Liability advice- Missing the Point

[David ilvedson]

Richard,

I like the "death certificate" idea and the fact that you don't 
charge them for the bad news...

David Ilvedson, RPT

Date sent:      	Tue, 07 Sep 1999 09:47:18 +0200
From:           	Richard Brekne <richardb@c2i.net>
Organization:   	http://home.c2i.net/ric/RicMain.html
To:             	pianotech@ptg.org
Subject:        	Re: Liability advice- Missing the Point
Send reply to:  	pianotech@ptg.org

> 
> 
> PianoSvFla@AOL.COM wrote:
> 
> > Al & Jody,
> >
> > Although the advise from the other techs are correct as far as the technical
> > causes and results, I feel the point is being missed. Your customer is taking
> > a stand on a legal point, that is , the piano was fine before you serviced
> > it.
> 
> First of all, I'd like to say this posting gives a lot of good advice
> lower on.
> As far as the above paragraph, is concerned, the customers "legal" point
> above
> rests on her ability to prove the point from a technical standpoint.
> This is
> impossible to do. It is totaly unreasonable to conclude that a piano
> that
> literally comes apart at the seams because it recieve a relatively minor
> pitch
> adjustment could have been  in "fine" condition, or anything close to
> it.
> 
> > Regardless of the type of damage done, she must have a proponderance of
> > evidence to prove to the court that it was functioning fine before you
> > serviced it. She can do this by going back to the original owner and
> > supplying to the court from them an affidavit to that fact.( And you know
> > they will to protect themselves.)
> 
> This simply wont hold. Neither have the technical  insight to have
> relevant
> opinions. And the actual cirmcumstances of the incident show clearly
> from a
> technical standpoint that the piano was in serious trouble before being
> worked
> on.
> 
> 
> >
> > It is not necessary for your customer to understand the how's and why's of
> > what happened because she is not a professional in the business, that's why
> > she came to you. She is also not obligated to have you repair the piano
> > because in her mind your credibility is tainted. She can simply have the
> > piano repair and sue you for the repairs if you refuse to pay.
> 
> I dissagree here, she is obligated to prove in some legal forum that you
> were at
> fault for the present condition (after tuning) of the piano, otherwise
> she can
> not charge you in any way whatsoever.
> 
> 
> >
> > At this point I would recommend to treat this as a legal issue and protect
> > yourself. To start with I would  send her a registered letter return receit
> > explaining
> > you opinion concerning the matter. Do not offer to buy,repair or return the
> > fee as this would be an admission of guilt and leave you open for liability.
> > Do not show her the posts as this would only cause further hard feelings in
> > rubbing it in for being a fool for buying a poor quality instrument. (
> > Besides you don't know their true financial situation ) These posts are
> > better off in the hands of your lawyer to firm up his case, not in hers' to
> > benefit her lawyer in rebutting them. Remember she is making a legal point
> > not a technical one.
> 
> This is good sound advice.
> 
> >
> > I have found that people who threaten usually don't follow through with it.
> > If she has a strong case she will simply serve you a subpoena.
> > If she insists on discussing her piano with you then she is negotiating,
> > that's good. Do not speak about the damage and who's fault it is. Listen to
> > her quietly and simple offer her the scenario of "How would she like this
> > conversation to end?" If her terms are acceptable to keep you out of court
> > such as returning the tuning fee, since SHE is suggesting it agree. Send her
> > a check and in the memo part write "Payment in full." This will put a close
> > to further payment and  keep her from coming back and requesting more money.
> > Seek the advise of an attorney to discuss your situation, most of them give
> > you the first 15 minutes for free. Also what I have said applies to Florida,
> > some of the laws maybe slightly different in your state.
> > In the future you might also discuss ways of protecting yourself, such as
> > waivers, incorporating etc...
> 
> I agree with most of this, tho I really must say that all this talk of
> lawyers and lawsuits is kind of overkill so far. I would be a little
> more cautious then the above suggests in dealing directly with her. 
> 
> If she does starte moving in the direction of a lawsuit, (small claims,
> or otherwise), It is important to not deal with her directly. Thing is,
> she doesnt have a leg to stand on. Hopefully tho she will see early on
> in any such process. The piano was no good to begin with and that you
> are probably as much a victim here as anyone.
> 
> 
> Personally I think the main issue here is how carefull piano techs
> should be or should be required to be, when approaching such "jobs". 
> Regardless of ones stance on the subject of PSO's, one must simply be
> aware that certain piano makes, and / or pianos that have seen
> obvious abuse, are at risk. I always look over carefully any "doubtfull"
> piano ahead of time and if I am in doubt, I refuse the job. I issue a
> death certificate and inform the customer that he/she can always find
> somebody out there willing to work on it but that it is my proffesional
> opinion that the piano is dead. I do this to protect myself. To keep out
> of awkward situations. I always feel a bit sorry for folks in this
> position, so I always refuse payment when writing out a death
> certificate. I know some other technicians will take issue with this
> point, but I have very good reasons for doing so, and very good
> experience with the results.
> 
> As far as how much of this kind of "beforehand caution" a customer is
> entitled
> to, it is difficult to judge. When piano techs as a whole can't aggree
> more then
> they do on what constitutes a PSO, or what constitutes a DOA, it makes
> matters
> worse. My advice to you is to learn from this incident, be more cautious
> in the
> future, and a bit more selective as to the quality of instruments you
> are willing
> to work on. I wouldnt worry much about your present situation tho. At
> worst it
> will develop into a "pain in the arse" situation that will sooner or
> later die
> upon its own unreasonablness.
> 
> Freindly regards
> Richard Brekne
> I.C.P.T.G.  N.P.T.F.
> Bergen, Norway
> 
> 


David Ilvedson, RPT
Pacifica, CA
ilvey@jps.net