Are Lawyers Destroying Our Society

[lenore]

Ok here is my story, I went to mother-in-laws to do a oil change and check up on her car, everything fine, except two tires dry rotted (cracked everywhere)...She is 85 years old and was planning a road trip about 90miles away, so like a good son-in-law i decided to buy two new tires for her...Sams, no tires her size, special order, Costco, to long a wait, So I pull into American Tires...write up order and tell them I want the two new tires on front wheels (Nissan sentra FWD)...Nope, manager wants me to view a video on his computer saying why they will only install on the rear...OMG what a bunch of pin heads..I asked if they would put them on the front if I signed a waiver. NOPE, sorry. So I said so you would loose my business over a stupid requirement which was probably brought on by some stinking lawyer lawsuit...Had to walk out without tires...Went to Sears and they installed two front tires...What in the heck is wrong with our businesses? Are the lawyers ruining this society?

[nc211]

Three responses:

First, Yes, Lawyers are ruining our country. They say they're "protecting" our liberties. Funny, I don't see in the Constitution or any of it's numerous amendments that says our liberties are to be protected by means of profit, at the tune of $200+ an hour. Several years ago I was on the edge of entering law school back in NC. Only two days a month do I sometimes wish I had gone. This isn't one of those days. I absolultely HATE lawyer speak with a vengence. Can they not speak english? Can they not, withthou forththou amendthou heretobebythou, just speak in clear english.

My dad once told me when I was a child, that I could do anything this world has to offer, and create opportunities that have not yet been created, by simply understanding the language those opportunities speak. If our elected representatives of this country can't even decode the CRAP they write, after they've written it.....well....see a connection to how lawyers are ruining this country?

Second, might as well include unions to this list as well. You want $50 an hour with benefits? Go to college. Take the gamble on student debt, invest in yourself to provide for yourself. Don't hijack the economic life of a nation by forming a GANG. You simply don't deserve $50 an hour to put a fender on a car, or a steering wheel that falls off at 70mph. You deserve a tick or two above min wage. If I were an american auto maker...I wouldn't have a plant in the USA if it meant I had to deal with the UAW, period. You want me to be proud of an American product? Than produce one that honestly and truly competes with others. Don't expect me to think your product is the best simply because I'm an American. Prove it. Need an example? My 05' 4runner with 90k very hard miles, rattle free, problem free. Show me ANY American SUV that can say that? I know I'm not alone in that example either. If I lived in Detroit, I'd be furious at the unions, and ashamed to be in one. They simply killed Detroit, period. An now the lawyers and politicians are stealing what's left. I go to Detroit, we have three investments that will ultimately become our only foreclosures. $120,000,000 to be lost. I drive down the road and see bumber stickers on the back of cars that say "proud to be union". I say to myself "that sticker is worth more than that pos car it's on." Literally, Bubba is heading to the unemployment office in his 1993 Ford Escort that's spewing blue smoke out the pipe, with a union sticker on the back of his car.

Third, probably a good thing you didn't buy your tires from that store. I doubt they'll be in business for too much longer with that STUPID sales pitch. A tire shop, who only installs tires on 50% of a car? Sounds like an ice-cream store that only sells cones and cups.

[lenore]

Oh boy thanks for the response. I must say I agree totally.

[LEXIRX330]

Oh boy thanks for the response. I must say I agree totally.

Yea...I am on board with you guys too.

[SW03ES]

For the record, new tires should always be installed on the rear. What they should have done was installed the new tires on the rear, and then rotated the remaining two good tires to the front. If you Google, you'll find many articles and video demonstrations of why when buying only two new tires they should always be installed on the rear, regardless of which wheels are the drive wheels.

So I think his point was not that he couldn't install the tires, just that he'd have to put them on the rear and put the two good tires already on the car on the front. Just wasn't explained to you well...

If I were a tire shop I wouldn't mount two new tires to the front either.

[lenore]

I understand that Steve, but what happened to the customer is right? That is just poor business....He could have taken me up with a waiver in signature of mounting on front...

[SW03ES]

But...in this case the customer wasn't right. As much as I am a huge proponent of customer satisfaction, and have dedicated my professional life to delivering the best customer service I can, the customer is not always right. The customer must always be treated with respect and given excellent service, but theres nothing wrong with refusing to do something that you know isn't right or isn't in the customer's best interest IMHO. I do it a lot.

