Customer Accidentally Damages Guitar

[John_]

Whilst removing it from its rack hanger, a customer accidentally dropped a Don Grosh CCT electric guitar priced at $3600.00. The damage was only cosmetic, but substantial, and the cost to repair it, $700.00.

The shop presented two choices to the customer who damaged the guitar:


1. Purchase the instrument, less a $200.00 discount, for $3400.00.


or


2. Pay $700.00 for the cosmetic damage and walk away with nothing but just empty hands.


Considering that the customer wants (or wanted) to buy a guitar, should the customer part with $3400.00 and take this damaged guitar, or just pay the $700.00 damage fee and later freely spend approximately $1700.00 to buy a different, high quality, completely new guitar and save $1000.00 compared to the total cost of having to purchase an already damaged and devalued instrument for a firm price of $3400.00?

Considering the compromising situation the customer was naturally subjected to, and being legally responsible even for accidental damage, price haggling would likely not be possible.

Also, the customer did not like the guitar and would not have purchased it after trying it, but, unfortunately, he dropped it, just after I played it and handed it back to the employee. Although, I am always careful, I was even more mindful that day whilst playing it.

[scriptphase]

3. RUN!!!

;)

[Virtual Pariah]

Aww man. Lousy situation.

Guess I'd buy the guitar if I had wanted to buy it anyway. Esp since I was the one who caused the damage.

[Jahn]

it comes down to whether the guy is in love with the guitar, and has the bank for it. no bank? step away from the guitar, just pay up the bandaid cost. no love? step away from the guitar, just pay up the bandaid cost. love and bank? bingo discount buy it!

[CyberFerret]

I guess that is why shops have those tags on the guitars and the signs on the wall that say 'please don't handle the guitars'.

It comes down to whether the 'customer' was in the market to spend $3400. Plenty of times I have gone into a store to purchase a $2000 guitar but played a couple of $4000 guitars whilst in there just for the sake of it. Oh, and even with 30 years guitar playing experience under my belt, I ALWAYS ask the store guys for permission, and I ALWAYS ask them to get down and put back any guitars hanging on a high rack.

I think the shop is totally justified in asking to pay the repair bill or else asking them to buy the guitar. Heck, they even offered a $200 discount which they absolutely did not need to do.

Short answer: If $3400 is not going to mean missing the mortgage payment or paying your kids school fees, then pony up and buy, otherwise pay the $700 and walk away with a lesson well learned to always ask the man behind the counter to get the guitars for you.

[musicman1]

This is why retailers have insurance...its for their own protection and the protection of their merchandise. If they have an issue with having customers handling gtrs then an employee of the store should be responsible for handling gtrs off racks or hangers. If the store allows the public to handle merchandise other than to try it out the the retailer is still are liable for their instruments.

Accidents happen...this is why businesses have insurance. Retailing is a business dependant on the public. A business has their own liability here when it allows the public through its doors.

I worked in music retail for 4 years and the customer is not necessarily held responsible here. At best its a 50-50 split...at most the customer could be on the hook for half of the repair cost.

[Rockinrob86]

yea I dont think this is on the customer. Shops are supposed to be insured.


Not that I advocate dropping guitars in stores, and he probably should be banned from the store or something.

[Drew68]

Ouch. See this all the time at GC. Saw a small child kick over a MIM Fender Strat completely off the stand. Just a loud KABANGGG!!! as it dove headstock first to the floor. The father picked it back up and nobody but the three of us knew about it. Granted, it wasn't a $3600 guitar.

Easy to see why the Gibsons are on the high racks.

Just curious. Don't shops have insurance for this kind of thing? What if someone completely broke damages a guitar? Small claims court? I guess they could flee and never show their face again. At the big box sellers, there's often lots of dings and scratches on the inventory. Sometimes it can work out to a nice deal.

[Catoogie]

The customer isn't responsible for buying it or for paying the repair charges. That whole 'You break it, you buy it' saying never holds up in court.

[axelfoley]

You generally can't just grab a $3600 guitar off the wall. They are usually behind the counter or to high to reach without asking for help. it's a total bummer of a situation. I think the insurance deductable would be alot more reasonable to ask of a customer. Who is doing the repair if he pays for it? The same store? At cost or retail? Unless it is a truly boutique store that only carries high end gear I think it should be on the employees to keep pricy gits like that out of reach. Just my .02

[VanR]

If the customer can legally be made to buy the damaged guitar the shop should sell it to him at cost. Then the shop didn't really lose any money.

[Jon Silberman]

I like the intention behind your post, VanR, but from an economics perspective, it's flawed.

[Luke]

EXACTLY.

The amount is not enough to file an insurance claim, so the store eats it, plain and simple.

You have to expect a few such incidents per year in a retail business with lots of customers, many of them being under 22 years of age.

If you are not making enough profit to cover such loses you are not in business and should lock the doors and go find a job.



This is why retailers have insurance...its for their own protection and the protection of their merchandise. If they have an issue with having customers handling gtrs then an employee of the store should be responsible for handling gtrs off racks or hangers. If the store allows the public to handle merchandise other than to try it out the the retailer is still are liable for their instruments.

Accidents happen...this is why businesses have insurance. Retailing is a business dependant on the public. A business has their own liability here when it allows the public through its doors.

I worked in music retail for 4 years and the customer is not necessarily held responsible here.

[Sam Sherry]

If the shop makes a claim on its insurance, that allows the insurance company to chase the customer. It's called "subrogation."

Besides, the insurance policy (if any) presumably has a deductible which the store will have to pay to get the policy to kick in. Lots of policies have deductibles in excess of $700.00.

Bummah.

[Guitar Josh]

If the shop makes a claim on its insurance, that allows the insurance company to chase the customer. It's called "subrogation."

Flawed analysis. The insurance company is only able to pursue the individual to the extent of the law. Here, a pure accident...probably no legal claim under which to recover. It doesn't sound like negligence, and it certainly wasn't intentional. It's the very thing you pay insurance for, and the very risk the insurance company accepts your premium payment for in relation to the risk. Here, the insurance company "lost" (despite the fact that premiums probably more than make up for the claim several times over) the risk equation.

There are plenty of cases like this where courts have simply found that the reason the an insurance company accepts premiums and assess risk is with the understand that at some point, it is going to need to make payment on a claim with no avenue for recovery. That's the game of insurance in a nutshell.

[saijo]

3. RUN!!!

;)
:roll

[Jon Silberman]

Another aspect of the game is an ins. co. may up its premiums for people who file relatively more claims than others, often regardless of the cause. This encourages people to be as careful as possible. In the case of the music store owners, for example, it might encourage them to stop leaving their guitars out where potential customers can readily access them. Whether that's a positive outcome depends on your perspective.

[jtees4]

First thing I'd do is call my lawyer and see what the legalities are. I would tend to think that the store's insurance should take care of it. I'd do whatever my lawyer tells me to do actually.

[yeahi]

Not sure this is entirely on the customer here, legally.

[CyberFerret]

There seems to be an over riding call for the shop to revert to their insurance policy to handle this situation. Not sure if any of you actually own a business yourself - I do, and yes, I have insurance, but every time I make a claim, my premiums go up, plus my excess is around $500 so I have to pay for that first $500 before my insurance company will pony up for the rest. (Not a music store BTW - an IT business).

So, if it was the case that a customer dropped a $6000 guitar and snapped the neck in two beyond repair then yes, insurance would be the normal recourse. However, if the damage was cosmetic and would cost $700 then no, I wouldn't want to pay the first $500, claim $200 from my insurance and go up one more risk category on their scale.

The shop still has a responsibility to try and protect their goods as much as possible. Therefore expensive items are usually put behind the counter, or have signs on them saying something along the lines of "Please ask a sales assistant before trying guitars". This allows someone from the shop to assess whether to hand over the risk of handling the merchandise to the customer, or do it on their behalf. Did this store in question have any such signage?

[acwild]

This thread gives me a great idea on how I can get a new guitar if my wife says no. :)

[GuitarsFromMars]

EXACTLY.

The amount is not enough to file an insurance claim, so the store eats it, plain and simple.

You have to expect a few such incidents per year in a retail business with lots of customers, many of them being under 22 years of age.


As opposed to this situation, where the store is asking a prospective customer (who arguably, made a very clumsy mistake), to eat the store's liability.

I am not certain which is worse: The person who damaged the guitar, or the store who let him near it...?

[dark_rainbow]

If I were a store owner, I'd be a lot more cautious then I see most of them being. I'd make it clear there's no obligation to let customers try guitars. And when I try one at a store, I always have them hand it to me when I'm sitting down in the playing position, and when i'm done I have them take it from me so they can hang it back up. What I see go on at Guitar Center and some other stores scares the hell out of me.

[poolshark]

Unless the state or locality has a break-it-buy-it statute, and I can't imagine it would, the store's only real recourse is going to be in a tort claim. In a civil suit, they *might* be entitled to enough compensation to put them in their original position - i.e. the actual cost or the guitar or repair, and not the advertised price - and legal fees would probably outweigh that cost by a mile. Legal action and, more importantly, the headache just wouldn't be worth it.

Was I the customer, I'd offer to compensate the shop for the cost of the guitar, plus a couple of friendly extra dollars for the trouble. Responsibilities like these tend to lie with the seller, but I tend to believe what's fair is fair. Still, if they have the nerve to demand a profit - not that I'd be shocked - I'd encourage them to sue, just to see the judge laugh in their faces.

[guitarfish]

Without knowing more details other than what's presented here...

Those options work out entirely in the store's favor. Did they have signs up? Were there sufficient store personnel available to assist the customer? Was there anything wrong with the hanger that the guitar was on? You get the idea.

I think there are other options to explore beside the two presented. Like a friend of mine likes to say, everything is negotiable. I don't feel the customer is legally responsible in this situation, considering the accidental nature of the damage. In fact, the customer may be legally entitled to just walk away.

Personally, I'd feel a moral obligation if I broke it, and I wouldn't want to stiff the store. I would probably offer to pay half the repair, $350, if they would cover the other half. I would be extremely polite in proposing this, and hope they'd accept it, with the understanding that it was an accident.

Most stores put out perfectly new guitars which get played, scratched, and dinged from being handled and played. Many of these get sold as a discount because of such wear, which is to be expected in this business. This, along with occasional accidental damage, should be figured into the cost of doing business IMO.

Having said all that, I don't like handling expensive stuff, and I always ask fisrt. It's always risky. Case in point: the last two >$2,000 guitars I handled, I ended up buying!

[Route234]

This thread gives me a great idea on how I can get a new guitar if my wife says no. :)

I was thinking the same thing! Honey, I dropped it and they FORCED me to buy it. Said they would sue me into next week so I HAD to buy it...

[CyberFerret]

Unless the state or locality has a break-it-buy-it statute, and I can't imagine it would, the store's only real recourse is going to be in a tort claim. In a civil suit, they *might* be entitled to enough compensation to put them in their original position - i.e. the actual cost or the guitar or repair, and not the advertised price - and legal fees would probably outweigh that cost by a mile. Legal action and, more importantly, the headache just wouldn't be worth it.

Was I the customer, I'd offer to compensate the shop for the cost of the guitar, plus a couple of friendly extra dollars for the trouble. Responsibilities like these tend to lie with the seller, but I tend to believe what's fair is fair. Still, if they have the nerve to demand a profit - not that I'd be shocked - I'd encourage them to sue, just to see the judge laugh in their faces.



Mmmkay...So....what I will plan to do next time I am in a shop is to:

1. Pick the most expensive, spotless, perfectly finished guitar they have hanging on a hook
2. Drop it onto the edge on an amp, chipping of a significant portion of the paintwork
3. Offer the them the cost of the guitar (a 30% to 50% discount)
4. Take the guitar home
5. Put it up on the Emporium here with a 300% markup as a 'relic' guitar
6. Repeat

And it would all be legal and above board apparently. :)

I believe only one person has mentioned the 'customers responsibility' in this thread. I'm sure most of us will take extra care when handling a friends guitar - why would you suspend that duty of care when handling a store guitar?

[Trandy]

I sell guitars for a living...I've been doing it for 32 years.

Unless there was some ill intent involved, I would not try and hold the customer responsible legally...stuff happens....no matter how hard you try to avoid/prepare, etc.

I'd probably just get it fixed and sell it at a deeply discounted price with full disclosure.

I might ask him to keep us in mind for his next purchase....but I wouldn't try and make him buy the damaged instrument.

That's making a bad situation even worse.

I'm sure the guy felt bad enough.

[scriptphase]

Mmmkay...So....what I will plan to do next time I am in a shop is to:

1. Pick the most expensive, spotless, perfectly finished guitar they have hanging on a hook
2. Drop it onto the edge on an amp, chipping of a significant portion of the paintwork
3. Offer the them the cost of the guitar (a 30% to 50% discount)
4. Take the guitar home
5. Put it up on the Emporium here with a 300% markup as a 'relic' guitar
6. Repeat

And it would all be legal and above board apparently. :)

I believe only one person has mentioned the 'customers responsibility' in this thread. I'm sure most of us will take extra care when handling a friends guitar - why would you suspend that duty of care when handling a store guitar?

