It's said "..in the last days, perilous times shall come. Men will be lovers of their own selves..."
After getting our Honda Pilot repaired and back to "before the accident status," which in and of itself was a battle with the insurance company, we sold it. Not because of the accident, but because my DH is now commuting 80 miles a day, and 15-18 miles a gallon isn't cutting it. Believe me, it hurt. I love that Honda Pilot. The last battle with the insurance company was repairing the transmission: they only wanted to fix the cosmetic stuff, we required that the transmission be repaired, to which after 8 weeks, they finally acquiesced. In the process, we decided to take it to a name-brand transmission company: AAMCO, so that we would not have any problems in the future.
This is what AAMCO's written policy states: 12 months or 12,000 miles limited warranty; WHO IS COVERED: (in caps and bold on their documents): The person on this original repair bill and any subsequent owner.
That's a pretty cool policy. It gave us confidence that a person buying the vehicle could buy with relative confidence.
Two days ago I received a phone call from the guy who bought the Honda. It was kind of a shock (and I admit, a little worrisome.) He got my phone number off the transmission paperwork. I left it intentionally in the car, but didn't actually realize it had my address and phone number on it...or I probably would have blackened that out or something. Anyway...
He called and said the transmission was acting up, that he had called AAMCO of Huntington Beach where we had the work done, and they refused to honor the warranty stating "it was not transferable" is there something I could do to help him out? I'm like, what do you want me to do? (Cuz I'm thinking, I'm not PAYING you money if that's what you're asking for.) He said, could you maybe call them and get them to honor the warranty?
I thought, yeah, I can do that. So I called the General Manager who had been so helpful before. I guess it's only when they are TAKING your money that they are helpful. His position was, "AAMCO policy is it's not transferable" and he was adamant about it. He further queried, "why are you even involving yourself in this? It's not your problem anymore, just stop taking his phone calls."
And therein lies the crux of the matter. I relied on a warranty ("your word") to sell the vehicle in good conscience. I gave "my word" that the vehicle had certain known defects (accident, repair) and the buyer accepted "my word" that the defects were under warranty.
You don't get to make me a liar because you are.
So I had the buyer scan me a copy of the front and back, checked AAMCO's website. All said the same thing: Original purchaser and any subsequent owner are covered.
So I typed up a letter which I served in person this morning, in the event I could not get them to see reason this morning. It went like this:
"If you are reading this letter, delivered to you or your General Manager in person, it is because all attempts to get you to honor the warranty for my 2005 Honda Pilot performed 26 July 2014, have failed. Litigation will follow.
Contrary to what was stated by your General Manager by telephone yesterday, my receipt and authorization for work performed clearly states: “AAMCO used transmission and transfer case, with AAMCO 12 month/12,000 mile Limited Warranty” and then goes on to describe the Used Transmission and Used Transfer Case.
(GM) stated on the phone to me yesterday, and you stated on the phone to (buyer) yesterday, that “the warranty was not transferable.” Not only is this not what was stated to me in July when I had the work performed upon which I relied in selling the vehicle, it is NOT AAMCO policy, which is clearly stated on the back of the receipt in terms and conditions of a 12 month/12,000 mile limited warranty which states “WHO IS COVERED: The customer listed on this repair order, and any subsequent owner of the vehicle.”
(Buyer) phone number is XXX. I hope to hear from him or you within 30 minutes of the delivery of this letter that you have decided to honor the warranty. That is how long it
will take for me to reach (xxx) Court and file litigation."
My meeting with the AAMCO GM was unfruitful. He attempted to tell me that I had purchased AAMCO's total car care, a service which covers consumables: brakes, oil changes, routine maintenance etc, which IS NOT transferable, and that the line which states Aamco TTC is not transferable means anything performed at Aamco is not transferable.
I've put on a bit of weight since I retired from suing people for a living, and I don't Dress for Success anymore, so I must just look stupid. At that point I just closed the meeting, delivered the letter and left for court.
I went to court, found out they moved civil litigation to a different courthouse in the center of the county which didn't fit with my timetable this morning, so lucky for AAMCO, I missed my self imposed 30 minute deadline. Ironically, I was at the intersection of the next courthouse this afternoon when the AAMCO owner called me. He told me he needed more time to "read my repair documents, and could I give him until Monday?"