Let me ask you this, what was the big deal about having them put the new tires on the rear where they should properly go? Just because you found a shop that was willing to do it the wrong way to satisfy you doesn't mean that the wrong way is any less wrong. Now you have a car for your mother that is less safe than it would have been had you let the first shop mount the tires properly. So...how is that a victory? Are you saying you know more about how tires should be mounted than people who mount tires for a living, or manufacturers of tires?

Like I said, just Google it:

http://www.discounttiredirect.com/direct/brochure/info/tmpInfoNewTireMounting.jsp

From Michelin...pretty respected source I'd say:

If you’re replacing only two tires, be sure to have the new tires installed on your vehicle’s rear axle. Here’s why:

-New tires will provide better wet grip than your half-worn tires.

-When new tires are installed on the rear, it helps reduce the potential for your vehicle to fishtail or hydroplane in wet conditions

This was probably the video they wanted you to watch:

http://www.michelinman.com/tire-care/tire-basics/reartire-change/

They just want you to be safe.

I wasn't there, but it sounds like they tried to explain why they needed to mount them on the rear, tried to show you an instructional video from possibly the world's most respected tire manufacturer that explained what they were saying, and you refused to listen to them. No offense, but good for them for turning you away IMHO. If anything I applaud the integrity of a business that turns profit away when they know that making that profit would put the customer at risk. Thats a business I want to patronize, not one that will do whatever I say to make a dollar whether I'm right or not.

[lenore]

He didnt even look at the vehicles tires, the ones on the rear had less than 2kmiles....

[LEXIRX330]

I don't know if it wasn't wasn't for the lawsuits they would put the tires anywhere you wanted. I agree it is great if the business was doing it on principle but I am sure it is just corporate policy.

I also turn away business when I know someone is doing something that is a bad idea or if they want to waive a coverage that I recommend. It's not worth the chance of an E and O claim. And even with the signed paper poor mrs jones didn't know what she was signing. But if didn't think I could get sued go ahead have a 60k car and you just want state minimum coverage...sure.

[SW03ES]

He didnt even look at the vehicles tires, the ones on the rear had less than 2kmiles....

It doesn't matter. As per the tire manufacturer the new tires get placed on the rear when you only buy two. Its a blanket policy.

You didn't answer my question, why did it matter to you if the tires were put on the rear or the front then? You were being just as implacable as they were being...only they had some reason for insisting that they mount the new tires on the rear...industry accepted practice and a directive from the tire manufacturer. What was your reason for insisting they be on the front?

Don't mean to come across as hard, but I think you're being pretty unreasonable in this situation IMHO.

I don't know if it wasn't wasn't for the lawsuits they would put the tires anywhere you wanted. I agree it is great if the business was doing it on principle but I am sure it is just corporate policy.

But why are there lawsuits? There are lawsuits because the tire manufacturers direct that when only two new tires are purchased they be mounted on the rear regardless of what drive type the vehicle is because its been proven that having tires with greater tread on the front than the rear promotes fishtailing in wet conditions. The lawsuits are because the tire retailers mount the tires in defiance of industry accepted practice and the directive of the tire's manufacturer and accidents result. If I was in an accident due to my tires being mounted against industry practice and against the directive of the tire's manufacturer I'd sue the *BLEEP* out of the retailer and rightly so.

How is it any difference if a shop installs brakes on my car, and they fail because of improper installation and an accident results, or if they mount my two new tires on the front against the manufacturer's instructions (improper installation) and an accident results? If I came on here and posted the former...everybody would be telling me to sue, but suing for the latter is somehow wrong?

So by the token of what you're saying, the lawyers are actually protecting people by forcing tire installers to mount tires properly...instead of destroying our country.

[pj8708]

Using the noun "Lawyers" to mean that every single lawyer in every type of practice is trying to sue everybody they can find for fun and profit is not only overreaching but flat out dumb. Yes Lawyers sue people, and in our present day society all you have to do is turn on the television or look at the back of a phone book to find some low life attorney wanting you to sue somebody. In the same breath all you have to do is talk to somebody in your family or church or work or sports team and you'll find someone who WANTS to sue somebody or is at least threating to. But there are multiple dozens of different types of attorneys that specialize in everything from collecting things to maritime/sea law.