Ummm...

INTENT
:)

[teefus]

yes it was an accident (apparently) but it was caused by the person/customer dropping the guitar. i know we have become a society where no one has any personal responsibility and everything bad is always someone else's fault but the person who did the damage should either pay for the repair or buy the guitar. i can see the person who did the damage suing the maker of the guitar hanger because it was somehow faulty.

[Oasis.Guitar]

I sell guitars for a living...I've been doing it for 32 years.

Unless there was some ill intent involved, I would not try and hold the customer responsible legally...stuff happens....no matter how hard you try to avoid/prepare, etc.

I'd probably just get it fixed and sell it at a deeply discounted price with full disclosure.

I might ask him to keep us in mind for his next purchase....but I wouldn't try and make him buy the damaged instrument.

That's making a bad situation even worse.

I'm sure the guy felt bad enough.

Now this is the way to create customer loyalty and make window shoppers or one time buyers life long customers.

[CyberFerret]

Ummm...

INTENT
:)

Absolutely! :) and I hope everyone realised the high sarcasm content in my post - I wasn't offering anybody career advice there.. :)

I guess what I am trying to say is that plenty of people here are mentioning the store's responsibility, but not many seem to be mentioning the customer's responsibility.

I was always taught to respect property and show common decency and take responsibility for my actions. Whether it be accidentally damaging shop merchandise or running into someone else's car in a parking lot etc.

I guess if it was me in the situation that the OP described, I would immediately OFFER to pay for damages to the store owner. I would hope (but not expect) that they would have the common decency to perhaps go halves in the repair cost.

[scottywompas]

I'd say see you in small claims court. I wouldn't pay $700 for a guitar repair that most likely will be covered under the owners insurance.

I'm not saying be irresponsible and drop expensive guitars all you want but this situation is a lose lose. The shop owner should have the high dollar guitars pulled down and put back up by his staff.

So now you have a customer that wont' shop with you anymore cuz you are trying to get $700 for the repair. You get the repair money but you lose that customer. As a shop owner just put the policy in place and keep the high end guitars out of reach. As the customer, don't grab the expensive stuff.

Scott

[Old Tele man]

...that's why you don't take KIDS or DOGS into a crystal or china shop, unless you're well prepared to PAY for all damages they might cause!!!

[Jiffy_Jeff]

I could see someone accidently damaging a guitar at GC.

Most of the times I have been in their stores there is crap everywhere. Stools, amps, guitars stands cluttered around. So I could see this happening.

But you usually don't see a high priced guitar hanging low there.


And to the OP..... Is the store bullying, or threatening the customer to take responisibility for the accident..or else? Are they telling him he has to pay up?

Is this your store, or are you the customer?


I just don't see how this falls on the responsibility of the customer, if it were an accident.

But then again, I don't own a music store....

[jimmybcool]

Interesting debate. I guess I see it more from the perspective of the guitar shop. Far too many people think the guitars on the hangers are toys to be fondled regardless of if they intend to buy one or can even afford it.

Saw a guy yesterday in my local shop wearing motorcycle clothes replete with the metal stuff that closes the jacket reach to a guitar (right next to the sign PLEASE ASK FOR HELP - DON'T TAKE DOWN sign) and remove a $7,000 guitar. Now, even if he doesn't drop it due to not understanding the hangers on the wall, there is the risk he will scratch it trying to play it wearing those clothes.

I mean what?

I don't understand. Sort of like people who want to test drive a Ferrari they can't possibly afford. Why? They don't give test drives for your pleasure it is a business and there are risks involved.

So I in this case I say it depends as to the right answer. If they left a $3,600 guitar at floor level easily reachable by anyone walking by and no signs in the store telling people to not take the guitars down without assistance then the store is in a tough luck position. They allowed them to be handled by the unwashed masses.

If the guitar was difficult to reach and they had signage telling people to not handle guitars without help then the guy who broke it bought it IMO. Can't afford it? Then why the hell was he trying to take it off the wall?

People got to remember that most of these stores (GC excepted) earn a living selling guitars. If you damage their inventory how will they stay in business?

[bopplayer]

Unless I was real friendly with store, if I did that by accident and they presented two options I would present two options back: 1. Bite me 2. Bite me...that's what insurance is for.

[Tone_Terrific]

Sooo, if one drops a $400. guitar and is then required to pay for fixing it, how much is the repair bill for cosmetic damage?

[Luke]

No idea where you are shopping, but Ferrari dealer near me asks a lot of questions before THEY drive the car as you as a passenger. I always presented proof of purchase ability before test driving an exotic car, which I've owned a few.

Interesting debate. I guess I see it more from the perspective of the guitar shop. Far too many people think the guitars on the hangers are toys to be fondled regardless of if they intend to buy one or can even afford it.

Saw a guy yesterday in my local shop wearing motorcycle clothes replete with the metal stuff that closes the jacket reach to a guitar (right next to the sign PLEASE ASK FOR HELP - DON'T TAKE DOWN sign) and remove a $7,000 guitar. Now, even if he doesn't drop it due to not understanding the hangers on the wall, there is the risk he will scratch it trying to play it wearing those clothes.

I mean what?

I don't understand. Sort of like people who want to test drive a Ferrari they can't possibly afford. Why? They don't give test drives for your pleasure it is a business and there are risks involved.

So I in this case I say it depends as to the right answer. If they left a $3,600 guitar at floor level easily reachable by anyone walking by and no signs in the store telling people to not take the guitars down without assistance then the store is in a tough luck position. They allowed them to be handled by the unwashed masses.

If the guitar was difficult to reach and they had signage telling people to not handle guitars without help then the guy who broke it bought it IMO. Can't afford it? Then why the hell was he trying to take it off the wall?

People got to remember that most of these stores (GC excepted) earn a living selling guitars. If you damage their inventory how will they stay in business?

[Big Al Z]

Hey John - Welcome to the Gear Page.

Post number 4 - Why did you post this ???

[sanhozay]

Sad how $700 would prompt a business to open themselves up to a lifetime of scorn from a customer who felt strong-armed by the shop, who was most likely remiss in the placement of a highly valued guitar. It's not rocket science, it's retail and the buyer gets a pass for this unless there is evidence they were negligent and their actions were more vandal than error. Honestly, most people want to make good on their mistakes and are willing to absorb some kine of monetary loss. It's happened to me in my shop and often the solution is for the person to work it off, or generate enough referral business to cover their consequences. It's a gold mine opportunity for the smart shop and a dead end for the one that lacks creativity when problem solving.

[jimmybcool]

No idea where you are shopping, but Ferrari dealer near me asks a lot of questions before THEY drive the car as you as a passenger. I always presented proof of purchase ability before test driving an exotic car, which I've owned a few.

So do you want the guitar shop to do likewise? What is your point?

[jimmybcool]

Unless I was real friendly with store, if I did that by accident and they presented two options I would present two options back: 1. Bite me 2. Bite me...that's what insurance is for.

Sooooo, you are gigging in a bar and your guitar is sitting on a stand well back from the front of the stage. At a moment while you are distracted looking at something a drunk bounds on stage to "scope out your baby". Oops, he drops it.

You tell him a new neck on that Les Paul costs $1500. He says "Bite me".

Guess you're OK with that. :sarcasm

[Luke]

So do you want the guitar shop to do likewise? What is your point?

My point is a Ferrari dealer will NOT give you the keys in my experience, thus making your analogy flawed.

[jimmybcool]

Sad how $700 would prompt a business to open themselves up to a lifetime of scorn from a customer who felt strong-armed by the shop, who was most likely remiss in the placement of a highly valued guitar. It's not rocket science, it's retail and the buyer gets a pass for this unless there is evidence they were negligent and their actions were more vandal than error. Honestly, most people want to make good on their mistakes and are willing to absorb some kine of monetary loss. It's happened to me in my shop and often the solution is for the person to work it off, or generate enough referral business to cover their consequences. It's a gold mine opportunity for the smart shop and a dead end for the one that lacks creativity when problem solving.

Yeah. It depends on how the item was placed as to how much moral obligation the clumsy customer has. As I said much of the discussion revolves around store product placement and signage. It would be easy to grab a Squire in my local guys store. Not that hard to get to decent strats. You really got to reach to get your hands on a Collings SoCo Deluxe and the sign is right there. But if the store placed a $3600 guitar on a stand inside the front door I don't know if I'd side with them.

It does amaze me that many in this thread think the store is supposed to absorb all damage as if it doesn't matter. The reality is if it is a Mom & Pop shop, which everyone on here bemoans the loss of, then they just took REAL MONEY from their pockets. Even the odd scratch and ding are reduction of value. And the same people who think they aren't in any way responsible for their actions that damage the inventory are the same ones who think the ding someone ELSE put in it means the store should give it away to them for $1000 less.

[jimmybcool]

My point is a Ferrari dealer will NOT give you the keys in my experience, thus making your analogy flawed.

Clever lad. Then the analogy works just great if the store has signage. What if you grabbed the keys and jumped in the Ferrari.

Try and make a big boys point.

[jads57]

Wow, bummer! I had thi exact thing happen to me here at a well known guitar store. Except it was a Martin OM-21 Special, and accidentally broke the back while trying to catch it from falling. The owner said it would $500.00 and he would just sell it at a loss on Ebay. Or he would sell it tome at his cost. I ended up trading him a used Gibson Pat Martino Custom for it. He paid for the repair and luckily I love the guitar. But it was a very uncomfortable situation to be in, for sure!

[twinrider1]

The obvious answer is......sue the rack hanger company! Clearly there weren't enough warning labels on the hanger. And imagine the mental anguish caused by watching a nice guitar take a dive.

Ok, seriously....Cost of doing business.

I'd feel bad, and work to find an equitable solution.....until the manager came at me with the "legally responsible" talk. My good will would end abruptly at that point.

[jimmybcool]

Wow, bummer! I had thi exact thing happen to me here at a well known guitar store. Except it was a Martin OM-21 Special, and accidentally broke the back while trying to catch it from falling. The owner said it would $500.00 and he would just sell it at a loss on Ebay. Or he would sell it tome at his cost. I ended up trading him a used Gibson Pat Martino Custom for it. He paid for the repair and luckily I love the guitar. But it was a very uncomfortable situation to be in, for sure!

You are a stand up guy.

[Luke]

Obviously you have no idea how it works. Ferraris are almost exclusively indoors, you don't grab the keys and run off committing grand theft auto, especially when you could afford one. Good luck with that.


Clever lad. Then the analogy works just great if the store has signage. What if you grabbed the keys and jumped in the Ferrari.

Try and make a big boys point.

[tripp2k]

Now this is the way to create customer loyalty and make window shoppers or one time buyers life long customers.

Can't the store take a write-off for damaged goods? I know this doesn't make things whole, but I can't imagine GC/Bain not using this option when selling their demo guitars at a discount. I also like the approach BigSlick is referring to. People talk and word like this gets around quick.

[guitarfish]

Sooooo, you are gigging in a bar and your guitar is sitting on a stand well back from the front of the stage. At a moment while you are distracted looking at something a drunk bounds on stage to "scope out your baby". Oops, he drops it.

You tell him a new neck on that Les Paul costs $1500. He says "Bite me".

Guess you're OK with that. :sarcasm
Not even close with this analogy. The guitar in the bar isn't for sale. The guitars in the store are out & displayed because they're for sale, with the implied indication that people can handle them unless noted otherwise.

Besides, you don't want that drunk to be a repeat customer. :barf

[FlackBase]

The main problem I see is the ultimatum presented to the customer by the store. As if they have the power to enforce the two choices.

The way to handle this is to ask the customer how he would like to handle the situation that cost the store $700. I think a surprising number of folks would react much more positively to that kind of negotiation. Personally, if I were at fault, I'd make an offer to them that I felt was fair. If I thought the $700 was out of whack, I might want to ask for a second repair opinion, etc.

Sure some people would just walk, but there are deadbeats all around us.

[Javanova]

Sorry this will be a business expense. No reason to anger any customer. Accidents happen. Should you read the store owner's policy for perils covered you will not find "stock damaged in customer's care and control". Just like inventory shrinkage, excluded. Anyone ever broke their own guitar at home and put in a homeowner claim? Not unless you have a seperate schedule for your instruments with open perils without a specific exclusion. Stuff happens. Ever see a supermarket charge a customer that drops a jar of pickles?

[sodapopinski]

I guess that is why shops have those tags on the guitars and the signs on the wall that say 'please don't handle the guitars'.


yup, i say just pay $700...

[Vibrolucky]

What would happen if an employee damaged it? Would the store owner make the employee pay for the repair and/or demand that he buy it?

I don't really think that a store can ever demand that a customer pay for an accident..., well they can demand - but I doubt that the customer would be legally bound to pay.

Accidents do happen with new guitars...hell, if you go to Guitar Center in Atlanta all the guitars worth more than $2k are locked in a separate room that requires a member of the sales staff inside at all times to get guitars off the rack. Its very humiliating and overkill, but they probably had similar problems and are trying to cut down on broken headstocks.