I said, "I'm at the courthouse intersection. As soon as I find a parking place, I'm filing litigation. So you've got maybe 20 or 30 minutes," reiterated the letter, added the part about the GM trying to use Aamco TTC as a way to get out of the warranty and hung up.
25 minutes later I got a phone call back from AAMCO telling me the buyer had an appointment on Monday, they'll take care of him from here on out, 27 minutes I got a text and thanks from the buyer for my help.
So what's the point of this blogpost?
It's really simple: WE NEED TO BE PERSONS OF INTEGRITY.
Sure, technically speaking, this issue wasn't my problem. Technically speaking, the buyer way overstepped his boundaries in contacting me and asking for help. If the warranty had actually said "not transferable" he and I would have had a different conversation. But when I give my word, I keep it. And I expect that when you give me your word, you're going to keep it to the best of your ability. And I believe in karma: that what you cast out on the waters eventually makes its way back to you.
In the end, it will all work out. Hopefully AAMCO will keep their word. It cost me a little time, and would have cost me a little money to file paperwork (I always go BIG and have the Marshalls serve litigation: nothing gets attention like a man with a badge telling you to go to court !), and I get to feel like I made a good difference in someone's life today.
And how often do we get to say that?
Friday, October 24, 2014
Monday, October 6, 2014
Out of Time to Prepare?
In June of last year, I blogged in Dancing on Law's Gravestone, about SCOTUS mortally wounding the rule of law. Evidently that was not enough for SCOTUS. As I said then and feel even more strongly today, regardless of which side of the SSM debate you sit on, everyone should be mourning what happened today: SCOTUS ERADICATED A CORE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE: THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.
I will say that Voting Still Matters. Choosing the right, constitutionally honoring officials matters. Presidents and Governors appoint judges. Senators confirm them.
I will admit I did not see today coming. I anticipated SCOTUS might rule gay marriage a constitutional "right", after all, Kagan officiated at a gay marriage a few weeks ago, for crying out loud, just poor taste for a sitting judge who has multiple cases pending on the subject. It never once occurred to me that SCOTUS would take the cheap way out, eradicate the votes of millions of people by refusing to even hear their cases. SCOTUS isn't even principled enough to stand up and defend their illogic.
I am even more stunned that this occurred a mere 48 hours after Apostolic warning by Dallin Oaks. The lightning speed of SCOTUS following this warning disturbs me deeply. I figured I had more time to prepare. 170 years ago, Joseph Smith prophesied of the Constitution being shredded. The first known record of the prophecy dates to July 19, 1840, in Nauvoo, when the prophet spoke about the redemption of Zion. Using Doctrine & Covenants 101 as a text, he said, “Even this nation will be on the verge of crumbling to pieces and tumbling to the ground and when the Constitution is on the brink of ruin this people will be the staff upon which the nation shall lean and they shall bear the Constitution away from the very verge of destruction.” (Joseph Smith Papers, LDS Church Historical Archives, Box 1, March 10, 1844.)
I didn't think I'd have another 170+ years, but I was hoping for more than 48 hours for crying out loud! For me, it was a parable of being caught unprepared and off guard.
Which brings me to the point of this post. I love the Old Testament, particularly the book of Isaiah. His warnings about our day, the End Times and what we can do to forestall calamity (or what we are doing to bring about calamity) are salient and clear. The pre-eminent, foremost scholar on Isaiah, Avraham Gileadi, not only translated the Isaiah Dead Sea Scrolls, but has written several treatises comparing Isaiah and his prophecies of our day. I have all of his works, including his doctoral dissertation published commercially as The Literary Message of Isaiah (fair warning, it reads like a doctoral dissertation.)
My two favorites are Isaiah Decoded and The Last Days.
Among other things, Isaiah tells us the law which extends the Lord's protection is adherence to the Mosiac law, the 10 Commandments: (1) Thou shalt have no other Gods before me, (2) No graven images (3) Not take the name of the Lord in vain (4) Keep the Sabbath Day holy, (5) Honor thy Father and Mother, (6) Not kill (7) Not commit adultery (8) Not steal (9) Not bear false witness, (10) Not covet.
It ought to be pretty simple: compliance to 10 little rules. But instead, like SCOTUS, we cast them aside without thought, and don't even realize we are hastening our own demise, speeding toward destruction with ever increasing recklessness.
