A Customer is Suing Over an Old Repair He Never Approved or Paid for

My question involves a consumer law issue in the State of: California
This is a small claims $5000 claim
I have a small business that repairs camera lenses.
6 years ago someone came to me and asked for estimate on repairing a broken lens.
I gave him an estimate and he never responded.
He went off the radar for about 5 years (I kept his lens in storage) and suddenly came back to me a year or so ago. I pulled the lens out of storage but now there is evident glass separation(damage) on one of the internal elements. The lens was dropped so it probably started when he brought it to me but was not visible that much. Now he wanted it fixed and threatened with a lawsuit. I took some time trying to repair, make the lens perform better and returned it to him.
In the mean time he served me the court date papers. First he said he'll not pursue but he just changed his mind (a week before the court date). I don't think I can find the old repair estimate. I wrote it off long time ago.
He never paid me a penny..

What is his claimed cause of action? In other words, what is his claim as to why you owe him anything?

Quote:

---

Quoting zaku

---

My question involves a consumer law issue in the State of: California
This is a small claims $5000 claim
I have a small business that repairs camera lenses.
6 years ago someone came to me and asked for estimate on repairing a broken lens.
I gave him an estimate and he never responded.
He went off the radar for about 5 years (I kept his lens in storage) and suddenly came back to me a year or so ago. I pulled the lens out of storage but now there is evident glass separation(damage) on one of the internal elements. The lens was dropped so it probably started when he brought it to me but was not visible that much. Now he wanted it fixed and threatened with a lawsuit. I took some time trying to repair, make the lens perform better and returned it to him.
In the mean time he served me the court date papers. First he said he'll not pursue but he just changed his mind (a week before the court date). I don't think I can find the old repair estimate. I wrote it off long time ago.
He never paid me a penny..

---

Go into court and explain it to the judge the same way you explained it here.

So you will have to go to court and answer the complaint with whatever you can find for evidence. Don't forget that the plaintiff has to prove his case with evidence also so he might have the written estimate.

One thing working in your favor is the statute of limitations.

In CA

Breach of a written contract: Four years from the date the contract was broken.
Breach of an oral contract: Two years from the date the contract was broken.
Property damage: Three years from the date the damage occurred.

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

What is his claimed cause of action? In other words, what is his claim as to why you owe him anything?

---

I just noticed- I think he got it reversed.
It says :
"Plaintiff caused damage to defendants property (a motion picture camera lens) rendering it useless. Plaintiff has not returned damaged property or explained cause of damage despite years of diligent effort to recover property"
It does not give a specific date but it specifies the period 1.1.2012 to 1.5.2013. I don't know what he is talking about with the dates- I've had this lens for 6 years. Maybe he has some emails but they are more recent. I know-it's a mess....
The property has been returned and signed for...

if that is what it really says, sounds like he has no idea what he is doing but given we are talking small claims, don't be surprised to see the judge to allow the complaint to be amended with the terms of plaintiff and defendant corrected.


Other than that; the plaintiff has the burden of proving their case. If you have a signed reciept for the lens, it obviously flies in the face of the plaintiff's claim. That also can damage their veracity if it is not explainable.

Other than that; do not lose your own case. Make the plaintiff prove his case. You defend against his evidence.



the problem I see is you did work on the lens after it had been at your shop for a long time due to the now seen damage. He will likely argue you did the damage. You then attempted to repair it but apparently it is not repairable. Since you did the work about a year ago to damage that was not known until he came to pick up the lens (after 5 years), the clock will likely be based on the discovery date of the damage and not the original delivery.

Can you defend a claim that you caused the damage? If it was not noticeable when he brought it in, it might lose your case for you.

I was just going to say that I repair lenses and the fact that it was given to me for repair obviously means that it was broken and not useable. It was impact damage and the damage was already there. I also have some email communication with him that the damage was there when I pulled it after he wanted it back but I'm not sure if I should volunteer anything...