[Ascension]

I sell guitars for a living...I've been doing it for 32 years.

Unless there was some ill intent involved, I would not try and hold the customer responsible legally...stuff happens....no matter how hard you try to avoid/prepare, etc.

I'd probably just get it fixed and sell it at a deeply discounted price with full disclosure.

I might ask him to keep us in mind for his next purchase....but I wouldn't try and make him buy the damaged instrument.

That's making a bad situation even worse.

I'm sure the guy felt bad enough.
DING!! I also have run a music store at one time and sold on the floor. Unless the guy just was a total jerk and doing something really out there when it happened it is flat bad business to demand full price or full repair cost. I would just write it off my taxes at the end of the year or if it was floor planned try to work something out with the Finance co. Now if the guy come up sits down on it and offers to help I would try to work something out but I would NOT start threatening him. If I know that a local shop has EVER pulled something like this on a customer over an accident they will NEVER see a dime of my $$

[Drew68]

if you go to Guitar Center in Atlanta all the guitars worth more than $2k are locked in a separate room that requires a member of the sales staff inside at all times to get guitars off the rack. Its very humiliating and overkill, but they probably had similar problems and are trying to cut down on broken headstocks.

It may seem humiliating when you're trying them out but should you choose to purchase one of their expensive guitars, you'll at least have the peace of mind that it hasn't been beat to shit by an untold number of 13-year olds trying to play "Crazy Train" on it.

[dark_rainbow]

How does it change the legal analysis if the store posts a sign like "Damaged or broken items are considered sold."

[Ascension]

How does it change the legal analysis if the store posts a sign like "Damaged or broken items are considered sold."
If it is clearly posted it changes everything. In that case the customer would clearly have some liability. However charging what if I am not mistaken is close to full retail in a situation like that is still way out of line.

[fenderball]

i'd think it's up to the customer...if he wants to buy it, he can make the store an offer....he wants to fix it, he can offer to fix it, and if he wants to up and leave, he can apologize and do that too....it's one of the downsides of retail...sorry.

[Goldstrat]

This happened to me. I was playing a 72 SG and set it on a stand. It was crowded and my foot hit the cord which moved the stand and CRACK. Snapped headstock. I bought it and he repaired the neck crack. I didn't have to but I felt bad and now I hate SG's every time I see them!

[CyberFerret]

What is worrying me here is the trend for people to basically say "oh well" and walk after they accidentally damage stock.

Wouldn't common decency dictate that you at least try and make some sort of reparation to the store?

The reactions here seems to change dependent on whether the damage occurred:
1. at a large corporate chain store
2. at a small mom and pop store
3. at a friends place
4. at a gig

Can you, with all good conscience change your reaction to the event depending on the context that it took place in? Not trying to preach from my high horse here - just curious as to the social trends that are happening out there...

[dkaplowitz]

As others have already indicated: Isn't this kind of scenario what insurance is for? Maybe the negotiation should be for the deductible.

[SteveO]

If you inspect every guitar at any GC, you will find WAY more than $700 worth of dents, dings, chips, and missing switch tips and knobs scattered throughout their inventory. You can bet that they will sell as many of those blemished items at their asking price as they can get away with, too. So if it's a large chain like that, screw 'em, they can cover the cost of repairs without feeling one once of lost revenue. If it's a small mom & pop, I would get together with the owner and work out an arrangement that is fair to both of us.

[ukslinger]

Is a homemade sign in a store saying you break it you buy it legally binding? I've always wondered that.

Seems tough to enforce unless the customer went behind the counter to grab something that was not easily accessibe. Like when a store has a few high priced guitars labled ask permission to play but they're hanging with all the normal guitars.

[guitarfish]

This happened to me. I was playing a 72 SG and set it on a stand. It was crowded and my foot hit the cord which moved the stand and CRACK. Snapped headstock. I bought it and he repaired the neck crack. I didn't have to but I felt bad and now I hate SG's every time I see them!

I remember you posting about this when it happened. Do you still have it?

[piby]

I like the intention behind your post, VanR, but from an economics perspective, it's flawed.

Actually it is only flawed if the guitar was one of a kind, unreplaceable. then the shop would be out their profit as well as the cost. The shop should take the high road and sell it for cost, then order another guitar and make their profit on that one.

[RRfireblade]

Customers not on the hook for a damn thing unless he signed a release taking over responsibility for the guitar.

Not saying he shouldn't feel obligated to do something , I'm sure he felt bad about it but that's why they are "Demo" guitars hanging on the wall. Arguably , the first time someone strums the strings on it , its a used guitar and 'should' be devalued from new. But they sure want you want you to pay that sticker price even tho a thousand people have already slopped thier goo all over it. Don't they. :)

It's an unfortunate situation but it's a fact of retail that has to be absorbed in your operating costs.

[bopplayer]

Different scenario, my guitar wouldn't be in a vulnerable spot. If there wasn't a safe spot it goes in the case. That's my policy for anyone. Same thing if someone wants to sit in...NO.

Sooooo, you are gigging in a bar and your guitar is sitting on a stand well back from the front of the stage. At a moment while you are distracted looking at something a drunk bounds on stage to "scope out your baby". Oops, he drops it.

You tell him a new neck on that Les Paul costs $1500. He says "Bite me".

Guess you're OK with that. :sarcasm

[AaeCee]

The damaged guitar was a Don Grosh CCT electric, and frankly, I have played one, albeit once, but was not impressed and found the neck to be very sticky and the fretwork unremarkable.Curious....why even include this opinion in your original post? It's irrelevant and contentious. And as several others have asked, are you the store owner, customer, or neither? I see you are new here, but you really should explain your interest in this situation as it may influence the discourse.

[dark_rainbow]

When a repair is done for shop damage, is it done by the OEM or the shop? Is it disclosed in either situation?

[dkaplowitz]

This thread makes me....

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_IqWOPMHbs0E/SRg89DNp26I/AAAAAAAABSE/-aKk45Tv464/s400/crying_indian.jpg

[dark_rainbow]

This thread makes me....

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_IqWOPMHbs0E/SRg89DNp26I/AAAAAAAABSE/-aKk45Tv464/s400/crying_indian.jpg
Same. Never played one, but from what I can tell those Grosh's are nice.
Hate to see one go down like that.
VxoVWF_bLig

[jimmybcool]

Obviously you have no idea how it works. Ferraris are almost exclusively indoors, you don't grab the keys and run off committing grand theft auto, especially when you could afford one. Good luck with that.

Having done a test drive of a Ferrari you'd be wrong. Look, you don't get the analogy. Fine. The real point is that some people think they have a right to try out something they can't affords and aren't liable for the damage they might do. Works for cars, guitars, boats, motorcycles, etc. Anytime someone tries something out of their price range.

[jimmybcool]

Different scenario, my guitar wouldn't be in a vulnerable spot. If there wasn't a safe spot it goes in the case. That's my policy for anyone. Same thing if someone wants to sit in...NO.

Different and the same. IF, and I stress IF, the store has signs don't take the guitars down without help, that equates to them telling you that they reserve the right to screen who tries out their expensive inventory. Just like a Ferrari dealer.

Again I stress IF the guy grabbed a guitar down with signs all around telling him not to, they are not DEMOS. They are inventory. And their inventory is every bit as much their property as your guitar is. If you loan your guitar to a guy in the bar to try out after you talked to him and he seemed like a good guy and THEN he dinged the headstock it really is your problem unless he is a stand up guy and offers to pay the repair (I would). Same with a store. If they take the guitar down and let you try it out then they bear some responsibility too.

But IF you took the guitar down without permission in a store with signage telling you not to and you damaged it I say it is all yours to fix. And telling them to bite you might end up ugly. Just saying.

[Luke]

If a store wants to avoid such an issue the guitar should behind locked glass, period.

[Azfarrier]

I find it strange the discussion we're having about this. It kind of shows the direction society is going. To me what difference does it make if it is a mom & pop store or a large retailer, whether the shop has insurance or not. If I drop a guitar and damage it even on accident I am responsible for the damage, therefore I am responsible for the repair or purchase of the guitar. The only way to handle this is to either pay for the guitar or pay for the repair (actual cost not their out of the blue estimate). This isn't about legalities it's about integrity. I'm sure it would make me more careful in the future.

[Catoogie]

yes it was an accident (apparently) but it was caused by the person/customer dropping the guitar. i know we have become a society where no one has any personal responsibility and everything bad is always someone else's fault but the person who did the damage should either pay for the repair or buy the guitar. i can see the person who did the damage suing the maker of the guitar hanger because it was somehow faulty.

This is an interesting post as it starts out as a condemnation of the current state of morality in society but ends with the author exposing his own deeply cynical personal constitution.

[scriptphase]

Absolutely! :) and I hope everyone realised the high sarcasm content in my post - I wasn't offering anybody career advice there.. :)

I guess what I am trying to say is that plenty of people here are mentioning the store's responsibility, but not many seem to be mentioning the customer's responsibility.

I was always taught to respect property and show common decency and take responsibility for my actions. Whether it be accidentally damaging shop merchandise or running into someone else's car in a parking lot etc.

I guess if it was me in the situation that the OP described, I would immediately OFFER to pay for damages to the store owner. I would hope (but not expect) that they would have the common decency to perhaps go halves in the repair cost.

LOVED your scenario. You wouldn't happen to be a Nigerian prince relocated to Australia? ;)

Seriously though, I agree that the dropper has a moral responsibility to do SOMETHING, I just don't know where I'd draw the line.

[XmasTree]

Screw all that B.S. ....i'd get a lawyer STATIM!!!!

"..oh, you HAVE to buy that now" "Full cost too bud, sorry, ..shouldn't have dropped it."
BULLS#!.......

I do not accept those two as my ONLY options
Get a lawyer

[Azfarrier]

Screw all that B.S. ....i'd get a lawyer STATIM!!!!

"..oh, you HAVE to buy that now" "Full cost too bud, sorry, ..shouldn't have dropped it."
BULLS#!.......

I do not accept those two as my ONLY options
Get a lawyer

Just out of curiousity XmasTree if you had damaged the guitar what do you feel would be a fair way to handle it for both parties.

[strtdv]

Screw all that B.S. ....i'd get a lawyer STATIM!!!!

"..oh, you HAVE to buy that now" "Full cost too bud, sorry, ..shouldn't have dropped it."
BULLS#!.......

I do not accept those two as my ONLY options
Get a lawyer


I'm pretty sure "you break it, you've bought it" applies here.

It's a guitar shop, it's there to sell guitars, not act as a public service for people to try out expensive guitars they can't afford.

If you can't afford the guitar then you shouldn't have touched it at all.

If nothing else, good manners dictates that the staff at the guitar shop should have been asked if it was OK to play the guitar in the first place.

[Sam Sherry]

Flawed analysis. The insurance company is only able to pursue the individual to the extent of the law. Here, a pure accident...probably no legal claim under which to recover. It doesn't sound like negligence, and it certainly wasn't intentional.
Sorry; flawed analysis on your end. "Negligence" means "failure to exercise reasonable care." "Drop guitar on floor" means "failure to exercise reasonable care" 99% of the time. Ergo, "Drop guitar on floor" means "negligence" 99% of the time.

Yes, there are circumstances in which it is reasonable to drop the guitar, such as "drop guitar to catch falling baby" but we haven't heard about that here.

I find it strange the discussion we're having about this. It kind of shows the direction society is going. To me what difference does it make if it is a mom & pop store or a large retailer, whether the shop has insurance or not. If I drop a guitar and damage it even on accident I am responsible for the damage, therefore I am responsible for the repair or purchase of the guitar. The only way to handle this is to either pay for the guitar or pay for the repair (actual cost not their out of the blue estimate). This isn't about legalities it's about integrity. I'm sure it would make me more careful in the future.
Nicely said.

Next . . .

[Guitar Josh]

Sorry; flawed analysis on your end. "Negligence" means "failure to exercise reasonable care." "Drop guitar on floor" means "failure to exercise reasonable care" 99% of the time. Ergo, "Drop guitar on floor" means "negligence" 99% of the time.

Again, we disagree completely. You seem to equate negligence with strict liability and that's simply not the case. There is absolutely no basis upon which to think that practically every single time an accident happens there is a failure to exercise reasonable care. It is a case by case basis examination. So again, your analysis is flawed because your assumption is incorrect.

And you know what they say about statistics - 99% of the time, 99% of statistics are 99% made up. ;)

[Mahogany]

How many of you guys are attorneys ?

[philiprst]

In my opinion, occasional accidental damage is the cost of doing business. The store owner is free to take whatever measures they wish to protect their stock including locked glass cabinets, big signs and having sales associates watch over every customer. This is the way it used to be when I was young; you could never try anything unless the sales guy assessed the size of your wallet first.

I assume that most stores choose whether or not to make their guitars easily accesible to customers, and that choice is based on how they feel it is best to conduct business.

[OldSchool]

I recently had to do an accident report on a guy who drove a new Corvette out of the the dealership and cut off a breadtruck. Totaled the Vette. dealer is gonna have to pay for the whole thing. Sure they took the guys DL and made sure he had insurance on his trade in, but he's not responsible.

