---- Bob Stevens <mtbiker62@GMAIL.COM> wrote:
> It's the mechanics responsibility to KNOW what they are doing, what they are
> working on, how to fix "the problem", while the customer
> has no responsibility or liability for any of that whatsoever. This is only
> one example, but there are hundreds if not thousands like it.
> http://ezinearticles.com/?Auto-Mechanics-Liability-For-Damages-Resulting-From-Negligent-Repairs&id=2675550
> State licensed technicians of ANY kind, who are taking $$ in exchange for
> their services, are always held liable for their work.
> It's a very poor precedent to let a paid individual off the hook for their
> "professional services".
> That's why Utah Imports drove 6 1/2 hours each way, to pick up my van in
> Montrose, CO after they installed a cam belt tensioner
> that seized after 600 miles in the fall of 2007 ... they know how this
> works.
> bob

Bob, copied this from the piece you linked to:

"Firstly, it must be proved the mechanic had a duty to use ordinary and reasonable care. Ordinary care, generally means the care that a reasonable man would exercise under the circumstances. "

I doubt that any reasonable person would expect the dipstick to be marked incorrectly or in otherwise faulty so that filling per the dipstick causes overfilling.  I suspect that there are literally hundreds of thousands of oil changes performed daily by paid personnel, and that in 99,999% of those, the oil is filled to the mark, without any problem.

I am a person who happens to expect complete and proper service from personnel I pay to perform it.  I don't expect them to know bizarre, nonstock attributes of my vehicle unless I make it a point to inform them.

DMc