Quote:

---

Quoting zaku

---

I was just going to say that I repair lenses and the fact that it was given to me for repair obviously means that it was broken and not useable. It was impact damage and the damage was already there. I also have some email communication with him that the damage was there when I pulled it after he wanted it back but I'm not sure if I should volunteer anything...

---

ok, it was broken, or damaged, but in what way? You say it was impact damage but the separation was not apparent at the time. You will likely have to describe how that could be, to the judges satisfaction. Otherwise, the guy brought in a damaged lens, with no separation and when he retrieved it from you, there was separation. Sounds like it happened while in your care.

Would it be helpful to print out some ebay ads that show that the price of that lens is $2900? I could also argue that the repair was $1700 so the actual value of the lens before the damage was discovered was $2900-1700=1200. I also looked online and found similar glass element for sale for $400.
Could I argue that the claim is $400 or less since that's what the cost of the damaged element is?
Or should I just stick with the "not guilty" defense? Could I start with not guilty defense and , if it doesn't go well bring up the monetary values in attempt to lower the judgement?
Haw do I do that?

In a civil case, there is no pleading guilty or not guilty. The Plaintiff will present his case and the Defendant (you) will present your case (like you did here in your first post) and any other defense to the complaint like SOL or plaintiff abandoned the property. Do you have a sign in your shop that addresses abandoned property if not picked up in a certain time.

Have all the cost and price info with you and use it if the judge asks about the cost.

Watch a few episodes of Judge Judy.:friendly_wink:

OK sounds good (not really haha)
I'll gather all the for sale ads, and play it by the ear. Should I volunteer with the printouts of the old emails or just verbally describe them? Is it important to have the printouts?

In small claims court, the case is heard as a dialog between the judge and the plaintiff and the judge and the defendant. You don't know how that dialog will take place until it happens. The judge will want to get to the meat and bones of the case as quickly as he can. If he thinks the plaintiff has a case and you don't have a defense, the judge will want to know about damages. On the other hand, if the judge does not think the plaintiff has a case, you will not need to establish the cost.

It's the same thing with the emails. Have everything with you and use it if you need it.

Did you answer the complaint or file a counterclaim for the cost of repair?

http://www.courts.ca.gov/1113.htm

No I did not know it was possible.
All this time I tried to get it taken care of by fixing the lens and he changed his mind about going ahead with the suit on Monday.
I happen to be traveling this week.
The court date is on Monday.
BTW if the claim states period of 1/1/2012- 1/1/2013 the starting date is past 3 years. Would that make the claim pass SOL?

Quote:

---

Quoting zaku

---

All this time I tried to get it taken care of by fixing the lens and he changed his mind about going ahead with the suit on Monday.

---

If you're planning on not appearing in court on Monday, you had best be certain that the matter has been dismissed or adjourned. If the plaintiff appears in court on Monday and you're not there, he'll likely get a default judgment.

Quote:

---

Quoting budwad

---

In small claims court, the case is heard as a dialog between the judge and the plaintiff and the judge and the defendant. You don't know how that dialog will take place until it happens. The judge will want to get to the meat and bones of the case as quickly as he can. If he thinks the plaintiff has a case and you don't have a defense, the judge will want to know about damages. On the other hand, if the judge does not think the plaintiff has a case, you will not need to establish the cost.

It's the same thing with the emails. Have everything with you and use it if you need it.

Did you answer the complaint or file a counterclaim for the cost of repair?

http://www.courts.ca.gov/1113.htm

---

He cannot alter the contract of a free repair to now customer has to pay for it.

I don't see anything in OP's posts that says he made any contract to repair the lens for free either in writing or verbally.

Quote:

---

Quoting budwad

---

I don't see anything in OP's posts that says he made any contract to repair the lens for free either in writing or verbally.

---

Going back and reading it appears not clear to me if the repair of the newly discovered damage was at the owners cost or some other arrangement. Given how it was phrased;

I took some time trying to repair, make the lens perform better and returned it to him



sounds like op was simply attempting to repair the lens without charging the customer. Otherwise why wouldn't op simply give an estimate to replace the element and make it fully functional. Why would one stop at "made it work better" if one is charging for a repair?