If it was me I'd feel really bad and probably Pony up to have it repaired. But it would really depend on the shops attitude. They demanded anything I'd walk out . $700? I don't think so. I'd make a deal we could both live with, maybe pay the insurance deductable.

[DonW]

If the store can prove the customer was negligent like a bull in a china shop they might get a small claims award.

[OldSchool]

I'm pretty sure "you break it, you've bought it" applies here.

It's a guitar shop, it's there to sell guitars, not act as a public service for people to try out expensive guitars they can't afford.

If you can't afford the guitar then you shouldn't have touched it at all.

If nothing else, good manners dictates that the staff at the guitar shop should have been asked if it was OK to play the guitar in the first place.

No way. Many many guitars are Impulse buys. You need to get those guitars in as many hands as possible. I've checked guitars I didn't intend to buy and was so enamored I broke the bank. (thats why I don't go to guitar shows or stores anymore). http://img.thegearpage.net/board/images/icons/icon12.gif

[OldSchool]

If the store can prove the customer was negligent like a bull in a china shop they might get a small claims award.

Yes. A Past history , so they should document it. Or a video showing that he was intoxicated. But an accident is an accident.

[dbeeman]

I don't understand how anyone thinks this is not the customer's responsibility. He damaged the guitar.

OTOH, the owner seems the be demanding close to full retail. What do these guitars usaually go for? I'd think whatever the rock bottom sales price is would be fair.

[Luke]

Businesses have insurance for just such an occasion.

Let's say you are at the supermarket and slip and fall, break your ankle. The reason you feel was the floor was wet, some kid goofing around (a customer's child) dropped a pickle jar.

Who is responsible?

A. You for not watching the floor
B. The kid's parent
C. The supermarket















The answer is ALWAYS C, the supermarket.

If an accident happens on your property you are liable and should be insured for such.



They would not have a 1954 Strat or 1959 Les Paul out to incur such risk, they chose to allow the risk IMO.

Go to Chuck Levin's in Washington DC, everything valuable is behind locked glass.




I don't understand how anyone thinks this is not the customer's responsibility. He damaged the guitar.

OTOH, the owner seems the be demanding close to full retail. What do these guitars usaually go for? I'd think whatever the rock bottom sales price is would be fair.

[73171]

Concerning the original post.......I don't think the cost matters, or the fact that it is a guitar....if a customer damages goods in any store, who is legally responsible? I think only a lawyer and/or a judge would know the correct answer......



My solution for my own life is this:

I don't touch a guitar if I can't afford to buy it.

[Boris Bubbanov]

[QUOTE=Luke;8230394

Let's say you are at the supermarket and slip and fall, break your ankle. The reason you feel was the floor was wet, some kid goofing around (a customer's child) dropped a pickle jar.

Who is responsible?

The answer is ALWAYS C, the supermarket.

[/QUOTE]


Not so fast; depends on the state. Sometimes the state statute gives the shopkeeper reasonable time to discover and address the spill; and sometimes the jury wants to know what you might've done differently since pickle juice has "safety colorant" in it. :p Insurance companies rarely pay what their insureds have no obligation to pay at law.

+++

Ennywey, this is one of the reasons why Guitar Center is a good place to study your guitars. When the guitar 15 feet from you falls and is wrecked, the shopkeeper doesn't lock his lasers on you. Thinking about a small shop out of state (some time back) where the guitars were displayed stupidly close together - I started to try and lift one Tele off of the hook, looked at the shopkeeper's uneasiness and decided to put it back. Good luck, buddy; but if you interlock your guitars you're looking for trouble and I can't help you. I'm buying elsewhere.

Yes there's a downside ( all the shopwear, etc. ) at places like GC but that's the tradeoff we pay for not being approached to pay the potential consequences of negotiating "the guitar trap" in some shops. :bitch

[Jon Silberman]

Go to Chuck Levin's in Washington DC, everything valuable is behind locked glass.
This hasn't been the cast at Chuck's for over a decade now. :eek:

[buddastrat]

I sell guitars for a living...I've been doing it for 32 years.

Unless there was some ill intent involved, I would not try and hold the customer responsible legally...stuff happens....no matter how hard you try to avoid/prepare, etc.

I'd probably just get it fixed and sell it at a deeply discounted price with full disclosure.

I might ask him to keep us in mind for his next purchase....but I wouldn't try and make him buy the damaged instrument.

That's making a bad situation even worse.

I'm sure the guy felt bad enough.

Common sense on the internet? Man if more people did stuff and thought like this, this world would be alright, ya know. Probably why you've been in biz for 32 years.

[Luke]

This hasn't been the cast at Chuck's for over a decade now. :eek:


It's been a while since I've been.

[OldSchool]

I don't understand how anyone thinks this is not the customer's responsibility. He damaged the guitar.

OTOH, the owner seems the be demanding close to full retail. What do these guitars usaually go for? I'd think whatever the rock bottom sales price is would be fair.

Lets not forget we are only hearing one side of this story. there is two more we have not heard yet.

[Trebor Renkluaf]

Ouch. See this all the time at GC. Saw a small child kick over a MIM Fender Strat completely off the stand. Just a loud KABANGGG!!! as it dove headstock first to the floor. The father picked it back up and nobody but the three of us knew about it. Granted, it wasn't a $3600 guitar.

Easy to see why the Gibsons are on the high racks.

Just curious. Don't shops have insurance for this kind of thing? What if someone completely broke damages a guitar? Small claims court? I guess they could flee and never show their face again. At the big box sellers, there's often lots of dings and scratches on the inventory. Sometimes it can work out to a nice deal.
Gibsons on the high rack?!? Which GC do you shop at? I was in the La Mesa store a little while back and they had a Historic Gold Top RI on the bottom rung. The front was all dirty and grimy from all the 12 year old wannabes pawing it, and the back had about 6-8" gash in it that look like it had been dropped on something.

[Luke]

Other things to consider:

The shop is probably incorporated, in many states that means they need to hire an attorney to appear in court. Would you hire an attorney to file a $700 suit?

The shopkeeper's time is worth something, again how much will you dedicate to pursue $700?

Reputation: if you sue a customer and he goes to the newspaper, there is a lot of negative press, far more $700 worth.

I was in business, you just have to accept these things are part of the program. If you cannot get over it, you will not last long.

[jimmybcool]

This thread explains much to me. I always wondered why the local guy who runs a one man guitar store watches people who come into his shop like a hawk. Not me or those he has done business with. We are customers. Sadly many here seem to ignore the number of people who think guitars are not expensive or fragile that want to pose like a rock star for their friend in a music store.

The attitude that a store is supposed to provide expensive toys for us to try at HIS risk might be one of the reasons the Mom&Pop store is disappearing. I don't know law but my ethics tell me if I grab something off a wall in a store and break it I bought it. Period. I would hope the store would make an effort to reduce the burden with a large discount but it is NOT their obligation.

If I were sitting there and they brought me a guitar and I dropped it I still share some responsibility. Am I not responsible for my actions? I accepted some risk when I accepted possession of the guitar.


Those of you who feel you bear no obligation after damaging a stores inventory have a different view as to your ethical obligation to the world around you. Please, if this describes you don't ask to try one of my guitars.

[germs]

i've been in enough stores to have seen a few guitars either get accidentally dropped from a hanger, or just spontaneously decide to free themselves.

stores CANNOT hold customers liable for damages. just like a grocer won't charge you $2.50 for that jar of salsa you busted. they have to prove intent in a court of law.

if i were the one who dropped an expensive guitar, i'd challenge. of course i'd apologize and feel bad, but accidents are accidents.

this is EXACTLY the same reason we have auto insurance. i'm not paying out of pocket if someone hits my car...

[kenneth]

Thanks.

Regardless if I would be or feel morally responsible, this is how I would believe and hope the store policy would follow.




I sell guitars for a living...I've been doing it for 32 years.

Unless there was some ill intent involved, I would not try and hold the customer responsible legally...stuff happens....no matter how hard you try to avoid/prepare, etc.

I'd probably just get it fixed and sell it at a deeply discounted price with full disclosure.

I might ask him to keep us in mind for his next purchase....but I wouldn't try and make him buy the damaged instrument.

That's making a bad situation even worse.

I'm sure the guy felt bad enough.

[RichieD]

I've seen this posted at other guitar forums over the past several months. Some very interesting perspectives on this forum:

http://www.guitarists.net/forum/view_bb.php?forum=11&thread=94703&sort=asc&threads=20

[andrekp]

Aside from the legal arguments that can be made for both sides in this (and they can and will be), there is a simple fact that will guide whatever solution comes about:

It's not enough damage to justify a cause of action in a court based on anything but doing it for the principle of doing it.

In other words, if the customer simply refuses to pay, the store's only real (non-insurance) option is a suit in tort to recover from the customer. That $700 will be eaten up by a couple hours of legal work - FAR less than will be required to fully pursue this case. You can hope that a recalcitrant customer will pay up when threatened with suit...but that doesn't always work.

So in the end, the store (or their insurance company) eats the damage because there is no financially reasonable way to force a non-volunteering customer to pay. The only store owner who will spend thousands to recover $700, is one who gets too caught up ion the principle of the thing ("I'll show HIM who breaks one of my guitars!").

So just call it a lesson in life, put up more signage, watch over the stock better, keep the expensive stuff more out of reach, and take what you can get from your insurance.

[cob666]

If it is clearly posted it changes everything. In that case the customer would clearly have some liability. However charging what if I am not mistaken is close to full retail in a situation like that is still way out of line.

Clearly posted signs are not automatically legally binding, especially if they are not legally enforceable or are contrary to the law. I've worked retail for many years when I was younger and our small camera store found this out the hard way. In the majority of the cases the retailer must be able to prove negligence, simply dropping something is not negligent however, a child kicking over a guitar could be interpreted as negligent on the part of the parent. Also, if the customer refuses to pay for the item the only real recourse the retailer has is to take the customer to court and from the little research I just did, if found negligent the customer would be responsible for the original cost of the item plus any reasonable profit that the retailer would have expected.

If I were in the situation where I damaged something I might offer to pay for 1/2 of the repair cost if I thought that it really was something I caused and was avoidable.

My USD$0.02

[guitarfish]

I've seen this posted at other guitar forums over the past several months. Some very interesting perspectives on this forum:

http://www.guitarists.net/forum/view_bb.php?forum=11&thread=94703&sort=asc&threads=20

In that thread (started 5 mos ago), and this one, the OP hasn't added any additional details - was he involved, what was the outcome, etc. We can debate it for days, but I'd kinda like to know how it ended up.

[Tlon]

I'm a little hesitant to get into this discussion, since there clearly are some strong opinions on either side, but...

The relationship between the seller and buyer is one in which each should assume some responsibility: the seller because allowing people to handle (and potentially damage) goods is how the seller markets the goods he sells. This risk has to be factored into the price of doing business. In some cases this is covered by insurance, in others by margins. This is the cost of doing business.

The buyer is also responsible because he may took an action that resulted in an accident. This is a risk we all assume when we get up and walk out of our homes. It's the cost of living.

I'd like to write something about being moral in an immoral capitalist system, contingent morality, corporate ethics, and sticking it to the man, but rather than spending my day waxing philosophic, I'd just say the best solution, it seems to me would be for both parties to negotiate a solution that is reasonable, and neither of the proposed solutions by the OP seem that. In the end, the buyer's only responsibility in this case is to his ability to sleep at night with the decisions he makes.

[coldfingaz]

Common sense on the internet? Man if more people did stuff and thought like this, this world would be alright, ya know. Probably why you've been in biz for 32 years.


I was thinking the same exact thing. There's a reason why good people like this endure all of the crazy times I'm sure his business has seen in the past 32 years. His post was a thread-ending one to me.

[strtdv]

No way. Many many guitars are Impulse buys. You need to get those guitars in as many hands as possible. I've checked guitars I didn't intend to buy and was so enamored I broke the bank. (thats why I don't go to guitar shows or stores anymore). http://img.thegearpage.net/board/images/icons/icon12.gif


Yes, but for an impulse buy to work, you have to be able to buy it there and then.

The principle still stands, if you want to play a guitar you should be able to afford it.

[semi-hollowbody]

This thread gives me a great idea on how I can get a new guitar if my wife says no. :)
Thats was MY first thought LOL

"so you mean to tell me that because you changed the tuning on the low e thingy, they MADE you buy it??? And why again did you ALSO have to buy the amp and that delay pedal??"

lol...my wifes a lawyer and she said the 'break it you buy it" is a joke...the store usually ends up filing an insurance claim...

[jimmybcool]

Thats was MY first thought LOL

"so you mean to tell me that because you changed the tuning on the low e thingy, they MADE you buy it??? And why again did you ALSO have to buy the amp and that delay pedal??"

lol...my wifes a lawyer and she said the 'break it you buy it" is a joke...the store usually ends up filing an insurance claim...

Legal aspect aside, if they had signs telling you to not remove the guitar, and you did, and you damaged it, would you feel any ethical obligation to make them whole?

[guitarfish]

The principle still stands, if you want to play a guitar you should be able to afford it.
"Hi, I'd like to try that XYZ guitar hanging up there on top."