It is this increasing speed which upset me so much when I heard SCOTUS' action today. I accept the word of the prophet Isaiah and other prophets: we err trusting in the arm of flesh, rather than the rock of the Redeemer Jesus Christ. It is true we will never be able to store enough food, water, money, or ammo to protect us against the tide of evil. Isaiah tells us that after all we have done to prepare, only Christ will save us.
I see the SCOTUS announcement this morning as yet another nail in our coffin of unrighteousness. I no longer believe we are in the "last days", I think it is more accurate to call it the "last minutes." Reading the calamities which are- or are about to- befall us, I believe we do need to take affirmative action to prepare for them as best we can, and then do a little more. If you have zero home storage, get 72 hours, then acquire a week's worth. If you have a week's worth, push to store one month's worth. If you've obtained a month's worth, double down and get three months and so on.
The same applies to your faith: if you are lukewarm in your relationship with God, regardless of denomination, maybe it's time for you to step closer. A lot closer. Maybe you should dust off those scriptures, and find out what the Lord has in store for you, for us, and what you can and should do about it. Perhaps it's time to change course and accept Christ in to your life. If you already have, maybe it's time to make Him an active part of your daily life.
I will double down and prepare spiritually, financially, temporally (home storage) and pray earnestly that I still have enough time. Hopefully more time than the allegory shown by the scant 48 hours between Dallin Oak's talk and this morning.
I will say that Voting Still Matters. Choosing the right, constitutionally honoring officials matters. Presidents and Governors appoint judges. Senators confirm them.
I will admit I did not see today coming. I anticipated SCOTUS might rule gay marriage a constitutional "right", after all, Kagan officiated at a gay marriage a few weeks ago, for crying out loud, just poor taste for a sitting judge who has multiple cases pending on the subject. It never once occurred to me that SCOTUS would take the cheap way out, eradicate the votes of millions of people by refusing to even hear their cases. SCOTUS isn't even principled enough to stand up and defend their illogic.
I am even more stunned that this occurred a mere 48 hours after Apostolic warning by Dallin Oaks. The lightning speed of SCOTUS following this warning disturbs me deeply. I figured I had more time to prepare. 170 years ago, Joseph Smith prophesied of the Constitution being shredded. The first known record of the prophecy dates to July 19, 1840, in Nauvoo, when the prophet spoke about the redemption of Zion. Using Doctrine & Covenants 101 as a text, he said, “Even this nation will be on the verge of crumbling to pieces and tumbling to the ground and when the Constitution is on the brink of ruin this people will be the staff upon which the nation shall lean and they shall bear the Constitution away from the very verge of destruction.” (Joseph Smith Papers, LDS Church Historical Archives, Box 1, March 10, 1844.)
I didn't think I'd have another 170+ years, but I was hoping for more than 48 hours for crying out loud! For me, it was a parable of being caught unprepared and off guard.
Which brings me to the point of this post. I love the Old Testament, particularly the book of Isaiah. His warnings about our day, the End Times and what we can do to forestall calamity (or what we are doing to bring about calamity) are salient and clear. The pre-eminent, foremost scholar on Isaiah, Avraham Gileadi, not only translated the Isaiah Dead Sea Scrolls, but has written several treatises comparing Isaiah and his prophecies of our day. I have all of his works, including his doctoral dissertation published commercially as The Literary Message of Isaiah (fair warning, it reads like a doctoral dissertation.)
My two favorites are Isaiah Decoded and The Last Days.
Among other things, Isaiah tells us the law which extends the Lord's protection is adherence to the Mosiac law, the 10 Commandments: (1) Thou shalt have no other Gods before me, (2) No graven images (3) Not take the name of the Lord in vain (4) Keep the Sabbath Day holy, (5) Honor thy Father and Mother, (6) Not kill (7) Not commit adultery (8) Not steal (9) Not bear false witness, (10) Not covet.
It ought to be pretty simple: compliance to 10 little rules. But instead, like SCOTUS, we cast them aside without thought, and don't even realize we are hastening our own demise, speeding toward destruction with ever increasing recklessness.