Yes it it confusing
Here is the time line
2009 customer brought me the lens and I gave him the estimate of $1700 to repair.
He did not get back to me until 2012.But that was about some other repairs, technical advise. By then I had put the lens in storage shed. He did not inquire about the lens until 2013. When I pulled the lens out of storage about that time I noticed the separating glass and started looking for replacement. That's when I told him about it. Unable to find replacement for this old lens I did what I could to make it work correctly and returned it to him about a month ago.
Before I did I asked him via email if that will take care of the lawsuit . He said yes and he confirmed when I returned the lens.
Last weekend I got an email from him that he changed his mind and is proceeding with the lawsuit. There was no other contract, verbal or otherwise about the repair. I did what I could because he told me he'd back out of the lawsuit. I'm back from travel now and plan to be present for the court date.

so the original $1700 estimate was for the damage as known in 2009. I don't know if that repair had anything to do with the recent condition.

Quote:

---

Unable to find replacement for this old lens I did what I could to make it work correctly and returned it to him about a month ago.

---

do you often charge $1700 to repair something with the promise of; I'll do what I can to make it work but no promises?

so, was the work you did part of a contract to repair the lens or was it gratis for whatever reason? If part of the contract, why did you allow him to take the lens without receiving payment?



and if you could not find replacement parts, how is it that you can now provide a price for those parts that are not available?

Quote:

---

Would it be helpful to print out some ebay ads that show that the price of that lens is $2900? I could also argue that the repair was $1700 so the actual value of the lens before the damage was discovered was $2900-1700=1200. I also looked online and found similar glass element for sale for $400.
Could I argue that the claim is $400 or less since that's what the cost of the damaged element is?

---

if you could not find the element to replace the damaged one, there is no price available.

and in the following excerpt from another of your posts you state you cannot find a replacement for the lens. Either you can establish value because there are other lenses like this one for sale or there aren't. If not, you can attempt to establish value by using similar age, quality, and mechanically comparable lenses.





.

Quote:

---

Unable to find replacement for this old lens I did what I could to make it work correctly and returned it to him about a month ago.

---

Quote:

---

Before I did I asked him via email if that will take care of the lawsuit . He said yes and he confirmed when I returned the lens.

---

not likely to be worth much of anything. All he has to do is claim you said the lens would be fixed which apparently it isn't.

I'm sorry about the confusion it is a bit convoluted. I appreciate your time very much indeed. ;-)
At the time of the initial $1700 estimate the glass was not part of it as I was unaware of the damage. I only quoted for the repair I was going to perform.
I found another glass element from the same type of the lens for $400 (approximately same size but not the same one). I can not locate the needed element.
The glass is still the same in the lens (separating/damaged) I just made mechanical repair/adjustment for it to work correctly. You actually can't see any effect on the image created by the lens caused by the separation. But it is clearly visible when you look inside the lens.
He was clearly aware that the separating glass will remain in the lens- the assembly, adjustment will only be mechanical.
Actually I looked back and there isn't even mention of any repair on our recent exchange.
He just wanted the lens back and said that he would back out.
I did some tweaking/mechanical repairs on my own...
Oh yes and there is another one for sale now.
In good condition, no repairs needed, $4000. Can I use it as an example and deduct the $1700 repair from it?
And use the $2900 one that sold on Ebay to support my claim?

First of all it is beyond the statue of limitations. If a Customer never approved for service then you are not held responsible especially if the client is outside of the warranty period or repair period.

A customer could come to you for an estimate or inquired about service but decide to go somewhere else as he/she did not approve(for you to perform the repair) for the repair. How can the customer prove that he or she did not damage it? How can you prove that you did not damage it? Basically it can be hearsay where he said she said. 6 years is quite a long time to come back for a free or discounted repair.