"OK. First we'll need to run a credit check to make sure you can afford it. May I have your Social Security number?"

:sarcasm

[thedroid]

Both options profit the dealer, the $700 one the most, since he can pocket the money and take less than that off the price of the guitar.

(BTW, What would amount to $700 in "cosmetic" damage? Is an Epiphone with a paint chip "totaled"?)

The situation, as described by the OP, sounds like the dealer is trying to strong-arm the customer into a purchase. I suppose it might work if the person is easily frightened or has an inflated sense of personal responsibility or just a lot of pocket money. It doesn't sound like good business sense to me, and if I were on the receiving end of such an ultimatum, I would leave and never come back.

My comments to not apply to every dropped guitar ever; just to what the OP described.

[dark_rainbow]

Both options profit the dealer, the $700 one the most, since he can pocket the money and take less than that off the price of the guitar.

(BTW, What would amount to $700 in "cosmetic" damage? Is an Epiphone with a paint chip "totaled"?)

The situation, as described by the OP, sounds like the dealer is trying to strong-arm the customer into a purchase. I suppose it might work if the person is easily frightened or has an inflated sense of personal responsibility or just a lot of pocket money. It doesn't sound like good business sense to me, and if I were on the receiving end of such an ultimatum, I would leave and never come back.

My comments to not apply to every dropped guitar ever; just to what the OP described.
If the $700 repair is made, does the OEM or store do it? And are they required to disclose it's been repaired?

[jimmybcool]

Both options profit the dealer, the $700 one the most, since he can pocket the money and take less than that off the price of the guitar.

(BTW, What would amount to $700 in "cosmetic" damage? Is an Epiphone with a paint chip "totaled"?)

The situation, as described by the OP, sounds like the dealer is trying to strong-arm the customer into a purchase. I suppose it might work if the person is easily frightened or has an inflated sense of personal responsibility or just a lot of pocket money. It doesn't sound like good business sense to me, and if I were on the receiving end of such an ultimatum, I would leave and never come back.

My comments to not apply to every dropped guitar ever; just to what the OP described.

Odd. I don't read the same things in the OP. The COST to repair is stated at $700. Hence no profit to the dealer. In fact, it is an aggravation and he still can't sell the guitar as mint.

And there is no mention of an Epiphone guitar. Not sure where that comes from.

BTW, you seem to be OK with the dealer losing money on the damage (and in case you haven't read the entire post that is exactly what will happen - insurance won't make him whole). Why is that? Is it OK to wreck his inventory? He pays for your clumsiness?

BTW, can I borrow your car? Hey, if I wreck it you got insurance right?

[Luke]

BTW, can I borrow your car? Hey, if I wreck it you got insurance right?


You probably have auto insurance as well if you have a driver's license.

However if I lend you my car and you total it, I went in knowing that recouping $25,000 from you was not an option and that the best case recovery would be my deductible.

Yes the shop owner eats it, its part of the business model. Why do you think they have to make 500% return on guitar picks?

[Sam Sherry]

Yes the shop owner eats it, its part of the business model. Why do you think they have to make 500% return on guitar picks?
They make a profit on picks . . . and everything else . . . because they pay for them BEFORE NOW so you can try them NOW and come back and buy LATER.

[jimmybcool]

However if I lend you my car and you total it, I went in knowing that recouping $25,000 from you was not an option and that the best case recovery would be my deductible.

Yes the shop owner eats it, its part of the business model. Why do you think they have to make 500% return on guitar picks?

OK, but say I don't want to pay you the deductible. Hey, it was your car. Right? You got insurance, right? I wrecked it but I don't feel any obligation to cover your real personal non-recoverable loss. This is EXACTLY the attitude the people in this thread have if they say too bad and walk. It is in fact taking cash right out of the store owners pocket. You have reduced his personal worth by the damage to that guitar. No different than if I dropped your personal guitar.

In my world people are responsible for their actions. I mean if you are playing football and throw one through your neighbors picture window into his 63 inch plasma tv do you just shrug and walk away cause he has insurance? Not me. I make sure he doesn't come out a financial loser in the deal.

[FrankieSixxxgun]

If it was an honest accident, chalk it up to an insurance claim. I heard you're supposed to have insurance if you own a business. If the customer was doing the Pete Townshend windmill with the thing and screwed it up, yeah, it's on him/her then.

[guitarfish]

There's two lines of reasoing going on in this thread, the legal angle, and the moral one. Legally, I don't think the customer is responsible, and as stated, it sounds like the store is trying to strongarm him. Morally, I do think the customer should do something other than run.

$700 for an insurance claim does sound like too much trouble to be worth it, especially if you factor in the deductible.

Well, I'm going to go take my Ferrari for a spin...

[Luke]

It is easy to take the high road on a hypothetical scenario.

When I was 17 a kid threw a rock and shattered my windshield. My friend got out and chased him, between the two of us we caught him. He refused to tell us who he was, but eventually his mother came looking for him (this was 20 years prior to cell phones). She called the cops on US. I filed a complaint, the kid's father wanted me to put into my insurance. It wasn't until the night before I was to testify against the kid did the father finally pony up the money.

I was not interested in the money at that point, months had passed. Eventually we struck a deal where I dropped the charges, which cost him 5x the windshield.

My experience is very few people do the right thing willingly.


OK, but say I don't want to pay you the deductible. Hey, it was your car. Right? You got insurance, right? I wrecked it but I don't feel any obligation to cover your real personal non-recoverable loss. This is EXACTLY the attitude the people in this thread have if they say too bad and walk. It is in fact taking cash right out of the store owners pocket. You have reduced his personal worth by the damage to that guitar. No different than if I dropped your personal guitar.

In my world people are responsible for their actions. I mean if you are playing football and throw one through your neighbors picture window into his 63 inch plasma tv do you just shrug and walk away cause he has insurance? Not me. I make sure he doesn't come out a financial loser in the deal.

[semi-hollowbody]

Legal aspect aside, if they had signs telling you to not remove the guitar, and you did, and you damaged it, would you feel any ethical obligation to make them whole?
It really depends...
If it was an accident and they were willing to sell it to me at cost, I would...

If I couldnt find a salesperson at GC (which is typical, I can only find one when i DONT want one) and I took down a $800 guitar...not a $4000 guitar i would never buy, but something I was truly interested in purchasing, and I slipped and dropped it, damaging it, I would buy it at cost...and then pay someone to fix it and have a new guitar...but if some dikhead tries to profit from the mishap, I will fight it...

[coldfingaz]

It is easy to take the high road on a hypothetical scenario.

When I was 17 a kid threw a rock and shattered my windshield. My friend got out and chased him, between the two of us we caught him. He refused to tell us who he was, but eventually his mother came looking for him (this was 20 years prior to cell phones). She called the cops on US. I filed a complaint, the kid's father wanted me to put into my insurance. It wasn't until the night before I was to testify against the kid did the father finally pony up the money.

I was not interested in the money at that point, months had passed. Eventually we struck a deal where I dropped the charges, which cost him 5x the windshield.

My experience is very few people do the right thing willingly.



Amazing... though sad & true.

If that was my dad, he would have ponied up immediately & I would have wound up paying substantially more than 5x what that cost him!

[stevieboy]

The store owner isn't going to lose money I don't think, as I believe he could sell that guitar with the damage for what he paid for it plus maybe a little extra for the aggravation. If he has a hard time getting new Groshes, then he would lose an opportunity to make money, yes. If it was a used guitar, then he might also lose the opportunity to make money.

But if he alienates a potential customer, he also might lose the opportunity to make money. We don't really know much about the store or customer, maybe even it's a hypothetical situation. While the customer has done something that he is at fault for, the store owner has also given him the opportunity, and done so with the reasoning that it helps him to sell guitars if he allows customers to handle them, and can be considered to be assuming a risk inherit to his business. I don't want to make an absolute statement about who should be obligated to do what, but I think the store owner is better off not demanding money from the customer.

[Jahn]

Amazing... though sad & true.

If that was my dad, he would have ponied up immediately & I would have wound up paying substantially more than 5x what that cost him!

ayep, if that was me and my dad, my dad would have paid up, and i would have paid 5X via pounds of flesh!:horse

[thedroid]

Odd. I don't read the same things in the OP. The COST to repair is stated at $700. Hence no profit to the dealer. In fact, it is an aggravation and he still can't sell the guitar as mint.

And there is no mention of an Epiphone guitar. Not sure where that comes from.

BTW, you seem to be OK with the dealer losing money on the damage (and in case you haven't read the entire post that is exactly what will happen - insurance won't make him whole). Why is that? Is it OK to wreck his inventory? He pays for your clumsiness?

BTW, can I borrow your car? Hey, if I wreck it you got insurance right?

The guy who dropped the guitar pays the dealer $700. The dealer hangs it back up on the wall and takes $300 off the price because of the damage. If it sells, he made an extra $400. What don't you understand?

The only choices offered were to pay 20% of the value of the guitar in repairs or buy it at 95% of retail. Those don't seem like fair settlements to me and I wouldn't accept them. If you would, I hope you dent my fender someday, cause I'll take you to the cleaners.

[oasis02]

My first reaction is that it is purely an insurance issue unless the buyer was violating a posted store policy.

However, something does not smell right with the guitar not being offerred at cost + repairs. No shop in my area would make the buyer pay $700 for an accidental drop, and they would CERTAINLY offer to sell the guitar at their cost.

A $200 discount on a guitar over $3000? Really? I sense seller desperation.

If the buyer truly does not like the guitar, he should OFFER to help with the deductible, but not be FORCED to do anything until legally mandated.

[CyberFerret]

The guy who dropped the guitar pays the dealer $700. The dealer hangs it back up on the wall and takes $300 off the price because of the damage. If it sells, he made an extra $400. What don't you understand?

The only choices offered were to pay 20% of the value of the guitar in repairs or buy it at 95% of retail. Those don't seem like fair settlements to me and I wouldn't accept them. If you would, I hope you dent my fender someday, cause I'll take you to the cleaners.

Er, you are making the assumption of course that the dealer is NOT going to actually repair the guitar. If he DID repair it, the $700 will go straight to the repair tech or the OEM ($0 profit), and he will hang the guitar up, possibly at a $100 discount or whatever because it is not 'new' or 'mint' as such, which is still a $100 hit on his profit.

[Drew68]

Gibsons on the high rack?!? Which GC do you shop at? I was in the La Mesa store a little while back and they had a Historic Gold Top RI on the bottom rung. The front was all dirty and grimy from all the 12 year old wannabes pawing it, and the back had about 6-8" gash in it that look like it had been dropped on something.

Just returned from the La Mesa GC. No Historics in reach without a ladder. Even the Studios were high up. I'm not disbelieving you as I'm sure employees occasionally bring guitars down from the ladder and then are too lazy/busy to immediately replace them up high, so they'll just put 'em on a stand down low. It just seems to not happen very often.

Did happen to see a $4K relic'd David Gilmour hanging at eye-level amongst the Squiers. I guess if someone drops that, nobody would notice.

[karma1]

I forwarded this thread to a good friend of mine who is an attorney, guitar player, and avid guitar collector. Here's his response:

"I agree with the guy who said it should have been turned over to insurance. Even if the customer was inclined to buy, it should have been at the wholesale price not retail less 200. When you invite the public to handle and fondle you get what you get, used and sometimes damaged goods."

[jimmybcool]

It appears many people here are under the delusion that every guitar store is swimming in money and can afford to take the loss caused by people who feel they have a right to take any guitar down and mess with it. IMO that kind of lack of personal responsibility is part of the problem with the world today.

There are all kinds of excuses but the bottom line is simple. If you damage a guitar in a store they take a loss unless you make it good. And in the case of most stores that loss is real and comes from the owners pocket. Apparently, some don't think the owner of a guitar store should matter. Weird.

Store insurance is the most mentioned excuse. McFly? Insurance is for a major event like a fire or store break in. The deductible at my locals store is $1000. I asked him what happens in this event and he said usually he is stuck with nothing and has to discount the guitar. A direct loss. I don't believe he is making all that much running that store 6 days a week. He has signs all over the store telling people do not touch. What? Do we need to return to the days where guitar stores wouldn't let you touch a PRS unless you let them hold your credit card? Is that what we want?

All of you excuse makers fire away. Explain why you aren't responsible for the damage. The bottom line is - you just lack ethics if you walk away. I won't return to this thread. Too depressing to realize how many people think like this.

[thedroid]

It appears many people here are under the delusion that every guitar store is swimming in money and can afford to take the loss caused by people who feel they have a right to take any guitar down and mess with it. IMO that kind of lack of personal responsibility is part of the problem with the world today.

There are all kinds of excuses but the bottom line is simple. If you damage a guitar in a store they take a loss unless you make it good. And in the case of most stores that loss is real and comes from the owners pocket. Apparently, some don't think the owner of a guitar store should matter. Weird.

