowable limit, the tires they put are probably factory sized. The situation is also not about load rating.

OP looked at the tires, thought there was an issue and did nothing about it. Knowing this, he then signed for the car, with the summer tires installed.

Strictly speaking, the dealer did NOTHING wrong. They were required to put new tires on the vehicle after their own inspection showed they needed replacement and they did. If a specific type had been indicated, they would have to install those.

If your new tires are not load rated the same as factory, yes, I would be causing a stink, as now your GVWR on your truck is not as represented, and you should be pissed.

As stated, the OP does not know much about vehicles. Same can be said for 90% of the city. Would you or I say something if we saw summer tires on our DD? absolutely. Would you expect your mother to do the same? would you expect a reasonable person to know the difference and say something? If you are honest with yourself, you know the answer is no, and that is the test a judge would use in deciding the case.

HuMz
02-20-2013, 09:23 AM
Originally posted by spikers


That would be up to a court and amvic to decide if the paper is worthless.

If I provide you with a report saying my shit smells like roses and is a great wrinkle remover, and you go home and spread my shit on your face, and it smells like shit and gives you pink eye, you better believe you are gonna come back waving that sheet of paper.

I would know your report is full of shit right from the get go because of the fact you were a used car dealer.


There is probably been 100+ threads since I signed up for beyond on people getting screwed by car dealers, this is nothing new.

spikerS
02-20-2013, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by HuMz


I would know your report is full of shit right from the get go because of the fact you were a used car dealer.


There is probably been 100+ threads since I signed up for beyond on people getting screwed by car dealers, this is nothing new.

your first sign that you know nothing is that I am NOT a used car dealer, I am a shit salesman.

of course it is nothing new, however every situation is different, as will every outcome.

And no, not every dealer report is going to be invalid. will some, sure, but most should be fine, as falsifying those reports can have some serious legal repercussions, outside of amviic.

lilmira
02-20-2013, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by spikers


Disagreed. This is not a private sale.

This is the purchase of a certified used vehicle from an AMVIIC licensed facility.

The vehicle should be road worthy from the moment the purchaser took delivery.

I would go back and ask for the proper tires but the dealership is not responsible for the accident. Having a lower load rating tires didn't cause the accident. If the tire exploded, yeah I say go for it.

Having summer tires on during winter is a factor but like I said, the owner should be aware. That's why it's not illegal to drive on summer tires in winter.

FraserB
02-20-2013, 09:35 AM
I think a reasonable person would consult someone who knows about cars if they are dropping tens of thousands of dollars on one and admittedly know nothing about them. Or at least do some research on the internet. Maybe even ask "what kind of tires did put on?" when the ones on there don't look normal.

If you look up "buying a used car in Alberta" on Google the first link is from Alberta Transportation and has step by step instructions on buying a used car. There a link on that page that is pretty obvious and is titled "Inspect before you buy".

Yeah, the dealer probably cheaped out and tossed on whatever set they had on hand, but the car would have passed the mechanical fitness report and they did replace the tires as per the agreement. At what point did we remove all responsibility from the customer?

spikerS
02-20-2013, 09:38 AM
Originally posted by lilmira


I would go back and ask for the proper tires but the dealership is not responsible for the accident. Having a lower load rating tires didn't cause the accident. If the tire exploded, yeah I say go for it.

Having summer tires on during winter is a factor but like I said, the owner should be aware. That's why it's not illegal to drive on summer tires in winter.

you have summed up my position nicely. :thumbsup:

FraserB
02-20-2013, 09:40 AM
Originally posted by lilmira


I would go back and ask for the proper tires but the dealership is not responsible for the accident. Having a lower load rating tires didn't cause the accident. If the tire exploded, yeah I say go for it.

Having summer tires on during winter is a factor but like I said, the owner should be aware. That's why it's not illegal to drive on summer tires in winter.

Agreed.

Oddly enough Spikers, I think we both agree on the major points. Just diagree on to what degree each party is responsible.

BananaFob
02-20-2013, 09:52 AM
Originally posted by spikers


The vehicle should be road worthy from the moment the purchaser took delivery.

Is a brand new M3 not roadworthy if I were to purchase it right now in the dead of winter from the dealership?

spikerS
02-20-2013, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by BananaFob


Is a brand new M3 not roadworthy if I were to purchase it right now in the dead of winter from the dealership?

Sure it is. Brand new, the GVWR is going to match the load rating on the tires to the door sill sticker.

My beef is not the summer tires part.

Nice try though!

JustinMCS
02-20-2013, 09:57 AM
That sucks. BMW was very clear to me when I bought my 335 that it came with high performance summers and I even signed something saying I understood. But, I also know more than the average car buyer to know that I need dedicated winters.

BananaFob
02-20-2013, 10:00 AM
Originally posted by spikers


Sure it is. Brand new, the GVWR is going to match the load rating on the tires to the door sill sticker.