We live, as you all know, in a litigious country where everyone thinks there owed something from somebody. It's always somebody else's fault, they did it unto me first!...by god!! Everyone demands their pound of flesh for the slightest little inconvenience.(By the way, is your coffee still too hot at McDonald's?)

Going back to the first times when people had the first rights of redress against their rulers/government, there have been lawyers. Both despised and loved. Loved when you won, despised when you lost with your head rolling off the guillotine. No one in any society totally like lawyers, but don't cry to me when you hit somebody's Lexus and injure a passenger for life. You'll probably want a lawyer.

[lenore]

He didnt even look at the vehicles tires, the ones on the rear had less than 2kmiles....

It doesn't matter. As per the tire manufacturer the new tires get placed on the rear when you only buy two. Its a blanket policy.

You didn't answer my question, why did it matter to you if the tires were put on the rear or the front then? You were being just as implacable as they were being...only they had some reason for insisting that they mount the new tires on the rear...industry accepted practice and a directive from the tire manufacturer. What was your reason for insisting they be on the front?

Don't mean to come across as hard, but I think you're being pretty unreasonable in this situation IMHO.

I don't know if it wasn't wasn't for the lawsuits they would put the tires anywhere you wanted. I agree it is great if the business was doing it on principle but I am sure it is just corporate policy.

But why are there lawsuits? There are lawsuits because the tire manufacturers direct that when only two new tires are purchased they be mounted on the rear regardless of what drive type the vehicle is because its been proven that having tires with greater tread on the front than the rear promotes fishtailing in wet conditions. The lawsuits are because the tire retailers mount the tires in defiance of industry accepted practice and the directive of the tire's manufacturer and accidents result. If I was in an accident due to my tires being mounted against industry practice and against the directive of the tire's manufacturer I'd sue the *BLEEP* out of the retailer and rightly so.

How is it any difference if a shop installs brakes on my car' date=' and they fail because of improper installation and an accident results, or if they mount my two new tires on the front against the manufacturer's instructions (improper installation) and an accident results? If I came on here and posted the former...everybody would be telling me to sue, but suing for the latter is somehow wrong?

So by the token of what you're saying, the lawyers are actually protecting people by forcing tire installers to mount tires properly...instead of destroying our country.

[/quote']

I wanted them on the front because the rears very almost new....and quite frankly the chance of her hydroplaning driving with 1 mile of her house is slim, remember she is 85 years old....Last year the car was driven about 1k miles total, mostly by her son.....

[1990LS400]

Why didn't the OP just have the first tire shop rotate the good tires to the front and then install the new tires on the back?

[SW03ES]

I wanted them on the front because the rears very almost new....and quite frankly the chance of her hydroplaning driving with 1 mile of her house is slim, remember she is 85 years old....Last year the car was driven about 1k miles total, mostly by her son.....

That doesn't make any sense. Why did you want them on the front? What was the big deal? You're saying that it doesn't matter if they were on the front or back because your Mom is 85 and never drives, well thats a two way street. If it doesn't matter what their policy is because of those facts, why does it matter to you where the tires are mounted in light of the same facts?

I think you just got *BLEEP*ed because they wouldn't just do what you wanted them to do because "the customer is always right". You have no reason for wanting it your way...you just wanted it your way. If I owned a tire shop I'd have turned you away too.

[lenore]

Funny steve But Sears saw no problem. Sometimes these businesses jump on the bandwagon without using some common sense....I understand the theory of what they said, but darn is my vehicle and my money....We are so overgoverned by this craziness that We as a society get nothing done....Stop a dam construction for a rare species of grass, etc....

[1990LS400]

Funny steve But Sears saw no problem. Sometimes these businesses jump on the bandwagon without using some common sense....I understand the theory of what they said, but darn is my vehicle and my money....We are so overgoverned by this craziness that We as a society get nothing done....Stop a dam construction for a rare species of grass, etc....

Come on, Lenore ... this just isn't a big deal. Most times I see a thread started by you, I think "Walter".

[pj8708]

The government is out to get you.

The tire manufacturers are against you.

The lawyers are against you.

The environmentalist are against you.

The forum is against you.

How about trying something positive for a change?