Store insurance is the most mentioned excuse. McFly? Insurance is for a major event like a fire or store break in. The deductible at my locals store is $1000. I asked him what happens in this event and he said usually he is stuck with nothing and has to discount the guitar. A direct loss. I don't believe he is making all that much running that store 6 days a week. He has signs all over the store telling people do not touch. What? Do we need to return to the days where guitar stores wouldn't let you touch a PRS unless you let them hold your credit card? Is that what we want?

All of you excuse makers fire away. Explain why you aren't responsible for the damage. The bottom line is - you just lack ethics if you walk away. I won't return to this thread. Too depressing to realize how many people think like this.

Apparently the only ethical action you see if you've wronged someone is to yield to their demands, no matter how unreasonable. Enjoy the view up there on your high horse.

Your local dealer pays for all accidental damage -- notice, I'm not saying he should have to -- and stays in business. So I don't think the greatest threat to the mom and pop music store is clumsy customers.

You're presenting a classic false choice: either submit to being bullied by business owners or go back to the bad of days of not touching the guitars. There's lot of in between, which is where most of us would find a solution.

Hope that didn't cause you to OD on your Zoloft.

[Luke]

Take the high road and give him the $700. :hide2


It appears many people here are under the delusion that every guitar store is swimming in money and can afford to take the loss caused by people who feel they have a right to take any guitar down and mess with it. IMO that kind of lack of personal responsibility is part of the problem with the world today.

There are all kinds of excuses but the bottom line is simple. If you damage a guitar in a store they take a loss unless you make it good. And in the case of most stores that loss is real and comes from the owners pocket. Apparently, some don't think the owner of a guitar store should matter. Weird.

Store insurance is the most mentioned excuse. McFly? Insurance is for a major event like a fire or store break in. The deductible at my locals store is $1000. I asked him what happens in this event and he said usually he is stuck with nothing and has to discount the guitar. A direct loss. I don't believe he is making all that much running that store 6 days a week. He has signs all over the store telling people do not touch. What? Do we need to return to the days where guitar stores wouldn't let you touch a PRS unless you let them hold your credit card? Is that what we want?

All of you excuse makers fire away. Explain why you aren't responsible for the damage. The bottom line is - you just lack ethics if you walk away. I won't return to this thread. Too depressing to realize how many people think like this.

[Azfarrier]

When I was 17 a kid threw a rock and shattered my windshield. My friend got out and chased him, between the two of us we caught him. He refused to tell us who he was, but eventually his mother came looking for him (this was 20 years prior to cell phones). She called the cops on US. I filed a complaint, the kid's father wanted me to put into my insurance. It wasn't until the night before I was to testify against the kid did the father finally pony up the money.

I was not interested in the money at that point, months had passed. Eventually we struck a deal where I dropped the charges, which cost him 5x the windshield.

My experience is very few people do the right thing willingly.

A lot of talk has been about the legal obligations of the clumsy guitarist. I think we all agree legally he has no obligation and that the cost involved to pursue it in court is more than what the claim is worth. We all agree that the deductible to the insurance company would be more than the cost of the repair so the store owner is out that money and so he does lose that money. The real question is a question of ethics. As many commented in the responses regarding what their father would have done if they had broken the windshield what would our fathers and grandfathers had done if we had broken a guitar even if it was accidental. They would have paid for the guitar or the repair because it would have been considered the right thing to do and made us work it off somehow. The way I would personally handle it would be to purchase the guitar. I obviously was looking for that type of guitar or I wouldn't have been trying it out. I would have asked the owner of the store to sell it to me at the price he would have given it to me had we negotiated the sale price before the accident and hopefully he would give it to me for that. If he wouldn't I would pay him what it said on the price tag and never buy from him again. It might be an expensive painful lesson but thats the way it goes sometimes.

[mc5nrg]

This subject has come up before- cost of doing business, the customer is not liable, damage to stock comes with the territory.

[Guitar Surgeon]

Both options profit the dealer, the $700 one the most, since he can pocket the money and take less than that off the price of the guitar.

(BTW, What would amount to $700 in "cosmetic" damage? Is an Epiphone with a paint chip "totaled"?)

The situation, as described by the OP, sounds like the dealer is trying to strong-arm the customer into a purchase. I suppose it might work if the person is easily frightened or has an inflated sense of personal responsibility or just a lot of pocket money. It doesn't sound like good business sense to me, and if I were on the receiving end of such an ultimatum, I would leave and never come back.

My comments to not apply to every dropped guitar ever; just to what the OP described.

What I don't get is if there is $700 damage why would the customer only get a $200 discount? I mean, off a $3400 guitar you get a $200 discount by simply haggling with the store. I would feel obligated to purchase the instrument if I damaged it to the tune of $700 in damage, but I would definitely get that price down to closer to $2800.

[dbeeman]

I carry insurance against uninsured motorists. Doesn't make them any less at fault or liable if they total my car. The insurance cost me something. Why should the store owner pay if you break the guitar - accident or not?

All shop owners have to figure on a certain amount of cost for pilferage and theft. Does that mean that since they have already figured it in (and probably have insurance against large losses), it is ok for me to steal a guitar every now and then?

[XmasTree]

Just out of curiousity XmasTree if you had damaged the guitar what do you feel would be a fair way to handle it for both parties.

I'd contact some sort of legal assistance to determine what my obligations are.
...cause they have it figured out. I don't.
If the law said I didn't have to pay anything........I would personally help out in some way.
..i'd definitely buy some gear and perhaps chip in for damage repair.
It was an accident. Neither party deserves to be dicked.

And i'll say it again, I'd refuse to accept those two as my ONLY options.

[guitarfish]

Check out this AllExperts.com entry about Customer Breakage (http://en.allexperts.com/q/General-Retail-Business-2223/Customer-Breakage.htm). Not definitive, but very interesting.

[treeofpain]

It's not a matter of what is legal. It's a matter of what is right.

If I damaged a guitar in a shop, I would pay to buy or repair it. Period.

The shop should also extend goodwill in this situation. Ideally, they would sell at a discount once they knew I was willing to buy it, but they are not obligated to do so. They purchased that guitar to make a certain amount of profit, and the fact that I broke it doesn't mean they should sell to me at cost and lose that profit potential.

[kevmin]

I worked at a music store in the early 90's and was hanging a custom shop tele up on a high guitar hanger. The guitar swung in the hanger as I walked away and the little tele headstock slipped out. The bottom of the guitar body hit the corner of the Marshall combo underneath and took a chip out of the edge. The amp was not damaged. The music store owner was not going to make me pay for anything, but I offered to buy the guitar at dealer cost plus the repair cost. The store made a little on the repair, but other than that it was a wash. I got a nice guitar for a great price too, so it was not too bad. Just embarassing... :bonk

Keep those teles on floor stands or narrow guitar hangers!

In response to the OP, I do not think the music store is doing a smart thing here. They would lose me as a customer by trying to strong arm me. I don't think the customer is legally liable for this damage. But as said before, morally he should try to help with the loss. I suspect that the music store would do just fine by selling the repaired guitar to the customer for their cost plus the actual repair cost. Not an inflated repair cost.

[ProToneThinline]

I'll chime in here, but let me give you a little background on me. First, I work as as underwriter for a large insurance company that insures, among other things, musical instruments. In fact, if you've ever bought instrument coverage on line, there's a good chance my company provided the coverage. Second, back in the '80's, when I was on "haitus" from the insurance business, I owned a small music store - guitars, amps, drums, etc.

So here's the deal. If the damage was accidental, the store is not insured. Almost all commercial policies contain an exclusion for "breakage, marring, or scratching". The damage the OP described in clearly marring.

If the damage was intentional on the part of the customer, the store can make a claim for vandalism, in which case the insurance company would pay the cost to replace, less the deductible. That usually means the wholesale cost, plus shipping charges. The insurance company would then in turn enter subrogation against the customer for the full amount of the claim, including the store's deductible. If they were successful in recovering, they would reimburse the store for their deductible.

As a former store owner, I can tell you that the store owner has a responsibility to protect his inventory from damage. That's why most stores keep their high-end product out of reach (see my explaination of marring, above). By keeping this item within easy reach of the customer, the owner failed to properly protect his assets. Damage to the item is a cost of doing business that the owner assumed by not keeping the high=end product properly secured. He assumed the risk, so he must also assume the cost of any damage.

Feel free to discuss :)

[guitarfish]

I'll chime in here...

Feel free to discuss :)
Thanks for an informative post! This makes a lot of sense.

[Azfarrier]

It's probably time for this thread to die. It just comes down to like everything else in life. Every day we have decisions to make. In every one of those decisions we know there is the right thing to do and there are the varying degrees of grey areas of the wrong thing to do. For those of you who choose the right thing regardless of the cost or consequences I commend you. The world would be in a much better place if everyone did it that way. For those of you that choose that grey area I hope I'm not around when you get karmically bitch slapped by an eight armed hindu goddess.

[whiteop]

and this is the reason I don't buy any of my guitars "off the rack". I have them pull a box from the back and I pull it out and try it. If I like it I buy it. I can't tell you how many kids I've seen scratch or damage guitars while I'm browsing. What kills me is how they let some of those kids pull out high end Gibsons to play on that clearly have no intention of buying them. If I ran a shop I'd keep all the good stuff back behind 'the counter'.

[phantasm]

I just skimmed the first page and read none of the others, so i have no idea what anyone else said.

It actually seems like the shops fault- no one should take a guitar off the wall except an employee. If the shop follows that policy, there'll most likely be alot less damage.

[RRfireblade]

Listen , it's a trade off. If you don't let anyone hold , try or play guitars then you don't sell any. Period.

If you do , then you deal with occasional damage and guess what , you still sell guitars. There are tons of people specifically looking for 'shelf' worn guitars so they have wiggle room and get a deal . . . and the store still makes money. Sheesh , nowadays they can just take it ouside , slide it across the parking lot and sell it as a relic. ;) Anyway . . .

It's just how it works unless your a small mom and pop shop and have all your money tied up in a small handfull of high end guitars in which case , A) you should be personally assisiting every customer and , B) odds are your not going to be around very long anyway.

[phantasm]

You take the guitar off the wall and hand it to the customer, most likely after they are seated. It's really that easy.

I've been going to the same guitar shop since 1987- they've finally let me take the guitars off the wall all by myself about 5 years ago (because they know i'm careful and understand how they attached to the wall).
I always thought it was pretty simple- go into a store and say " I'd like to try that one" and they pull it down.

haha! I've been to a store where the salesman would pull down the guitar and then play it himself and not let the customer try it. I walked on him many times, but i'd still go back to see what was hanging. I remember one time he asked " You come in here every month and never buy any of the guitars- why is that? He seemed perplexed when i said it was because i could never actually play them myself. You really need to hold and play a guitar before you buy it. Heck- he could have actually handed me the guitar after he took it off the wall.

[XmasTree]

It's probably time for this thread to die. It just comes down to like everything else in life. Every day we have decisions to make. In every one of those decisions we know there is the right thing to do and there are the varying degrees of grey areas of the wrong thing to do. For those of you who choose the right thing regardless of the cost or consequences I commend you. The world would be in a much better place if everyone did it that way. For those of you that choose that grey area I hope I'm not around when you get karmically bitch slapped by an eight armed hindu goddess.

Don't bring your religion into this buddy!

[Jazz2Punk]

Don't bring your religion into this buddy!

That's kind of funny considering your forum name.

[Gasp100]

Flawed analysis. The insurance company is only able to pursue the individual to the extent of the law. Here, a pure accident...probably no legal claim under which to recover. It doesn't sound like negligence, and it certainly wasn't intentional. It's the very thing you pay insurance for, and the very risk the insurance company accepts your premium payment for in relation to the risk. Here, the insurance company "lost" (despite the fact that premiums probably more than make up for the claim several times over) the risk equation.

There are plenty of cases like this where courts have simply found that the reason the an insurance company accepts premiums and assess risk is with the understand that at some point, it is going to need to make payment on a claim with no avenue for recovery. That's the game of insurance in a nutshell.

I agree and I hope you are right (for the 'customers' sake). This is bullshit, the store is trying to get out of filing a claim, dealing with the insurance company and/or paying their deductable.

"I sell guitars for a living...I've been doing it for 32 years.

Unless there was some ill intent involved, I would not try and hold the customer responsible legally...stuff happens....no matter how hard you try to avoid/prepare, etc.

I'd probably just get it fixed and sell it at a deeply discounted price with full disclosure.

I might ask him to keep us in mind for his next purchase....but I wouldn't try and make him buy the damaged instrument.

That's making a bad situation even worse.

I'm sure the guy felt bad enough." -- seriously, can you imagine how bad the customer feels having dropped that guitar BY MISTAKE??? Who's to say he has $3200 laying around to buy the thing anyway... sh*t happens running a business.

[Gasp100]

This thread explains much to me. I always wondered why the local guy who runs a one man guitar store watches people who come into his shop like a hawk. Not me or those he has done business with. We are customers. Sadly many here seem to ignore the number of people who think guitars are not expensive or fragile that want to pose like a rock star for their friend in a music store.

The attitude that a store is supposed to provide expensive toys for us to try at HIS risk might be one of the reasons the Mom&Pop store is disappearing. I don't know law but my ethics tell me if I grab something off a wall in a store and break it I bought it. Period. I would hope the store would make an effort to reduce the burden with a large discount but it is NOT their obligation.