It is this increasing speed which upset me so much when I heard SCOTUS' action today. I accept the word of the prophet Isaiah and other prophets: we err trusting in the arm of flesh, rather than the rock of the Redeemer Jesus Christ. It is true we will never be able to store enough food, water, money, or ammo to protect us against the tide of evil. Isaiah tells us that after all we have done to prepare, only Christ will save us.
I see the SCOTUS announcement this morning as yet another nail in our coffin of unrighteousness. I no longer believe we are in the "last days", I think it is more accurate to call it the "last minutes." Reading the calamities which are- or are about to- befall us, I believe we do need to take affirmative action to prepare for them as best we can, and then do a little more. If you have zero home storage, get 72 hours, then acquire a week's worth. If you have a week's worth, push to store one month's worth. If you've obtained a month's worth, double down and get three months and so on.
The same applies to your faith: if you are lukewarm in your relationship with God, regardless of denomination, maybe it's time for you to step closer. A lot closer. Maybe you should dust off those scriptures, and find out what the Lord has in store for you, for us, and what you can and should do about it. Perhaps it's time to change course and accept Christ in to your life. If you already have, maybe it's time to make Him an active part of your daily life.
I will double down and prepare spiritually, financially, temporally (home storage) and pray earnestly that I still have enough time. Hopefully more time than the allegory shown by the scant 48 hours between Dallin Oak's talk and this morning.
Wednesday, October 1, 2014
Occupy Central Hong Kong (Not)
UPDATE Oct 4th: WHAT DID I JUST SAY WHEN I MADE THIS POST ON Oct 1st??? This is the FoxNews' report on Infiltrators: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/10/04/hong-kong-pro-democracy-protesters-face-threat-from-criminal-triads/
This is not an analyst white paper. I don't have time to write one which will shore up my argument. But in the event that I'm proven right, note to those of you in that community: don't call me.
The WSJ wrote a short blogpost on the "Five things you should know about the situation in Hong Kong." It was so far off the mark I'm surprised it saw the light of day, and I'm really disappointed. The WSJ usually has better analysis than that, and the Asian WSJ is often an analytical force to be reckoned with.
It would be humorous if it wasn't about to become tragic that the 20-somethings in Hong Kong think their "protesting" sit in is actually going to change Beijing. Clearly, their grandparents are no longer living, and they're not listening to their parents. I'm not sure if I'm impressed or saddened that the numbers flooding Central and Wan Chai are large and visually impressive.
Here are the two rules which have governed China for seven millenia:
1. People are cannon fodder.
2. Might makes right.
Subset of #2: unless Beijing is looking for an excuse to change: it doesn't.
You forget how the PROC came into existence: by following those two rules. How was the Emperor finally overthrown and the Republic of China born? By following those two rules. Warring dynasties established? Hello. Repeat: following those two rules.
In 1989 I worked at a company staffed by quasi-former military (meaning, they weren't active duty.) In 1989 students "occupied Tiananmen Square" in advance of the first official visit by Mikhail Gorbachev. They were "protesting" for democracy. Beijing ignored them until it became apparent their "sit in" was going to violate rule 3:
3. Don't embarrass Beijing (goes to the age-old save face tradition).
They were warned. I remember the conversations with the "former" military types when the "lone guy" stood in front of a tank and "faced it down and backed it off." Puh-leaze. I said: "really? The PROC Army which kicked our butt in Vietnam and Korea (and by that I mean just kept sending wave after wave of soldiers...with 6 billion people to use as cannon fodder, they can outlast us), you think that Army was scared off by one little student? PUH LEAZE. That was the equivalent of the ROTC, and that was a warning shot across the bow. That square will be cleared and cleaned up before Gorbachev even lifts off."
And then they were surprised when 48 hours later, the real PROC Army moved in and cleared the square.
If you're thinking Beijing wouldn't dare do that in Hong Kong, you're slightly right. They have learned a few things since Tiananmen. You've forgotten however, that Hong Kong is an island. There's no place to run. If Beijing cares enough to act (and right now since rule #3 hasn't been violated, they're choosing to ignore the temper tantrum) it wouldn't take much to simply not allow them to leave.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if Beijing simply built a virtual fence or blockade around Central and Wanchai, or even the whole island if need be, and starved them out. You wanna stay there? Fine. We'll simply keep water, food, sanitation, transportation OUT. See how long you last when the food, water and sanitation runs out (about 3 days, BTW.) And then we'll only let you out under our terms and conditions. Or send in infiltrators, start a riot which will provide an excuse for the Army to move in, and when the smoke clears there will be a lot of bodies.