Paul

[LEXIRX330]

I don't think it is a huge deal that I would have gotten that upset and left I would have just said fine put the tires where ever. But I see the point that Lenore is making it's my car my money put the tires where I want them...if you don't I'll take my business elsewhere.

So guys tell me something let's say I have tires that are a different set on front and back like my Mercedes c class that I had. When I need new tires and I buy a new set for the front they aren't going to install them? They can't put them on the rear it is a different size wheel...so in that case would I have to buy all 4 or would they put them on the front and let me leave? I know that is different but there is a situation that they would let me leave with the new tires on the front of the car?

Anyway Paul I also agree not all attorneys are bad...got some great clients and friends that are attorneys but this class action society, and sue sue society that we live in is out of control.

[pj8708]

I don't think it is a huge deal that I would have gotten that upset and left I would have just said fine put the tires where ever. But I see the point that Lenore is making it's my car my money put the tires where I want them...if you don't I'll take my business elsewhere.

So guys tell me something let's say I have tires that are a different set on front and back like my Mercedes c class that I had. When I need new tires and I buy a new set for the front they aren't going to install them? They can't put them on the rear it is a different size wheel...so in that case would I have to buy all 4 or would they put them on the front and let me leave? I know that is different but there is a situation that they would let me leave with the new tires on the front of the car?

Anyway Paul I also agree not all attorneys are bad...got some great clients and friends that are attorneys but this class action society, and sue sue society that we live in is out of control.

I think it is the class action law suit that has brought on the backlash against the the legal eagles. Turn on the television and you can find a guy asking if you were ever prescribed X, then you should sue before you die from it!! I have a chronic illness for which I take several medications. Over the last few months, I have seen TV solicitations from lawyers for class action suits based on two of the medications I take. LOL!! Should I feel worse now? LOL

The class action suit has merits in some narrowly defined situations, but as you say it has become a get rich quick scheme for the attorney and pays out only pennies to the little people bringing on the action. Yes, the attorney has to win first and fronts the cost, but come on, share the spoils.

On the other subject. For people who have never owned their own business, it always looks so easy. Heck, you open your doors, advertise a little, have nice merchandise, and you sit back and buy a Lexus with all the money that comes in every month. If you have never dealt with the public from the other side of the counter you've missed a part of your formal education.

Customers are the greatest people in the world. Customers are the biggest *BLEEP*s in the world. If that sounds like a dichotomy it's supposed to. The notion that the customer is always right was never right to begin with. If you as a business owner have integrity and really do care about your customers, then you have an obligation to educate and demonstrate to your customer the best and proper and safest way to use your product. Selling a left handed fishing reel to a right handed customer without first asking them which hand they crank with, is giving your customer poor service. Explaining to him or her the benefits of a interchangeable reel is educating them.

The *BLEEP* customer doesn't want your help, your knowledge, your suggestions, or the ream of experiences you know about other customers problems they've had with this particular product. They just want it NOW, CHEAP, and oh, CHEAP! They always know more than you do and they always take every opportunity to let you know just how much they know. (There information always turns out to be from some infomercial.)

The customer is not always right, but it is the job of a good business person to insure the customer leaves with EVERYTHING RIGHT and the customer feeling they were treated absolutely right.

[lenore]

Ok guys not a big deal, but for 32 years I was on the end of providing the customer service, not just service, but great service. And I notice these things everyday...Just the other day the Tag checker at the exit of my Sams club whom I have seen every time for the last couple of years looked a little pained. I asked him how he was doing, and he responded it was a tough day...(not his usual greeting)..He always wears a hat with marine ensignia on it, and from previous conversations I knew he was a retired marine. So I called him by his name and said Thank you for your service and shook his hand...That made his day...It is the little things that make people happy, a concern for your fellow human being. I was a service rep for a large corporation for all those years, and bent over backwards to meet my customers needs...The rewards (in the old days were great) for this extra care....trips,etc. So When I am the customer I ask only what I would preceive is fair and meets my needs...It gives me personal satisfaction.

[SW03ES]

Funny steve But Sears saw no problem.

Again, just because you found someone who does it wrong...doesn't make it less wrong. Given my prior experience with the Auto centers at Sears, the fact that they did it doesn't hold a whole lot of weight with me...

Sometimes these businesses jump on the bandwagon without using some common sense...

