Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kgb" data-source="post: 470472" data-attributes="member: 19327">Greetings ladies and gents...As you know it, yesterday was the day of first hearing for BMW case. Mechanic was there, but was not representing himself, he just happen to appoint a "manager" at his workshop who just happen to be something very similar toa lawyer, as he himself said, legall trained      That "manager" wrote reply to accusations which was only submitted on the day of hearing (looks like someone is desperate and playing dirty already). Defendent has claiimed the following: he was not appointed to do BMW as there was no agreement, he takes no responsibility over the vehicle, defendent did not purchase the engine, but the engine was purchased by the claimant thus paperwork need not to be provided by the defendent and that claimant was modifying his own car by himself, workshop space and tools were borrowed to claimant to do the work and that NO MONEY were taken from the claimant. Basically, they deny everything. So, what do you reccon?What sort of conclusions can we draw about such mechanics?Tribunal did not dismiss the case, instead was referred to the Civil Court. p.s. fellows, if this is not a great learning curve, i don't know what is, take notes and make sure you don't end up in same shit.</blockquote>