Bike Shop Damaged My Frame Issue - Help!

[Pure Savage]

I disagree. Their poor workmanship really stuffed up his bike in what I read to be a sensitive area that one should not be repairing. They therefore need to replace his frame.

If insured, claim and let the bike shop take on the insurers' legal team.

They would argue its sensitive but repairable with a 6 month warranty. Much harder argument than if there was a longer warranty in place already. 

Edited August 5, 2019 by Pure Savage

[Pure Savage]

So frame may not have have been new according to a little birdie. 

 

Therefore a repair by a carbon expert is all CD should really have offered. Offering a new frame sounds like a nice gesture which did not go well. 

 

Sorry OP, dont think any amount of lawyers is going to help here. CD offered you a sweet deal first up which they did not have to. 

 

Unless the frame was bought new from Spez. 

[King_Crispy]

No conspiracy. The posts were removed for containing private communications and personal details. It's against our rules.

 

We also removed any posted quoting them. Including the Specialized post.

 

These latest posts including the same will also be removed.

Then why do you not notify anyone that you've removed a post?

I've said it before, it's public domain. Different legal entity/set of rules you're dealing with

[cadenceblur]

So frame may not have have been new according to a little birdie. 

 

Therefore a repair by a carbon expert is all CD should really have offered. Offering a new frame sounds like a nice gesture which did not go well. 

 

Sorry OP, dont think any amount of lawyers is going to help here. CD offered you a sweet deal first up which they did not have to. 

 

Unless the frame was bought new from Spez.

 

Okay, so put yourself in the OPs shoes.. You get your well looked after bike back in that condition and get told "we'll repair it with a 6 months warranty "? You going to to be happy?

[Arrie]

Specialized at it again, i had a fight with them also of paint peeling on my previous bike that i bought brand new from them. Anyways, sold the bike and so happy with my new bike, i will never ever purchase a specialized again.

[Jewbacca]

Then why do you not notify anyone that you've removed a post?

I've said it before, it's public domain. Different legal entity/set of rules you're dealing with

It's in their user terms and conditions.

 

You agree to their user terms and conditions when you set up your account.

 

They are not obliged to tell everyone every time they break their agreement.

 

This site is governed and managed, it is not 'public domain' as you have agreed to the T's and C's..... 

[stringbean]

But they offered him a brand new 2019 frame as replacement for his second hand 2015 frame and he rejected it because he doesn’t want to pay for the build over costs.

[Hairy]

Specialized at it again, i had a fight with them also of paint peeling on my previous bike that i bought brand new from them. Anyways, sold the bike and so happy with my new bike, i will never ever purchase a specialized again.

Just to stay on point here, the gripe is with the LBS and not the Spaz Brand.

[cadenceblur]

Which was potentially Indeed a mistake or a point of principle for the OP.

[MudLark]

Legally, there are a number of different ways of approaching the question of the determination of damages, depending upon facts and circumstances. But in this case probably the most appropriate is to ascertain what the value of the bike was before and after the BB was damaged. The difference is the loss that was suffered. Compare that to the new 2019 frame value, less the cost of the build over. If the number is there or thereabouts its a reasonable offer to square up the harm caused.

I can't imagine that build over costs could be that significant. As said, a few grand at most.

I suspect that once rebuilt with the new 2019 frame, the "new" bike will be worth more on the open market that the aggregate of the value of the old bike (before damage) plus the build over costs. If so, it's a fair offer and should be taken.

Engaging the services of a decent lawyer will cost more than the build over costs and likely be irrecoverable.

Sometimes in life it's wise to just cut a deal and move on.

 

Edited August 6, 2019 by MudLark

[MORNE]

snip

 

 i think you might have missed the part where the bikeshop seems to be pulling a fast one and is now unwilling to offer a new frame anymore and only a repair job. By the looks of it, they might have been responsible for the damage and  can't claim a warranty replacement that way,  so would have to pay for a new frame out of pocket if thats the case and are now opting for the cheapest option at the expense of the OP

 

at least thats what it looks like.

[MudLark]

 i think you might have missed the part where the bikeshop seems to be pulling a fast one and is now unwilling to offer a new frame anymore and only a repair job. By the looks of it, they might have been responsible for the damage and  can't claim a warranty replacement that way,  so would have to pay for a new frame out of pocket if thats the case and are now opting for the cheapest option at the expense of the OP

 

at least thats what it looks like.

 

I admit that I read the original post and a few of the posts in between but not all 14 pages… But in principle, the original poster is entitled to be put back in the position he would have been in had they not damaged the frame bottom bracket in the first place. That is, in theoretical principle at least, the test that should be applied. How you get there in practice in these particular circumstances though is a slightly different matter.