Uneducated westerners view the world from their perspective, demonstrating their flawed thinking and "analysis" with their commentary. They should remember (or learn):
1. The ineffective "law enforcement" firing tear gas, "retreating" from the protesters? That's local Hong Kong police. They are local folk, and they are similar to the warning shot fired by the tank. They are meant to simply keep the peace, try and persuade people to go home before the PROC Army shows up.
2. Beijing will not acquiesce in order to keep the markets open: western thought is you wouldn't want to kill the goose. Beijing doesn't give a rats' *** about the financial markets. I forget the numbers back in the 1997 takeover, but basically it was: they could shut down EVERY financial institution/practice westerners value, put it under strict communism, lose 40% and the remaining 60% of a gazillion dollars cashflow was still a hell of a lot of goose eggs (I think it was something like 11 trillion US dollars in income a year. AFTER a complete shutdown.)
3. Repeat: Hong Kong itself is an island. Nothing is grown there--food and water have to be brought in, and it's pretty easy to bring the island to its knees--the choke points are few and far between. Shut off the main roadway (that would be the tunnel), shut off access to the MTR, bring in the Navy and Army to keep things from reaching the island by sea or air, cut off power, and the island will be down in days, and people will be dying or surrendering within a week.
4. Beijing does not care about collateral damage to either people or property. Sucks to be you if you're living in Central, Wanchai or the rest of HK island. Your food and water is about to go bye-bye too. Me? I'd go stay with friends in the New Territories while I can still get out. Iconic buildings brought down? Beijing's attitude will be good riddance: they were ugly reminders of British Imperialism anyway.
5. Beijing already bent when it allowed "two systems" to be instituted. You knew they didn't really mean it, right? Wait, you thought they meant it?? Noooooooo! That was just subterfuge to get Britain to hand over the island of Hong Kong and the peninsula without having to go to real war. Unless Beijing wants, and I mean wants to move off the communist-socialism yardstick, like they did when they allowed tourism in which gave them the excuse to move away from hardline extremist Mao-communism, this will not end well for the idealistic, naive students in Central and Wanchai. An example will be made. The tail does NOT wag the dog.
Again I say: unless Beijing is looking for an excuse to change it will not end well. As long as the stupid, naive students don't do anything stupid (like they're threatening to do by storming a Beijing government building) Beijing may just continue to ignore them. But that is the best case. At worst, a lot of people are going to die.
It's unfortunate that the vast majority in Hong Kong do not have food or water stockpiled, many of them have cash in the bank but won't be able to get to it, and now that the airport is way off island (versus at Kai Tek on the Kowloon side) have no way to escape. In short: they are unprepared to ride out calamity.
I could be wrong. But seven thousand years of history says I'm probably right.
This is not an analyst white paper. I don't have time to write one which will shore up my argument. But in the event that I'm proven right, note to those of you in that community: don't call me.
The WSJ wrote a short blogpost on the "Five things you should know about the situation in Hong Kong." It was so far off the mark I'm surprised it saw the light of day, and I'm really disappointed. The WSJ usually has better analysis than that, and the Asian WSJ is often an analytical force to be reckoned with.
It would be humorous if it wasn't about to become tragic that the 20-somethings in Hong Kong think their "protesting" sit in is actually going to change Beijing. Clearly, their grandparents are no longer living, and they're not listening to their parents. I'm not sure if I'm impressed or saddened that the numbers flooding Central and Wan Chai are large and visually impressive.
Here are the two rules which have governed China for seven millenia:
1. People are cannon fodder.
2. Might makes right.
Subset of #2: unless Beijing is looking for an excuse to change: it doesn't.
You forget how the PROC came into existence: by following those two rules. How was the Emperor finally overthrown and the Republic of China born? By following those two rules. Warring dynasties established? Hello. Repeat: following those two rules.