Lets say I brought in my laptop for repair at 123 Laptop Repairs 6 years ago and today I found out my hard drive is failing. I simply cannot prove that it was due to 123 Laptop Repairs as you are given a 90 day repair warranty and even then you could be charged for labor and parts if it was found out that the customer altered it. In the case of your customer they could have went on a Safari to Africa two weeks ago and broke the lens and wanted to find someone to blame so they decided to blame you. They may be trying to scam you because 6 years after the fact is too much.

If they wanted the lens fixed then they need to enter in a new contract with you.

Clearly you are under no obligation to enter into an old agreement as the cost of labor has gone up and the parts can be more expensive.

Remember the sign"We reserve the right to refuse service". If the customer is really pushing you to do something you don't want to do then you can tresspass the customer and tell him/her that they are no longer welcome in your establishment and if they come to you again you will call the police and charge them for tresspassing.

Having a tresspassing warning or order could be helpful to you if you do go to court provided that you are doing it legally and not discriminating against the customer.

Thank you that's what I figured. He's just trying to liquidate his last piece of gear that he owns. He apparently sold all his camera gear. Just my common sense tells me that somebody 6 years after leaving the gear with me , never approving repair and not paying me a penny can't just demand compensation because the lens is still broken. It makes no sense to me and hopefully will be the same to the judge. Besides the statue of limitations should be the best defense.

You are so welcome zaku and yes the Statue Of Limitations is your best defense. Remember to ask for your legal fees to be paid as well as loss of business time during the trial and other foreseeable costs encountered as a result of this frivolous lawsuit. Perhaps ask for a Tresspassing or Restraining Order if you feel uncomfortable dealing with this client in the future. I would tell the Judge that you wish to not do business with a client who tries to come to you after the fact.

Hope it works out and please keep us posted on the outcome.

Quote:

---

Quoting travelplus

---

You are so welcome zaku and yes the Statue Of Limitations is your best defense. Remember to ask for your legal fees to be paid as well as loss of business time during the trial and other foreseeable costs encountered as a result of this frivolous lawsuit. Perhaps ask for a Tresspassing or Restraining Order if you feel uncomfortable dealing with this client in the future. I would tell the Judge that you wish to not do business with a client who tries to come to you after the fact.

Hope it works out and please keep us posted on the outcome.

---

zaku failed to treat the lens as abandoned property and in fact, performed work on the property very recently. That makes an sol defense invalid. In California there are requirements regarding abandoned property. If a merchant fails to avail themselves of what the law allows, they end up with the continuation of a bailment. Given it was a gratuitous bailment at the time the duty of care zaku was required to comply with was an ordinary level of care, the fact the lens was arguably damaged by zaku, the owner has a reasonable argument for the value of the lens, in it's condition at the time of the delivery.


as to the legal fees and loss of business; not a chance in the world. This is far from frivolous.

as to a trespassing or restraining order; what are you even talking about? Zaku can ban owner from returning to his shop if he so chooses. If owner returns, there is a trespass. There is no valid argument for a restraining order. Feeling uncomfortable is not even close to a valid claim for an RO.

Quote:

---

zaku writes:

Thank you that's what I figured. He's just trying to liquidate his last piece of gear that he owns. He apparently sold all his camera gear. Just my common sense tells me that somebody 6 years after leaving the gear with me , never approving repair and not paying me a penny can't just demand compensation because the lens is still broken. It makes no sense to me and hopefully will be the same to the judge. Besides the statue of limitations should be the best defense.

---

since he NEVER approved a repair, the only argument you would have to attempt to claim the value of the repair would be on a quantum meruit argument. There was no contract in place under which you could seek compensation, at least that you have disclosed here.