 

If somebody like Carbon Repairs is willing to do the repair work and sign it off as having been properly done, that's probably about as much as you can reasonably ask for in the circumstances. It's a little bit like a car accident. Somebody goes into your car, the panel beaters repair it and warrant it for six months. One may not be wild about it but that's pretty much how the system works. I certainly wouldn't be prepared to accept a carbon repair on the bottom bracket carried out by the bike shop themselves (maybe I have the wrong end of the factual stick here?). But if it's done professionally, that's another matter.

[Pure Savage]

 i think you might have missed the part where the bikeshop seems to be pulling a fast one and is now unwilling to offer a new frame anymore and only a repair job. By the looks of it, they might have been responsible for the damage and  can't claim a warranty replacement that way,  so would have to pay for a new frame out of pocket if thats the case and are now opting for the cheapest option at the expense of the OP

 

at least thats what it looks like.

Thats if the frame was under warranty, otherwise they just need to repair what they broke.

[MudLark]

Hm. Reading the OP:

 

* Then previous LBS finally offers new 2019 replacement frame BUT all follow-on costs are to be for my account. This means I am now liable for a new hub, wheel build, seat post and BB. Never mind second wheel build. This total cost (with all sundries) I am not sure of, but this will easily amount to a few grand (cost price to them is way less).

* I reject the offer as I do not feel it is right that I need to cover any follow-on costs.

* I then get email stating three choices: 1. Sourced used, comparable frame with sign-off on frame by head office BUT any build costs are for me 2. New replacement frame BUT all required components and build costs for me 3. Repair old frame and sign off by HQ.

IMHO, for reasons explained above, should take (or should have taken) 2 and moved on. Not entirely clear to me whether 2 is still an option or not. Perhaps attitudes are hardening.

[Dirkitech]

Legally, there are a number of different ways of approaching the question of the determination of damages, depending upon facts and circumstances. But in this case probably the most appropriate is to ascertain what the value of the bike was before and after the BB was damaged. The difference is the loss that was suffered. Compare that to the new 2019 frame value, less the cost of the build over. If the number is there or thereabouts its a reasonable offer to square up the harm caused.

 

I can't imagine that build over costs could be that significant. As said, a few grand at most.

 

I suspect that once rebuilt with the new 2019 frame, the "new" bike will be worth more on the open market that the aggregate of the value of the old bike (before damage) plus the build over costs. If so, it's a fair offer and should be taken.

 

Engaging the services of a decent lawyer will cost more than the build over costs and likely be irrecoverable.

 

Sometimes in life it's wise to just cut a deal and move on.

 

 

This makes sense, but just wondering about a technicality - what if said person who's bike was damaged, had a usable bike beforehand and a new frame minus rebuild cost would net them a new frame and components but not a usable bike? #justcurious

[mrcg]

Thanks Morne and Mudlark for being more factual. A lot of others...jirre, julle kann ook n klomp *** praat. Gentlemen, let's bury the hysteria....and keep it factual. I listed only factual arguments and no emotional outbursts.

I am trying to deal with a dealer/service provider who messed up a job and thereby destroyed my property. How they plan to rectify their error is under debate here. Nothing else.

And nothing else actually matters here!

 

Again, the bottom line is:
1. BB was incorrectly installed.
2. This resulted in BB shell damage.
3. This area is know as a CSP - a critical stress point. Meaning non-repairable. Of course it could be repaired but it won't last. Therefore not an option - non-starter!
4. The model I have is also no longer available, otherwise it would be a straight swop-out. Meaning I need to take the latest model. Which means, there are additional components necessary for a boost bike. Is that my fault? Should I carry those costs and other costs through no fault of mine?

 

So, stringybean, you can pass on the message: Cycles Direct messed up royally, irreparably damaged my bike (as assessed and reported by three independent experts, ,including the manufacturer!), and have now essentially told me to get f%@£d.
They are shirking their full responsibility and want to shaft me in only providing a repair.
In fact, AFTER I compromised and accepted their offer of a new frame (as suggested by many hubbers), with resultant build costs for me (R6000!), they suddenly (same day a few hours later) retracted this option. Which I can only interpret as being a strategy from the outset.

Cycles Direct seemingly tried to claim a warranty from Specialized - which was rightly refused. But Specialized still tried to assist the shop to do the correct thing: providing a discounted frame. I have no issues with Specialized as a brand!

 

Carbon Repair have said they would not repair. Even if I was offered a 2 year warranty by Bogus, the joy of riding a bike which is just waiting to break down is a non-starter.
New bike...used bike, in or out of warranty......completely non-essential to the process and discussion.

 

In your example Mudlark, we are talking about the engine room here: we can't epoxy the pistons with a 6 month warranty.

It is not the boot or top tube area, which would've been a completely different story. Savage, if your car is 5 years old and out of warranty, does this mean they only need to attempt to repair the irreparable, and you would accept it?

 

Ok, back to work everybody. Happy Tuesday!

 

(edit for spelling)

Edited August 6, 2019 by mrcg