I think common sense would dictate that the tires be mounted according to the instructions provided by the tire's manufacturer. How is there no common sense in mounting tires the way the tire manufacturers say the tires need to be mounted?

I understand the theory of what they said, but darn is my vehicle and my money....

And you can take it to someone who cares as little about your safety as you do if you choose, which you did. So, how are you damaged by the original shop's insistence that they mount the tires properly?

Again, sorry to be hard on you. I like you and have no desire to start some kind of argument...but I think you're 100% in the wrong here. Since you can't come up with any reason why you wanted things the way you wanted them other than "the customer is always right" and "its my money and my vehicle" I think you understand what I'm getting at. What if you wanted them to replace your shocks and mount them with glue instead of bolts? Its your vehicle and your money right?

They *BLEEP*ed you off because they tried to show you they knew better than you did...and you reacted to that as being poor customer service when in reality its good customer service, they tried to show you the video about why the tires need to be on the rear, and in the end put your safety above their need to make money. In the light of day you see what I'm saying.

Ok guys not a big deal, but for 32 years I was on the end of providing the customer service, not just service, but great service. And I notice these things everyday...Just the other day the Tag checker at the exit of my Sams club whom I have seen every time for the last couple of years looked a little pained. I asked him how he was doing, and he responded it was a tough day...(not his usual greeting)..He always wears a hat with marine ensignia on it, and from previous conversations I knew he was a retired marine. So I called him by his name and said Thank you for your service and shook his hand...That made his day...It is the little things that make people happy, a concern for your fellow human being. I was a service rep for a large corporation for all those years, and bent over backwards to meet my customers needs...The rewards (in the old days were great) for this extra care....trips,etc. So When I am the customer I ask only what I would preceive is fair and meets my needs...It gives me personal satisfaction.

But all of this is a completely different topic than a shop's refusal to mount your tires the way you wanted them when that would put you at risk as per the tire's manufacturer. Giving good service doesn't mean blindly doing whatever the customer wants. I can't really improve on Paul's assessment above...were they rude to you about it?

So guys tell me something let's say I have tires that are a different set on front and back like my Mercedes c class that I had. When I need new tires and I buy a new set for the front they aren't going to install them? They can't put them on the rear it is a different size wheel...so in that case would I have to buy all 4 or would they put them on the front and let me leave? I know that is different but there is a situation that they would let me leave with the new tires on the front of the car?

Thats an excellent question, and the fronts are going to wear much faster than the rears because they can't be rotated. I would say for safety's sake I would not replace the front tires without replacing the rear tires as well. I'd guess that a shop that adheres to these manufacturer's guidelines would not mount the front tires.

[lenore]

OK (I am being nice today)

[smooth1]

All the work orders that come in and out of shops these days are CYA all the way. The Tire Store manager is being stupid. There's plenty of room on the work orders to type :

Customer requests new tire installation on front of vehicle. Explained why they should be on rear, customer restated first request be done anyway.

Total : $699.95 + Tax

Date, and signed. in triplicate and a copy given to the customer. We go thru this every day. think about this also then, you bring in your car and ask for an oil change. While it's in they see your brakes are almost worn out, your tire wear is 90%, and you need an alignment. So it's $600 for the brakes, $400.00 for the tires and $199.00 (we're having a special) for the alignment. Tech notifies you of this and you say your broke, no way, just change the oil. Oil gets changed and the car is returned. If they drive out of there and go down the street and crash, that's not the shops fault or liability. The owner was notified of the conditions and elected not to perform the work. And by what I read here, if you said yes to the brakes, but no to the tires and alignment, they would have to tell you it's all or nothing. " I'm sorry lenore, but according to our lawyers interpretation of the liabilities laws, unless we can fix everything we see wrong with your car, if we released it back to you, even with your being made aware of the issues, we would be liable. And by the way, we can't give you back your car until the issues are corrected because of the obvious reasons we have already established.

[lenore]

Thank you very well written...

[RX350lover]

To answer the question asked in the title as to whether the lawyers are destroying our society? It could be said that if we wouldn't sue everyone for everything; if we would be a more gentle people who can forgive more, understand more and be more responsible, then we wouldn't make use of lawyers so much. After all, lawyers are just exploiting a situation that we, the people, have created all by ourselves.