Raymond
Whitney,#2Consumer Comment
Thu, August 10, 2006
Yes that is right, it is your fault. Upon the occurance of the mistake you were the one responsible to have Wal-Mart make note, on their paperwork with the proper signatures of management, of all that transpired during your visit for maintenance. Sorry but this is a fact. It is called CYA(not a legal term). Then you would have had recourse against them once you found the problem. Also, Wal-Mart would not liable for the entire amount of a replacement transmission they would only be liable for a pro rated value of the transmission based on age and mileage. This would severally devalue the amount that you would receive. I also agree with a previous post here advising that you are liable to "Mitigate Damage", no matter if there is any changes to the performance of the transmission. If damages occured from the mistake then additional damages most likely are occuring from continual useage.
Robert
Jacksonville,#3Consumer Comment
Thu, August 10, 2006
I said, "You'll have a hard time trying to recoup anything from WalMart. All an oil analysis will show is that it's a petroleum product. Both are." I do not dispute damge is done to your transaxle. I also do not dispute engine oil can do that. I am simply saying an oil analysis will show nothing more than the fluid is petroleum based. It will also show how much, and what type, metal in the oil. But, that's it. Using that as your proof, the Judge will toss it out. This will sound callous, but it's the truth. There is a reason places like that charge very little. They have a grand total of ZERO mechanics working for them. The quickie lube places at least train their kids. Even so, they average one engine per month, destroyed. Most independent shops charge about $5 more than the CHEAP places. To save that $5, you'll spend $4000. CHEAP has never been equated to GOOD.
Jeff
Wesley Chapel,#4Author of original report
Thu, August 10, 2006
I understand. I assumed that, if anything, the possible issue was that the improper oil was preventing the trans from working properly. If so, then why would Subaru say that I need to replace the trans completely? The cost of which is $4,000. Also, the symptoms have not worsened or changed. It's doing exactly what it did from day one. Also, Walmart has completely turned down my claim. They have not said anything except that I "can't prove they did it"... which they obviously did. The hood was not even lifted in between those to services.
Robert
Jacksonville,#5Consumer Comment
Wed, August 09, 2006
ATF is oil. It's a 5 wt oil with friction modifiers , red dye(or blue), and detergents. Just like engine oil, it turns black when it's worn out its' usefullness. You'll have a hard time trying to recoup anything from WalMart. All an oil analysis will show is that it's a petroleum product. Both are. Good luck though.
Hugh
Paducah,#6Consumer Suggestion
Wed, August 09, 2006
I would go ahead and get the correct oil installed in your transaxle. Who knows, you might just correct the problem you are having by simply doing that. You do have some responsibility to mitigate the damages - that is, limit the damage done to the transmission by the incorrect oil. Let's say Wal-Mart ends up agreeing to pay and repairs are $2000 - they might very well argue, "well, if he had changed the oil to the correct one back when the Midas store told him it was the wrong oil, then the damage would only have been $500, so that's all we are going to pay".