My beef is not the summer tires part.

Nice try though!

You do realize that an 89 load rating is perfectly acceptable for a Volvo S40 right? It is 100% completely within spec of the weight of the car. There is NOTHING not roadworthy about it.

Aleks
02-20-2013, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by BananaFob


Is a brand new M3 not roadworthy if I were to purchase it right now in the dead of winter from the dealership?

As mentioned a few times, BMW makes you sign a waiver stating car is equipped with summer tires.

Had Kramer done this with the OP it might have prompted him to ask for all season tires instead.

403Gemini
02-20-2013, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by BananaFob


You do realize that an 89 load rating is perfectly acceptable for a Volvo S40 right? It is 100% completely within spec of the weight of the car. There is NOTHING not roadworthy about it.

http://esd.volvocars.com/local/us/2011-Volvo-S40-Owners-Manual.pdf

Page 183

Says they require 95H

spikerS
02-20-2013, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by BananaFob


You do realize that an 89 load rating is perfectly acceptable for a Volvo S40 right? It is 100% completely within spec of the weight of the car. There is NOTHING not roadworthy about it.

Sure there is. Just by using the load rating difference, the GVWR is now going to be off by a whopping 616lbs, which in quite a few vehicles, now barely leaves enough room for a driver with NO cargo before going over the limit.

Are you fucking nutty? How is that road worthy? the car is not even up to spec!

BananaFob
02-20-2013, 10:23 AM
Originally posted by 403Gemini


http://esd.volvocars.com/local/us/2011-Volvo-S40-Owners-Manual.pdf

Page 183

Says they require 95H

No it doesn't. Read closer. That's just an illustration to tell you how to read the numbers on the tire. I'm willing to bet that's it's just a standard picture in all the volvo manuals.

Considering I just checked out three well-known tire websites including Tirerack that recommend down to 88 load rating for the car, 89 is more than fine. :dunno:

spikerS
02-20-2013, 10:28 AM
Originally posted by BananaFob


Considering I just checked out three well-known tire websites including Tirerack that recommend down to 88 load rating for the car, 89 is more than fine. :dunno:

considering they all pull their information from the same source, quoting 3 different places is useless.

Put this before a judge, and he is going to ignore what these tire places are saying, and go by what the original manufacturer states is the requirement. And if the vehicle comes with a 93 rating, anything under is negligence, unless otherwise detailed by the manufacturer.

BananaFob
02-20-2013, 10:28 AM
Originally posted by spikers


Are you fucking nutty? How is that road worthy? the car is not even up to spec!

I guess we are resorting to ad hominem now.

Someone better call up them tire dealers and let them know it can't support the weight then! 89 load rating would be good up to 5116lbs. GWVR is 4450. While this may not leave you room to load up 5 fat chicks and a grand piano, it's still within spec.

spikerS
02-20-2013, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by BananaFob


I guess we are resorting to ad hominem now.

Someone better call up them tire dealers and let them know it can't support the weight then! 89 load rating would be good up to 5116lbs. GWVR is 4450. While this may not leave you room to load up 5 fat chicks and a grand piano, it's still within spec.

Wow, I had no idea that the OP had posted his GVWR for you to make those assumptions, based on a vehicle with no options.

Take this for example.
http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/dd364/bwinkelm/41737F2E-C351-421B-8D1B-3DDBA30E36A8-6853-000002D77ABD75CF_zps8978d51f.jpg

This is taken from Benyl's F-150.

you take 616lbs off his GVWR, and guess what, he can carry 3 people in the truck with zero cargo.

if he goes to the grocery store, he might have to take 2 vehicles as the groveries and himself might overload a F150.

heavyD
02-20-2013, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by Aleks


As mentioned a few times, BMW makes you sign a waiver stating car is equipped with summer tires.

Had Kramer done this with the OP it might have prompted him to ask for all season tires instead.

Even Calgary Subaru encouraged me to have winter tires installed on my STI before I drove it off the lot.

Aleks
02-20-2013, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by heavyD


Even Calgary Subaru encouraged me to have winter tires installed on my STI before I drove it off the lot.

No doubt it's irresponsible to send a customer out on summer tires in the middle of winter without even discussing it. What surprises me that this is a mainstream dealer not one of those small dealer shops.

Also aren't most summer tires more expensive than all seasons?

Weapon_R
02-20-2013, 01:36 PM
My take on this is that there might be a case here if Kramer (or industry practice) normally requires a purchaser to sign a waiver when summer tires are installed on a vehicle. The vast majority of people do not know the difference between an all season tire and a summer performance tire.

When someone pays for expert service, that person is entitled to rely on that service and the advice that accompanies it. Installing summer tires was done only to save costs or as a matter of convenience. No one in their right mind would purposely choose to install summer tires, in the middle of winter, on an S40 over the alternatives.