In 1989 I worked at a company staffed by quasi-former military (meaning, they weren't active duty.) In 1989 students "occupied Tiananmen Square" in advance of the first official visit by Mikhail Gorbachev. They were "protesting" for democracy. Beijing ignored them until it became apparent their "sit in" was going to violate rule 3:
3. Don't embarrass Beijing (goes to the age-old save face tradition).
They were warned. I remember the conversations with the "former" military types when the "lone guy" stood in front of a tank and "faced it down and backed it off." Puh-leaze. I said: "really? The PROC Army which kicked our butt in Vietnam and Korea (and by that I mean just kept sending wave after wave of soldiers...with 6 billion people to use as cannon fodder, they can outlast us), you think that Army was scared off by one little student? PUH LEAZE. That was the equivalent of the ROTC, and that was a warning shot across the bow. That square will be cleared and cleaned up before Gorbachev even lifts off."
And then they were surprised when 48 hours later, the real PROC Army moved in and cleared the square.
If you're thinking Beijing wouldn't dare do that in Hong Kong, you're slightly right. They have learned a few things since Tiananmen. You've forgotten however, that Hong Kong is an island. There's no place to run. If Beijing cares enough to act (and right now since rule #3 hasn't been violated, they're choosing to ignore the temper tantrum) it wouldn't take much to simply not allow them to leave.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if Beijing simply built a virtual fence or blockade around Central and Wanchai, or even the whole island if need be, and starved them out. You wanna stay there? Fine. We'll simply keep water, food, sanitation, transportation OUT. See how long you last when the food, water and sanitation runs out (about 3 days, BTW.) And then we'll only let you out under our terms and conditions. Or send in infiltrators, start a riot which will provide an excuse for the Army to move in, and when the smoke clears there will be a lot of bodies.
Uneducated westerners view the world from their perspective, demonstrating their flawed thinking and "analysis" with their commentary. They should remember (or learn):
1. The ineffective "law enforcement" firing tear gas, "retreating" from the protesters? That's local Hong Kong police. They are local folk, and they are similar to the warning shot fired by the tank. They are meant to simply keep the peace, try and persuade people to go home before the PROC Army shows up.
2. Beijing will not acquiesce in order to keep the markets open: western thought is you wouldn't want to kill the goose. Beijing doesn't give a rats' *** about the financial markets. I forget the numbers back in the 1997 takeover, but basically it was: they could shut down EVERY financial institution/practice westerners value, put it under strict communism, lose 40% and the remaining 60% of a gazillion dollars cashflow was still a hell of a lot of goose eggs (I think it was something like 11 trillion US dollars in income a year. AFTER a complete shutdown.)
3. Repeat: Hong Kong itself is an island. Nothing is grown there--food and water have to be brought in, and it's pretty easy to bring the island to its knees--the choke points are few and far between. Shut off the main roadway (that would be the tunnel), shut off access to the MTR, bring in the Navy and Army to keep things from reaching the island by sea or air, cut off power, and the island will be down in days, and people will be dying or surrendering within a week.
4. Beijing does not care about collateral damage to either people or property. Sucks to be you if you're living in Central, Wanchai or the rest of HK island. Your food and water is about to go bye-bye too. Me? I'd go stay with friends in the New Territories while I can still get out. Iconic buildings brought down? Beijing's attitude will be good riddance: they were ugly reminders of British Imperialism anyway.
5. Beijing already bent when it allowed "two systems" to be instituted. You knew they didn't really mean it, right? Wait, you thought they meant it?? Noooooooo! That was just subterfuge to get Britain to hand over the island of Hong Kong and the peninsula without having to go to real war. Unless Beijing wants, and I mean wants to move off the communist-socialism yardstick, like they did when they allowed tourism in which gave them the excuse to move away from hardline extremist Mao-communism, this will not end well for the idealistic, naive students in Central and Wanchai. An example will be made. The tail does NOT wag the dog.
Again I say: unless Beijing is looking for an excuse to change it will not end well. As long as the stupid, naive students don't do anything stupid (like they're threatening to do by storming a Beijing government building) Beijing may just continue to ignore them. But that is the best case. At worst, a lot of people are going to die.
It's unfortunate that the vast majority in Hong Kong do not have food or water stockpiled, many of them have cash in the bank but won't be able to get to it, and now that the airport is way off island (versus at Kai Tek on the Kowloon side) have no way to escape. In short: they are unprepared to ride out calamity.
I could be wrong. But seven thousand years of history says I'm probably right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)