Thank you, Rick, and I hope my edit conveys what you meant. Certainly, and regardless of paragraphing, that is my take on the matter.
Legally speaking–and note I am speaking generally as 1993 Dodge Ram is in a different jurisdiction than I am–this is a matter of contract. 1993 Dodge, you contracted with a mechanic to put in a part you supplied. He did the work, but your part was defective. Regardless–and this is the important part–you contracted for him to do the work, which he did. Now it is time for you to make good on your obligation under the contract, which is to pay him. This is why the police won’t heed your claims of “stolen vehicle”; because the mechanic has a legitimate claim against your vehicle for work performed on it but not yet paid for. It could be said that legally, he has an equitable interest against your vehicle; or, in lay terms, he can put a lien on title. Or, he can simply keep the vehicle until you pay his bill, which it sounds like he has.
As I said, I am generally speaking, and I am not in California. I would suggest that if 1993 Dodge Ram wants her van back, that she pay the mechanic’s tab in full. She can pursue a civil remedy later, if any is available under the law of California. For now, as regards any legal issues, I’d suggest she consult a California lawyer, who could inform her of her rights, and more importantly, of her obligations, under the contract she struck with the mechanic.
Note that my remarks are based on the information as given, which I may or may not understand fully. In addition, there may be unreported facts, which could change my answer. As always, the best advice to the OP is to consult a lawyer licensed to practice in the jurisdiction where the matter is occurring.
If you were in Nevada, I would say, “open carry”. Never have a problem when you “open carry”, and get treated with the respect due an average money paying customer.
WTF?
You do realize that the shop owner has done nothing wrong (based on what has been posted here) and in an open carry state, what you are suggesting could get the OP either arrested or shot.
I say again, WTF?
She’s not a 'money-paying customer," as she refuses to pay any money.
Implied threats that arise due to open carry will not overcome the contractual obligations incurred by the OP, and may adversely influence the Court should matters get that far.
It’s not a matter of paying for repairs. Repaired or not, the OP has to pay for the mechanic’s time.
By bringing a part to the mechanic, you’re hiring the mechanic to do n hours labor to install the part you provided. If he installs the part and the part is defective, the mechanic doesn’t get that n hours of his life back…n hours that he could’ve spent working on someone else’s car and getting paid for it.
Furthermore, it sounds like something is wrong with the car besides the water pump, but by the OP self-diagnosing and providing a part, the mechanic didn’t have the opportunity to do his own diagnosis. If the mechanic had misdiagnosed the problem, then he’d have to eat the labor for any unnecessary work he did, but that’s not what happened here.
ETA: Wow…Rick and Spoons gave almost the same answer I did…I shouldn’t spend 2 hours editing a post.
Not sure how it works in Nevada, but if you use that “open carry” to insinuate that kind of threat in Louisiana, it becomes “brandishing” and you go to jail for a very long time.
As you know, I am not in any of the jurisdictions involved. But based on my readings of American caselaw, and my experiences in the United States, simply carrying a firearm in a holster (in a state where that is permitted, of course), won’t cause any legal problems. Assuming of course, that the firearm is not pulled out and waved around to effect a quick solution to what is ultimately a civil matter. At that point, I’d guess that all bets are off.
This is a monumentally stupid idea. This is exactly the mindset that the gun grabbers want to hear to justify all of their fears. Implying use of force of any kind while openly carrying a firearm in such circumstances can shift from customer throwing a tantrum to armed robbery without even drawing the weapon. Almost any threatening behavior while armed is going to land you in jail or at best detained while the cops decide if you are a real threat or not.
Also many small business owners have guns on the premises, this kind of stunt with an armed business owner can end up creating a situation you cannot win legally. He has a decent shot at a self defense plea if he shoots you and you roll the dice with shooting someone in the process of committing another crime, see Felony Murder Rule
IF you instigate the situation, under CA law as I understand it, you have surrendered your ability to legally use lethal force in self defense. Under the OP’s desire to remove her vehicle you would cross into armed robbery, and any shooting that takes place is gonna land her in prison for a long, long time.
Also CA law has a differentiation for open carry and loaded open carry. Loaded open carry does require permits and or additional justification as I understand it. Security guards for example can get a loaded carry permit and are allowed to carry loaded within reason to and from work/job sites.
I’m not touching the ‘flash a gun and get your van back - problem solved’ suggestion.
I’m also trying to understand the circumstances/consequences of not getting the van back, which we learned also has a number of other presumably new parts inside, along with, I’m guessing, some personal possessions. On the one hand, the OP suggests she will be homeless for whatever reason if the van situation doesn’t resolve itself by 10/1. Yet, somehow she is able to get from the mechanic to the auto shop to the auto parts warehouse without a working vehicle. I got the impression when I started reading this post that this was some poor person who got stranded in Victorville with a broken down van driving from Vegas to L.A. or something of that nature. However, she somehow has the ability to abandon the van, get to wherever she has to go to prevent from being homeless without the van, and then implies she may even have the money to get another vehicle. I presume the value of the van is greater than the $500+ repair. At this point, it’s probably the only issue worth considering. Otherwise she should pay for the repair and sell the van to recoup the money. It sounds like the van may be a piece of crap anyway, so maybe that’s the best course of action.
Another local chiming in…in Victorville, I usually use:
A&M Auto Repair on D Street (x-4th), (760)-245-5185, for general auto repair. Friendly, reliable and moderate in expense.
Bob’s Tires on D Street (x-4th), (760)-245-3333, for Brakes and Tires. Friendly, reliable and moderate in expense.
I tend to stay away from the repair shops on 7th street, even the chains like Midas and Goodyear…kinda shady in my book. The shops listed above have been around for decades and have built a solid reputation over the years. Not the best neighborhood in town, but you’re not paying for the scenery. Stick to the advice given by the other dopers in the car repair field. Ask questions before committing your vehicle to be worked on. Know up front what you expect of them and vice versa.
Look, OP, I know that, yes, when a mechanic goes and gets the part they often charge a markup…but, if you’re in a strange place, it’s probably best to let them do it-because they’re going to know who the reputable parts dealers are.
Now, my suggestion to you, is pay the man, get your piece of junk hauled to somewhere else, fixed properly, and next time you wind up needing repairs in a strange place…
Go to the people at the parts stores (like O’Reilly, Carquest, or NAPA, but don’t even bother with Autozone) and ask the counter staff who does the repairs they themselves don’t feel like doing on their cars.
You find the really good, affordable mechanics that way.