JRSC00LUDE
02-20-2013, 01:46 PM
Originally posted by Weapon_R
My take on this is that there might be a case here if Kramer (or industry practice) normally requires a purchaser to sign a waiver when summer tires are installed on a vehicle. The vast majority of people do not know the difference between an all season tire and a summer performance tire.

When someone pays for expert service, that person is entitled to rely on that service and the advice that accompanies it. Installing summer tires was done only to save costs or as a matter of convenience. No one in their right mind would purposely choose to install summer tires, in the middle of winter, on an S40 over the alternatives.

No one in their right mind would argue that. Which is why so many people on Beyond are trying to tell the OP it's all his fault. :nut:

spikerS
02-20-2013, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by Weapon_R
My take on this is that there might be a case here if Kramer (or industry practice) normally requires a purchaser to sign a waiver when summer tires are installed on a vehicle. The vast majority of people do not know the difference between an all season tire and a summer performance tire.

When someone pays for expert service, that person is entitled to rely on that service and the advice that accompanies it. Installing summer tires was done only to save costs or as a matter of convenience. No one in their right mind would purposely choose to install summer tires, in the middle of winter, on an S40 over the alternatives.

Exactly, none of it passes the reasonable person test.

If the case can be made, which has here with BMW, about warning clients who purchase vehicles with summer tires, kramer can be held to that standard.

my soap box was the load rating.

A judge could very well hold Kramer Mazda accountable, especially if it is determined that the accident could have been avoided with proper tires...

lilmira
02-20-2013, 02:09 PM
There is some logic to it but I don't think that's gonna happen. It is perfectly legal to drive on summer tires in winter here. Interestingly, I wonder how this would turn out if it happened in Quebec where winter tires are mandatory. Even that, I would guess that the dealership would only be partially liable. It's not like the car just blew up unpredictably. Winter tires or not, when you are driving too fast for the tires, adjust your speed accordingly. That's the driver's responsibility.

max_boost
02-20-2013, 05:14 PM
I'm surprised OP doesn't have any friends he could have consulted???

You know, always go with a homie just in case.

max_boost
02-20-2013, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by Aleks


No doubt it's irresponsible to send a customer out on summer tires in the middle of winter without even discussing it. What surprises me that this is a mainstream dealer not one of those small dealer shops.

Also aren't most summer tires more expensive than all seasons?

I mean knowing they could make some more money by selling him a set of winters at 100% markup. :nut: this is so messed up.

m10-power
02-20-2013, 08:03 PM
Originally posted by spikers


Wow, I had no idea that the OP had posted his GVWR for you to make those assumptions, based on a vehicle with no options.

Take this for example.
http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/dd364/bwinkelm/41737F2E-C351-421B-8D1B-3DDBA30E36A8-6853-000002D77ABD75CF_zps8978d51f.jpg

This is taken from Benyl's F-150.

you take 616lbs off his GVWR, and guess what, he can carry 3 people in the truck with zero cargo.

if he goes to the grocery store, he might have to take 2 vehicles as the groveries and himself might overload a F150.

:dunno:

What does that have to do with tires on a volvo?

spikerS
02-20-2013, 08:15 PM
Originally posted by m10-power


:dunno:

What does that have to do with tires on a volvo?

Didn't think it needed explanation, taken in context with the conversation...

I was illustrating that an f-150 would lose 1/2 of its payload capacity when swapping the 4 tires to a lower rated tire, and the loss would be much more magnified in the Volvo the OP purchased.

m10-power
02-20-2013, 08:47 PM
Originally posted by spikers


Didn't think it needed explanation, taken in context with the conversation...

I was illustrating that an f-150 would lose 1/2 of its payload capacity when

swapping the 4 tires to a lower rated tire, and the loss would be much more magnified in the Volvo the OP purchased.

Sure because your argument isnt valid in the first place. Tires are within spec, I wonder if they are the correct speed rating, perhaps they are of a lower rating...

Do you think the original tires were inflated to 45psi for the maximum load rating? Maybe the 89 rated tires were filled by the dealer to 45psi and therefore had a greater load capacity then the 93 rated tires at 30psi...

spikerS
02-20-2013, 09:15 PM
who states that the 89 tires are acceptable? anyone other than the manufacturer of the car doesn't mean shit.

your whole argument is invalid. you are basing everything on assumptions, and retarded ones at that.

at least my opinions are based on the facts as the OP has given them. :facepalm:

m10-power
02-20-2013, 10:17 PM
Originally posted by spikers
who states that the 89 tires are acceptable? anyone other than the manufacturer of the car doesn't mean shit.

your whole argument is invalid. you are basing everything on assumptions, and retarded ones at that.

at least my opinions are based on the facts as the OP has given them. :facepalm:

Lol who states they are not acceptable, if it was up to the manufacturer you'd have to use the exact tires it was delivered on for replacements.

spikerS
02-20-2013, 10:23 PM
^^not even going to bother.