If I were sitting there and they brought me a guitar and I dropped it I still share some responsibility. Am I not responsible for my actions? I accepted some risk when I accepted possession of the guitar.


Those of you who feel you bear no obligation after damaging a stores inventory have a different view as to your ethical obligation to the world around you. Please, if this describes you don't ask to try one of my guitars.

Okay, the OP seems to indicate it was clearly a very unfortunate ACCIDENT. What bothers me is that the OP seems to be MIA in this thread so now everyone is just guessing as to exactly what went down.
Was there signage indicating the guitars are not to be handled?
Where was this guitar "floor planned" well?
Did any employee offer assistance? Are you supposed to ask for assistance before handling the guitar?

And finally, the OP seems to indicate that the store is somehow pressuring the dropper into one of two options, black & white, do this or do that... if the answer to the above questions is NO and the store is only offering those two options, I call bullshit.

Why does this have to turn into a thread about the deteriorating morals of the US consumer?

[wrxplayer]

Whilst removing it from its rack hanger, a customer accidentally dropped a Don Grosh CCT electric guitar priced at $3600.00. The damage was only cosmetic, but substantial, and the cost to repair it, $700.00....

Considering the compromising situation the customer was naturally subjected to, and being legally responsible even for accidental damage, price haggling would likely not be possible.

....

Why do you think the customer is legally responsible? If a store is unwilling to assume the risk, it should lock the guitar, requiring a salesperson to get them down. I see no legal responsibility on the part of the customer absent reckless behavior.

What if your customer merely scratched the guitar inadvertently on her belt? It's no longer new. On a Grosh that could mean an immediate 20% reduction in value.

[wrxplayer]

I guess that is why shops have those tags on the guitars and the signs on the wall that say 'please don't handle the guitars'.


Those signs are BS, IMO, and merely lead to situations like the one presented. If a store doesn't want you to handle a guitar, lock it up.

But of course they DO want you to handle a guitar so they don't lock them and put up the silly sign knowing full well it will be ignored. Considering how high guitars are hung in some stores, GC in particular, a store is almost setting themselves up for accidents to happen.

[wrxplayer]

This is why retailers have insurance...its for their own protection and the protection of their merchandise. If they have an issue with having customers handling gtrs then an employee of the store should be responsible for handling gtrs off racks or hangers. If the store allows the public to handle merchandise other than to try it out the the retailer is still are liable for their instruments.

Accidents happen...this is why businesses have insurance. Retailing is a business dependant on the public. A business has their own liability here when it allows the public through its doors.

Bingo.

[Azfarrier]

It's probably time for this thread to die. It just comes down to like everything else in life. Every day we have decisions to make. In every one of those decisions we know there is the right thing to do and there are the varying degrees of grey areas of the wrong thing to do. For those of you who choose the right thing regardless of the cost or consequences I commend you. The world would be in a much better place if everyone did it that way. For those of you that choose that grey area I hope I'm not around when you get karmically bitch slapped by an eight armed hindu goddess.
Don't bring your religion into this buddy!
:roll:roll:roll:roll
That's some funny stuff there.

[Bantha]

The store can't make you do anything and they likely have assumed the risk by allowing people to handle the guitars.

No court will make you buy the guitar...but a court may compel damages, insurance issues aside. Even if the store did sue for the damages they would likely have to mitigate by a good faith effort to sell (or repair and sell) the guitar, etc. and the negligent dropper would have to pay some difference, but likely it would never get that far.

[TattooedCarrot]

Just wait until the personal injury lawsuit comes where the customer sues the shop because he injured hi back stretching to replace the guitar on the rack that was mounted too high and therefore caused his injury.

[TattooedCarrot]

If it is clearly posted it changes everything. In that case the customer would clearly have some liability. However charging what if I am not mistaken is close to full retail in a situation like that is still way out of line.
Just because something is posted, that doesn't absolve the store of its responsibilities. You can post beware of dog in your yard too, but when a kid hops the fence to retrieve his baseball and get mauled, guess what? You're not off the hook just because of the sign (its really happened, not making that up).

IMO store can ask the customer to work it out, with compromise on both sides. But at the end of the day I don't think they have a leg to stand on in forcing the issue.

[poolshark]

Just because something is posted, that doesn't absolve the store of its responsibilities. You can post beware of dog in your yard too, but when a kid hops the fence to retrieve his baseball and get mauled, guess what? You're not off the hook just because of the sign (its really happened, not making that up).

Seriously? I thought property owners traditionally had no duty to trespassers?

[shando98]

Seriously? I thought property owners traditionally had no duty to trespassers?

Unfortunately that's not the case. For instance, if you have a pool, you'd better put a fence around it with an alarm. Even if somebody tresspasses onto your property and drowns in your pool, you are liable.

If somebody breaks into your home and you shoot them, you'd better kill them. If you don't, prepare for a hefty civil suit for the damages you caused them.

So, the two best things you can purchase are high fences and big insurance policies.

[azimuth]

February 26 – “Family of electrocuted thief gets $75,000″. “The family of a convicted burglar who was electrocuted in 1997 when he tried to break in to a bar in Aurora after-hours and triggered a homemade booby trap has been awarded a $75,000 jury verdict to be paid by the owners of the bar and the property.” Frustrated by repeated burglaries, Jessie Ingram electrified the inside of his tavern’s window and “then posted several warning signs outside, including one outside the window [Larry] Harris broke in through. Drunk and high on cocaine, Harris, 37, either didn’t see or ignored the warnings.” (Dan Rozek, Chicago Sun-Times, Feb. 25).

[guitarman3001]

This is why retailers have insurance...its for their own protection and the protection of their merchandise. If they have an issue with having customers handling gtrs then an employee of the store should be responsible for handling gtrs off racks or hangers. If the store allows the public to handle merchandise other than to try it out the the retailer is still are liable for their instruments.

Accidents happen...this is why businesses have insurance. Retailing is a business dependant on the public. A business has their own liability here when it allows the public through its doors.

I worked in music retail for 4 years and the customer is not necessarily held responsible here. At best its a 50-50 split...at most the customer could be on the hook for half of the repair cost.

I didn't even read the rest of the thread after this post.

This post is where the thread should have ended. Shops have insurance for stuff like this. If the damage is less than the deductible, it's a cost of doing business. The shop can certainly try to work something out with the customer but as much as it may suck for the shop, the customer is usually under no real obligation in cases like this.

[ProToneThinline]

Shops have insurance for stuff like this.

Actually, they don't. See my earlier post (#144).

[Bantha]

Seriously? I thought property owners traditionally had no duty to trespassers?

Strict liability...

[poolshark]

Strict liability...

Not for the examples that he's using. Too many people equate settlements to actual liability.

[XmasTree]

That's kind of funny considering your forum name.

Hmm, i never thought of that. You have SOME point but I know you're just looking to get a cheap shot, so none of this matters.

[andrekp]

Seriously? I thought property owners traditionally had no duty to trespassers?

Depends on the State, and it usually depends on what the property owners knows about the possibility for tresspassers, whether there have been tresspassers in the past, and/or what he knew about this particular tresspasser.

Like everything, it's set up for lawyers to make arguments on either side.

[Headstock]

Cost of doing business. If I was that customer, I would feel bad, but that would be all the store owner got out of me. If it happened enough to a given owner they could implement taking deposits on guitar runs.

[Atmospheric]

...being legally responsible even for accidental damage.

I'm not sure customers are ever LEGALLY responsible for accidental damage, but then I am not a lawyer.

Did the store post signs warning customers to not touch the instruments or remove them from hangars? Some stores do that for just this reason.

If not, the customer likely has a very good case in small claims court that the store (knowing how valuable the instrument was) did not take ordinary care to ensure its safety.

That would certainly by my position were I the unfortunate customer in this scenario. But I probably would have asked the store to remove the guitar from the hangar and hand it to me.

IMHO, the customer could likely just walk way and the store would be forced to sue to recover damages. Not a good value proposition over $700.

This sure seems like something insurance should cover, either the store's or the customer's home insurance policy.

[John_]

Some members asked me about the outcome of the incident as described in the OP.

At the time, the customer stated he would have paid only the cost of the guitar, if he wanted it, and not the $3400.00 discounted price. The store initially argued that they should be reimbursed the cost to repair, or the customer should pay the discounted price. Their reasoning was that the guitar might have been sold that day, or any day thereafter for $3400.00, but, as a result of the incident, that potential sale was not possible.

I thought, and some courts have ruled that there is no certainty, there is no "sum certain" that the guitar might have been sold to another customer, even for the price of $3400.00, if it was not damaged. It also might have been sold for $4500.00 or any greater, or lesser amount. Certainly, the liable customer could not be required to pay the highest, or lowest potential price. Similar to the basis of contract law, there has to be, along with other conditions to create an agreement, a valid contract -- "a sum certain" -- that is, a specific price agreed to by the parties. Even if this guitar was not damaged, there was no "sum certain," or a possibility to know of a "sum certain" that it might have been sold for. By and large, the hurt party may not seek damages for potential loss, a "what if" loss, or a "what might have or could have been" loss. Again, the reasoning is similar to worker's compensation claims. Whilst the employer is liable for the employee's injuries, related costs and loss of income, the employer is not liable for future, potential, or "what if" losses that the employee might realise, such as income lost from the employee's second job, if any, due to the injury. Overall, there are, and have to be maintained, limits regarding intentional and unintentional torts and losses, for all parties involved.

In the end, the customer played the guitar again, and paid the cost of the repair, because he did not want to buy the guitar anyway. Admittedly, he walked away with nothing, but he also did not buy an instrument that did not have practical value and use for him.

I often thought that if I accidentally damaged a guitar that I would not have purchased anyway, I would just pay the cost of the repair and walk away with dry hands, especially if the instrument was overpriced and "pie-in-the-sky."

It might be a psychologically difficult experience for anyone. There might be some pre and post-purchase dissonance. Add to that the salesperson coming back and telling the customer,


"Dude, I just talked to my manager and he flat out told me that the MOST we could discount this 1960 Tonewood Double Extra you damaged, is $200.00. But, dude, you are still getting an amazing guitar for $5200.00. This thing rocks, and even the damage on the body is not noticeable, or it makes it look like a relic. It's a deal of a lifetime! Even a few people stopped me in the showroom as I was coming back with it. I'd get it myself, if I had not bought one last week."


The point is not to evade responsibility, but to avoid psychological and marketing tactics, from both the salesperson and your own self, and make a realistic decision.

It was unfortunate but the result appropriate to both parties.

[Jahn]

it comes down to whether the guy is in love with the guitar, and has the bank for it. no bank? step away from the guitar, just pay up the bandaid cost. no love? step away from the guitar, just pay up the bandaid cost. love and bank? bingo discount buy it!

Sounds like it was the No Love option. The guy stepped away from the guitar and paid the bandaid cost. Case Closed!:BluesBros

[pickaguitar]

This is why retailers have insurance...its for their own protection and the protection of their merchandise. If they have an issue with having customers handling gtrs then an employee of the store should be responsible for handling gtrs off racks or hangers. If the store allows the public to handle merchandise other than to try it out the the retailer is still are liable for their instruments.

Accidents happen...this is why businesses have insurance. Retailing is a business dependant on the public. A business has their own liability here when it allows the public through its doors.
this imo

[dirtyguitar]

Not that it matters now. But two posters above raised what I believe to be the relevant issue - assumption of risk.

Sellers have a choice to make their inventory available to demo, or not. And to implement any degree of control over that policy as long as it is non-discriminatory against protected classes (not 100% on the discrimination).

If you as a seller decide to make your inventory available, you assume the risk of accidental damage. You must absorb the cost into your margins as a cost of business.

What is interesting it that legally, I wonder if the burden of risk switches in the case where a customer is informed of a "You break it, you buy it" policy.

It seems in that case, that like with posted trespass signs, the burden may switch. The seller is effectively saying, "I don't assume this risk, you have to carry the risk if you want to try my inventory."


We can debate what is ethical, and we can debate what is a smart business policy - but how about some clarity around what is legal?

It really would be nice if someone will come out of the closet as a JD and voice an educated opinion. Too many soap-box preachers here...

[TattooedCarrot]

Another argument would be whether or not that offered discount price is the dealer's cost? Because when it comes to civil laws and declaring a loss, it must be an actual loss and not a potential loss. So the dealer is only able to claim their cost as the loss amount and not what they might have sold the item for later.

(or not, I'm not a lawyer, just food for though on the subject)

[dark_rainbow]

3rd time I'm asking: if a $700 repair is made, does the store do it or the manufacturer? Also, does the store have to disclose in either case a repair was made?

[andrekp]

3rd time I'm asking: if a $700 repair is made, does the store do it or the manufacturer? Also, does the store have to disclose in either case a repair was made?

+1

After all, this is now at best a "reconditioned" instrument. I'd be bothered by purchasing a high-end instrument for full price, if I found out it had been repaired - expertly or otherwise. Furthermore, if it is morally right (as some here argue) for the customer to pony up the repair price, it is also morally right for the seller to indicate that it's a repaired item.

