Adams Only Please...

Yeah he didn't purposely mislead the customers. He didn't realize untill after the deatil was done.



When they started going on about the "Adams shine" I would have told them what happened. It would be good for a laugh.
 
By omitting that you used Meguiar's instead of Adam's product I think that you have committed fraud.
Click to expand...



Theres no fraud by omission in this case, in reality fraud by omission can't be prosecuted against in most cases, there is no duty for him to disclose the facts but there is a duty to answer questions truthfully.



An exception would be if the car had some sort of serious defect from detailing it and he didn't tell.



Regardless, even if there was an attempt at sueing for Fraud they would lose simply on the grounds that the 4 elements of fraud arent met:

Misrepresentation has occurred, Intent to Deceive, Reliance, Injury to Innocent



:sosad
 
cwcad said:


By omitting that you used Meguiar's instead of Adam's product I think that you have committed fraud.



As some one said, "I think it is funny." But I am not laughing.
Click to expand...



I don't think Joe even had any contact with the actual customer. The detail was contracted out by another shop, so I am sure Joe went out, did the detail, then found out about the Adams stuff after the fact. He is probably related what the owner of the other shop told him when the customer picked up the car.



I do details occasionally for a body shop and I have no contact with the actual owner of the vehicle and any comments I hear are from the owner of the body shop.
 
This post is getting weird!! LOL!



Thanks for the defense Scott and Komp. and others.



I was given the keys and did the best job I knew how. I was never told about the Adams until after.
 
My Bad! i guess i read the post in the wrong way. I spent quite a period of time thinking about what i was going to say in this thread. Guess i did not think enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top