The salesman at my local dealer told me this story so its second hand but scarry none the less.Seems the mechanic at the dealership has an older 400 sport with many mods and its fast to say the least.He was also trying to sell it.This guy comes to test ride it and decided he wanted to see how well it would take off on the paved parking lot.Dumping full throttle to it,it went straight up doing several end over ends before landing.When the guy landed it apparently took most of his clothes off as well as doing,at last count,$1500 in damages to the bike.The mechanic had no insurance and the moron made no offer to even help pay for the damages.Makes you wonder why some dealers won't allow test rides don't it.

 

FAST TO SAY THE LEAST, several end overs off of take off. Sounds like a Darrel Waltrip story. excellent point though, I would think most dealers would have more common sense then to have some guy walk in with obviously not much if any experience and let them hop on a built machine. Good story though.

 

OOOHHH I'm envious! I'd Love to be able to do that on mine....still on warranty.

 

Used to sell motorcycles. Hold the guy's credit card when he rides. Nail it quick when he falls!

Rich



------------------
Rich Weinssen 1999 Scrambler 500 2000 Scrambler 500 2000 Trail Boss 1998 Magnum 425

 

The moron was a nice guy after all. He could have sued the dealership and the mechanic for whatever physical and or mental damages....?!

Joe

 

A scary story on several levels.

The courts generally hold the vendor responsible for any damages, not the customer, in these mishaps. Has to do with "social responsibility of business," maintaining an "attractive nuisance," knowingly and willingly permitting unsafe practices, etc., etc. (Don't shoot the messenger!)

Some risk appears as the "cost of doing business." For example, many posters have declared they're "mad as hell and not going to take it anymore" because a dealer denys or limits test rides. Thus, the dealer feels pressure to let the custromer have a go. However, customers don't wear jersies identifying them either as knowledgeable, capable, reasonable ATV riders of good judgment, or the reverse--careless, incompetent, reckless and dangerous dudes like the guy in the story.

Surely, everyone reading this post is a safe, capable rider. How does the dealer distinguish US from THEM? If you were a dealer, and your life savings were tied up in your business, what test ride policy would you implement?

Tree Farmer

 

Yes, the prospective buyer was a jerk for not offering to pay for repairs, but I would like to know if he was properly informed of the quad's capabilities. The mechanic bears at least some responsibility for not carrying insurance as well. By passing on the insurance, the mechanic becomes, in effect, self-insured. He just got to pay a "claim".
Some days you're the windshield, some days you're the bug....

No - I do not sell insurance

------------------
Hawk - stock (for now) 99 Scrambler 400

 

All the fuss about vendor responsibility notwithstanding, this was a private individual offering his own property for sale to another private individual. Unless the transaction was part of a business transaction by a dealer, on the dealer's premises, I expect his liability would be limited.

It sounds like this is the kind of situation you or I could be in when we attempt to buy or sell quads (or anything else) privately.

 

Let me just clarify something.The dealership was not selling the quad for him,he had it for sale as an individual.And I'm sure the prospective buyer was warned.I personally have insurance on both of my quads I couldn't replace either one if something like this happened to me.

 

"Vendor," in this case, could mean the mechanic selling the quad privately. If the dealer knowingly permitted the activity on his premises, or if the dealer did not employ "reasonable and proper" means prohibiting this activity, the dealer could incumber some liability for mishaps even on private sale activity.

The status of the mechanic comes into play. Was he an "agent" of the dealership? Would a "reasonable" person assume so (e.g., he's wearing a dealership uniform, obviously working on the premises)? Was the mechanic "on the clock," actively employed at the time of the incident?

Again, please don't shoot me, the messenger; I merely point out: the arms of the liability lawyers are long; their fingers, often sticky; be careful out there!

Tree Farmer