The statute of limitations does not apply since you did not avail yourself of the laws regarding abandoned property. Then, since you did work, the exact discussion at that time is what the time involved will be dealing with. Your "contract" was entered into on that day. Since I was not privy to that discussion I cannot say if the owner has a valid claim for damages or if you have a valid defense of any sort. You can try an sol defense but often times, given it is was is called an affirmative defense, if you did not file your response to the suit with such a claim, it may not be allowed as a defense once you get to court. Given you are dealing with small claims, the rules can often be loose compared to a higher court, it surely would be in your best interest to at least attempt to make an sol argument.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

travelplus;892295]First of all it is beyond the statue of limitations. If a Customer never approved for service then you are not held responsible especially if the client is outside of the warranty period or repair period.

---

talk in circles much? If the customer never approved any work, then why was there work performed? Then, what warranty period do you think applies? The work was very recent.

as to statute of limitations: what are you considering in that statement? sol for am implied warranty? sol for a claim for loss of personal property? sol for a claim on a failure of zaku to perform under his duty of care for a bailment? Something else maybe? Simply tossing out; it is beyond the statute of limitations, doesn't mean a lot in itself.

Quote:

---

A customer could come to you for an estimate or inquired about service but decide to go somewhere else as he/she did not approve(for you to perform the repair) for the repair. How can the customer prove that he or she did not damage it? How can you prove that you did not damage it? Basically it can be hearsay where he said she said. 6 years is quite a long time to come back for a free or discounted repair.

---

when the property is in the possession of the repair shop the entire time the "new" damage occurred, well, it makes it a pretty simple argument the owner of the property did not cause the additional or new damage.

and hearsay has no place in the discussion. Apparently you are not aware of what hearsay is.

Quote:

---

Lets say I brought in my laptop for repair at 123 Laptop Repairs 6 years ago and today I found out my hard drive is failing. I simply cannot prove that it was due to 123 Laptop Repairs as you are given a 90 day repair warranty and even then you could be charged for labor and parts if it was found out that the customer altered it. In the case of your customer they could have went on a Safari to Africa two weeks ago and broke the lens and wanted to find someone to blame so they decided to blame you. They may be trying to scam you because 6 years after the fact is too much.

---

zaku was in possession of the lens when the "new" damage took place. Unless zaku can prove to the courts satisfaction the damage apparent when the lens was first brought in could result in the damage seen when the customer retrieved it simply due to the passage of time, it is possible zaku may be on the hook for the value of the lens in the condition it was in when first brought in. Your argument about the computer has nothing in common with the situation here. It isn't that the owner had the lens repaired 6 years ago and is attempting to make a warranty claim. It is that there was less damage when the lens was brought in. The lens was in the possession of zaku the entire time. zaku is liable for the additional damage.

Quote:

---

If they wanted the lens fixed then they need to enter in a new contract with you.

---

yet zaku did work on the lens. Either there was a contract in place or zaku performed work he was not authorized to perform.

How about this,
I never performed any work on the lens. It was never approved or paid for
He never approved, I returned it to him as it was. End of story

What do you mean; how about this?

you already said you worked on it.

But even if you didn't he would have a claim based on your negligence while the lens was in your possession. As I stated before, since you failed to comply with the laws regarding abandoned property and did return the lens to him you have no argument that there was not a continuing bailment.

Thank you for the comprehensive post previously. I'm learning a lot here :-)
OK I did not work on it
I returned the lens to him after 6 years jut the way he gave it to me.
How is he going to prove otherwise?
Why was it bad that I returned it to him?
would I be better off not returning it to him?
how do I treat equipment as abandoned property?
Thanks again.... I really appreciate the explanations on such a short notice...

If you are telling us that you plan to lie under oath in court, well, all the more power to you. That's not something we can help you with.

Quote:

---

Quoting zaku

---

Hypothetically speaking of course. I'm just talking about different scenarios. Why was it bad to return the lens? I'm trying to learn something for the future. I may put in some preventive clauses in my estimates after this. Something that would help me to avoid this from happening again.
BTW I don't have to lie about it. I can just say that i returned the lens. It is the truth...

---

You better hope he doesn't find this thread.

Haha that would be something!!!!
I'm only speaking hypothetically ;-)