autox
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Subject: Re: shop manuals

To: "Rick Cone" <rickcone@bellsouth.net>, "Steven J Miller"
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: shop manuals
From: "Rocky Entriken" <rocky@tri.net>
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 20:35:45 -0600
Yes, Rick, I agree with you there. It should be the burden (initially) of
the protestee to provide proof of legality. But in this era, it is no longer
reasonable to require that proof be personally owned documentation.
Therefore, if the situation arises, then the protestee must be allowed
reasonable time to obtain such proof -- and not be immediately DQ as has
been past practice (reasonable 25 years ago, not today). If necessary, the
protested car can be impounded pending receipt of such proof.

As for cost, that should come under the protest bond. If the protested car
is legal and protestee had to incur expense to prove himself so, that
expense is borne by the protestor whether it be teardown expense or
dealership verification expense. If the car is illegal, protestee foots the
bill. That would mean the protestee buys the shop time, but gets repaid from
the bond, same as he buys the gasket set to rebuild the torn-down motor and
is repaid from the bond if he is legal.

And in many cases, it will still be cheaper than acquiring the
documentation. And a helluvalot cheaper than everyone in the class having
individual documentation when one car gets protested.

--Rocky


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rick Cone" <rickcone@bellsouth.net>
To: "Rocky Entriken" <rocky@tri.net>; "Steven J Miller" <sjm@us.ibm.com>;
<autox@autox.team.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: shop manuals


> >>But I'd hate to buy my car new today and then have to find one at a
> reasonable cost.<<
>
> I agree with you.. so if you don't need a shop manual, when there *is* a
> protest... shouldn't the burden still be on you to provide proof of
> legality?  Even if it means that you have to foot the bill at the dealer
for
> them to look up the information?
>
> Its great to stand up and say its a financial burden, but the ultimate
> burden of proof for each car out there needs to be on the owner of the
> vehicle.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Rocky Entriken" <rocky@tri.net>
> To: "Rick Cone" <rickcone@bellsouth.net>; "Steven J Miller"
<sjm@us.ibm.com>
> Cc: <autox@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 7:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Subject: Re: shop manuals
>
>
> > The helmet I use every event.
> > The tires I use every event
> > Even the shocks (I don' need no steenkin' Penskes) I use every event.
> >
> > That damn book just sits there and takes up space I could use for spares
> on
> > the off chance someone might protest me someday (I could wish to worry
my
> > competitors enough to get protested).
> >
> > (My book isn't so big, but at least you can read it.  What about books
> that
> > are four feet long or in a media that needs a special machine to read
it?)
> >
> > Costs have become unreasonable for those that are available, updates
> become
> > impossible, availability is iffy depending on what you drive.
> >
> > Yes, Rick, the option is a better answer. Having documentation should be
> > encouraged, but to DQ someone for failure to have it has become an
> untenable
> > solution. I'll have my book with me if only because it is the easier way
> > (since I've had it for decades, and I even actually use it to work on
the
> > car.) But I'd hate to buy my car new today and then have to find one at
a
> > reasonable cost.
> >
> > --Rocky






<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>