andrewj
Platinum Member
CCI, I hear there are also legal ramifications for handing out legal opinions and advice if you are not a lawyer, and in Ken's case, not a member of the KY bar. (unauthorized practice of law is a crime in most states).
Do you have a dog in that fight? Never met ken or bought anything from him, but every time I call Ken with one of my crazy questions he goes out of his way to help me. Talk about him saying it publicly, what you said in public you could have just as easily said to him in private.
ken, you never cease to impress me - keep up the good work!
AJ
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( <font color="blue"> Boman, I think after you brought this issue to thier attention, First Choice addressed and corrected that problem some years ago. I will make a 1 time offer, good for 30 days. If you will deliver your unit to me, I will exchange it for a new one at no cost to you. This should remedy your problem.--If you decide to take me up on this offer, Call 270-528-3323 or email: sweet@scrtc.com in advance to be sure that I have them in stock.-- Ken Sweet
</font>
Ken,
There are legal ramifications of you making this a public offer as you just did. Exchange of problem implements with customers happens among manufacturers as a matter of good will and state lemon laws. Most any respectable dealer will do this in private to satisfy a customer. By you publicly offering to replace the tiller for "thebowman", you may be legally obligated to offer this transaction to any and all of the customers you have sold First Choice tillers too that have this problem. Because the laws vary from state to state, this is a contingent liability that is open ended. The big question for Sweet Tractors is do you have to indemnify each customer in the same manner?
Since you are neither the manufacturer nor the distributor you are not legally speaking for them and have not obligated Sicma or First Choice to this Sweet Tractors "Recall" of First Choice tillers for rust problems. If another one of your customer demands this same offer, you almost have to do it. If not ,you are saying to them that the "thebowman" is more important than them. You may be obligated even if "thebowman" does not take the offer because you made your offer in a public recall manner.
You have also put Buy Smart-First Choice and Sicma in a position that they now will not publicly help Sweet Tractors and take care of these tillers problems. They likely have long ago chosen not to obligate themselves by a recall and have dealt with each situation in a private manner. You have painted yourself into a corner legally. Will this be known as the "Sweet Tractors Recall" case? )</font>
Do you have a dog in that fight? Never met ken or bought anything from him, but every time I call Ken with one of my crazy questions he goes out of his way to help me. Talk about him saying it publicly, what you said in public you could have just as easily said to him in private.
ken, you never cease to impress me - keep up the good work!
AJ
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( <font color="blue"> Boman, I think after you brought this issue to thier attention, First Choice addressed and corrected that problem some years ago. I will make a 1 time offer, good for 30 days. If you will deliver your unit to me, I will exchange it for a new one at no cost to you. This should remedy your problem.--If you decide to take me up on this offer, Call 270-528-3323 or email: sweet@scrtc.com in advance to be sure that I have them in stock.-- Ken Sweet
</font>
Ken,
There are legal ramifications of you making this a public offer as you just did. Exchange of problem implements with customers happens among manufacturers as a matter of good will and state lemon laws. Most any respectable dealer will do this in private to satisfy a customer. By you publicly offering to replace the tiller for "thebowman", you may be legally obligated to offer this transaction to any and all of the customers you have sold First Choice tillers too that have this problem. Because the laws vary from state to state, this is a contingent liability that is open ended. The big question for Sweet Tractors is do you have to indemnify each customer in the same manner?
Since you are neither the manufacturer nor the distributor you are not legally speaking for them and have not obligated Sicma or First Choice to this Sweet Tractors "Recall" of First Choice tillers for rust problems. If another one of your customer demands this same offer, you almost have to do it. If not ,you are saying to them that the "thebowman" is more important than them. You may be obligated even if "thebowman" does not take the offer because you made your offer in a public recall manner.
You have also put Buy Smart-First Choice and Sicma in a position that they now will not publicly help Sweet Tractors and take care of these tillers problems. They likely have long ago chosen not to obligate themselves by a recall and have dealt with each situation in a private manner. You have painted yourself into a corner legally. Will this be known as the "Sweet Tractors Recall" case? )</font>