Was this a court case or binding or non-binding mediation?

[treeofpain]

Not that it matters now. But two posters above raised what I believe to be the relevant issue - assumption of risk.

Sellers have a choice to make their inventory available to demo, or not. And to implement any degree of control over that policy as long as it is non-discriminatory against protected classes (not 100% on the discrimination).

If you as a seller decide to make your inventory available, you assume the risk of accidental damage. You must absorb the cost into your margins as a cost of business.

What is interesting it that legally, I wonder if the burden of risk switches in the case where a customer is informed of a "You break it, you buy it" policy.

It seems in that case, that like with posted trespass signs, the burden may switch. The seller is effectively saying, "I don't assume this risk, you have to carry the risk if you want to try my inventory."


We can debate what is ethical, and we can debate what is a smart business policy - but how about some clarity around what is legal?

It really would be nice if someone will come out of the closet as a JD and voice an educated opinion. Too many soap-box preachers here...

I think good points have been raised in this thread. To me, the common sense approach seems best. As long as the guitar is reasonably displayed - hung on a proper hanger where it won't be damaged by "normal" customer activity - the store has a reasonable expectation to be compensated for actual damages caused. Two scenarios:

Scenario 1
Guitar is hung on a wall hanger in a store. Customer A walks in and asks to see the guitar. Clerk hands the guitar to customer. Customer wanks on it for 30 seconds and accidentally drops it on the floor, causing the headstock to break (it's a Gibson, after all!). Customer should pay to repair.

Scenario 2
Same store. Guitar is leaning up against an amp, where a clerk had been wanking on it until they got a phone call. Customer comes in and inadvertently knocks the guitar with his leg as he passes by. Guitar falls to the floor and is damaged. Customer is not liable because the guitar was not properly displayed for protection against normal activity.

As far as stores posting "you break, you buy" signs, I don't think they should have to do that. Common sense tells you that you can't go into a store, damage their merchandise, then walk out as if nothing has happened.

What ever happened to basic morality? :huh

[guitarfish]

3rd time I'm asking: if a $700 repair is made, does the store do it or the manufacturer? Also, does the store have to disclose in either case a repair was made?

The store owns the guitar. If it gets damaged and needs repair, it's up to the store, they can do it in house if they have the ability, or send it somewhere else.

In the case of a structural repair, like a headstock, I think we'd all agree yes, the store absolutely should disclose that. Not sure on other cosmetic damage. Lot's of new cars get dinged and scraped on the way to a dealership, and these are repaired without the new buyer ever knowing. Personally, if I guitar has been dropped, that's no longer a "new" guitar in my book! Not sure if there's a law on something this specific, but in the case described in this thread, I'd consider the repaired guitar "refurbished".

[Amp360]

I would have bought it on the spot because to me it's the right thing to do.

From owning my own business I know filing a claim with one's insurance is not something I ever wanted to do.

[Splaticon5]

This happened to me recently in a music store in Oslo, Norway (“4Sound” – chain store with several shops in Oslo and rest of the country, I will refrain from mentioning which one).

I was in the marked for a Gibson Les Paul, so I took one down from the wall (no signs telling me not to.) The price was roughly $1990. I asked the staff if it was okay to try it with a strap, and they said “sure, just pick a strap from the hanger”. I went to the amp room and started plugging in. I then took my hand off the neck for a moment to adjust the strap. The strap then ‘unbuttoned’ at the front and the guitar went down in a chopping movement, hitting the ground headstock first. (It went down before I could actually start playing.) This caused a separation between the upper fretboard and the neck (no damage to the wood) and a left a small mark in the headstock where it hit the ground. Being a person with a strong sense of justice, (like some other people in this thread) I immediately assumed full responsibility and told the staff to “just put in on my bill”. The staff told me it was probably nothing to worry about, but I gave them my phone number just in case.

Later that week I got a call from the shop. They had spoken with the manager, and he said the guitar could not be sold as a new guitar, and that I had to buy it. I immediately told them “okay, I guess that’s just the way it has to be”. I had never been in this situation before (first time I’ve ever broken anything in a shop) so I didn’t know anything about rights, insurances etc. in such a case. Anyway, I arranged to drop by and buy it a couple of days later. I also called my tech and arranged to bring him the guitar that same day.

Meanwhile I told the story to a couple of friends, and they told me that I might have been a bit too fast in assuming full responsibility. One of them had worked several years in a music store, and told me they never charged customers if they accidentally broke something in the shop (this was a small family owned shop). So I figured I should probably call the shop and ask about insurance etc. I also remembered that I had travel insurance (which I had never used), and thought that this might be a case in which it could apply.

I then called the manager on the arranged date and started asking about the mentioned stuff. He didn’t understand why I was calling, because in his mind the case was crystal clear: I had broken a guitar, and I had to pay full (retail) price for it. He said they didn’t have insurance on the stuff in the shop, only transportation insurance. I mentioned my travel insurance, and wondered if I should use it in this case. Again, he didn’t understand why I was bringing this up, since after all, I had broken the guitar and I had to pay up. He told me “well maybe you should contact the insurance company after you’ve bought it, to get compensation for your clumsiness”. He then told me stuff like “If this had been Guitar Center in the US, you wouldn’t even have been allowed to leave the shop until you had paid up” and he expected me to come to the shop on the arranged date (same day) and buy it (or else..) Me, not being experienced in the art of breaking things in shops (and getting away with it) didn’t really see any other options at this point, so I just went down to the shop and paid up.

In short, I was strong-armed into buying the guitar. The guitar is totally decent (after repair), but I’m not particularly happy about how this matter was handled. Needless to say, I won’t be shopping in that store again.

Some points regarding questions raised by other posters in this thread:



The actual repair cost was $54. My tech told me it was a very straight-forward glue job.
I had been shopping in the store semi-regularly for about five years. I have bought two guitars there (one at $180, one at $1100), pedal board, bags and a lot of smaller stuff (strings, picks straps, etc.) The staff more or less knew me (or at least recognized me), but not sure the manager did.
It was an accident, and I’m usually very careful with guitars. However, I’m really only used to Fenders, which are more robust than some Gibsons, and have bigger strap buttons which are less prone to letting go.
I picked a guitar that I could afford and that I might be interested in buying (had to try it first of course). I usually don’t try out guitars I have no intention of buying, or guitars that I can’t afford unless I’m told like “Hey, try this top-of the-line model for comparison”.
I offered to pay straight away, but I had no way of knowing what the right amount was in a case like this (retail price/cost/cost + repair/repair + compensation?) Like a lot of other people, I assumed that “if you break something, you buy it”.
All the people I’ve spoken to about this (including professional/semi-professional musicians, former music store employees, techs) say that it’s not common practice to charge unfortunate customers in matters such as this (at least not retail price.) However, I’m not a lawyer, so for all I know the manager might have been in his full right.
The shop did not have their goods insured, and I suspect that the (legally) right thing to do in this case would have been for me to apply my travel insurance. After all, situations like this are why insurance exists.

[mfitz804]

I'm not sure customers are ever LEGALLY responsible for accidental damage, but then I am not a lawyer.

Did the store post signs warning customers to not touch the instruments or remove them from hangars? Some stores do that for just this reason.

If not, the customer likely has a very good case in small claims court that the store (knowing how valuable the instrument was) did not take ordinary care to ensure its safety.

That would certainly by my position were I the unfortunate customer in this scenario. But I probably would have asked the store to remove the guitar from the hangar and hand it to me.

IMHO, the customer could likely just walk way and the store would be forced to sue to recover damages. Not a good value proposition over $700.

This sure seems like something insurance should cover, either the store's or the customer's home insurance policy.


Not sure about this situation, but people are held responsible for accidental damages in Court all the time. Hence the phrase car "accident", instead of car "on purpose".

I think it could be argued that the dropping of a guitar is negligent, as per the following, which are the 4 elements of negligence:

1) DUTY: to handle guitars with care while trying them.
2) BREACH: dropping it on the floor.
3) DAMAGES: $700 bill for the repair
4) CAUSATION: the $700 bill was incurred solely due to the guy dropping the guitar.

That being said, I would assume shops typically eat this kind of thing. I have played many, many expensiv guitars in shops that I had little or no intention of buying. If I dropped the guitar in question and they asked me for $3400, I would have no way of doing that on the spot. So they'd have to sue me or just write it off as a cost of doing business. Even if its not something they have insurance for (and it really should be), they could still write it off as a loss come tax time.

Regarding the "ordinary care" statement above, you might be onto something. If the customer could demonstrate that the usual practice in the industry is not to have $3600 guitars being that accessible, they might be able to put at least part of the blame on the shop. The liability could certainly be split up, with the customer still being responsible for a portion.

I think the moral of the story is, don't drop any guitar, but if you do, make sure its your own.

[DonW]

A shop without insurance on their goods is crappy business and I find it hard to believe that's the case. It may be true but if they have a business loan which many shops do their financial institution wouldn't be happy.

[BBender]

Not pay shit. Stores should have insurance...part of doing business, shit happens!

[Madguitrst]

Any store that tries to do this will lose a lot more than the money for guitar and/or the repair.....
....just sayin'.

Also, if a customer tried to walk out of the store and was prevented from doing so by anyone in the store, I would think the store could have much bigger problems.
I would call the police immediately.

I'm all for fair, but just what is fair?

BTW, this reminds me of people who play a guitar off of the wall and love but then request a "new one from the back", sometimes without even playing it.
It's okay to check, but take the one that speaks to you, even if the pickguard has a few marks.

[Cornholio]

Insurance is to cover things like personaly liability theft, fire, natural disasters.

I have not seen a policy that covers customer negligence. If if that type of thing is covered under a custom policy, there is going to be a deductible. So the shop has to fork over the deductible, and they will only get reimbursed for the wholesale value, not retail. My guess is that a deductible would be pretty high to keep premiums low. Do any of you pay extra for zero deductible health or auto insurance?

The shop is out money either way. Perhaps some of you guys need to run a competitive/ high overhead business like a guitar shop. You all really think a customer can just damage an expensive guitar and have no accountability? I bet if that was your business you would think differently.

[Madguitrst]

Corn, I get your point, but there has to be a happy medium.
So, what is that to you?

One thing with insurance claims is that, after a certain number, the insurance rate increases and without too many, the entity can become uninsurable. We had this with workman's comp, which in our case had the magic number of 5, even though one had $0 paid out and three were under $500. We had to appeal to the underwriters but were very close to being terminated.

Just another reason (along wit the deductible) that small claims are often not put in.
Still, a music store is a hands on business, especially with guitars/basses.
There are a few places that make it such a hassle to try guitars that I won't even think about going there.
So........

[Drak]

1) DUTY: to handle guitars with care while trying them.
2) BREACH: dropping it on the floor.
3) DAMAGES: $700 bill for the repair
4) CAUSATION: the $700 bill was incurred solely due to the guy dropping the guitar. The current issue was a $54.00 repair.
The thread has been resurrected from 2010.
The OP from 2010 was in a $700.00 jam.

[tiktok]

CODB for the store. Scratch and dent sale time. Keep the pricey stuff behind the counter if it's a problem.

[guitarfish]

In short, I was strong-armed into buying the guitar. The guitar is totally decent (after repair), but I’m not particularly happy about how this matter was handled. Needless to say, I won’t be shopping in that store again.


Darn, I was hoping for a different ending, like you tell the manager "I was planning to buy it, but since you're such a tool, no thanks." He did strong arm you for sure.

I guess he's never been to a Guitar Center in the US either. It's hard to find a piece of gear there that hasn't been abused in some way.

I hope you at least like the guitar. Otherwise flip it, and move on.

[mcdes]

Not pay shit. Stores should have insurance...part of doing business, shit happens!

i agree, if i was a store owner, and didnt have insurance, i would not let too many people touch the merch! so it sounds silly not to be covered specifically for it.

[RichieD]

He then told me stuff like “If this had been Guitar Center in the US, you wouldn’t even have been allowed to leave the shop until you had paid up”

He's obviously never been into a Guitar Center in the US.

[bob-i]

I just read a few pages of this thread, my first reaction is REALLY?

My next reaction is, zero F**Ks given. The store assumes risk when a potential customer touches an instrument, not willing to take the risk, don't let them touch it. It's the cost of doing business.

I've played many high end instruments with no intention of buying, in fact I've told the sales rep I wasn't buying. They still accept the risk just in case I love it so much that I'll find the money, which is not unread of. I would never agree to buying a guitar that was damaged while I was playing it.

Funny that Luke mentioned the supermarket issue, slip and fall. A recent award was given to a woman who's 3 year old slipped on a spill that she caused. If I spilled something and my kid slipped on it, I'd take responsibility.

[mcdes]

A recent award was given to a woman who's 3 year old slipped on a spill that she caused. If I spilled something and my kid slipped on it, I'd take responsibility.

yea, thats just non-sensical!:jo

[The Kid]

Add $2000 to the price and sell it as "relic." Split the extra profit with the customer who dropped it.

[John 14:6]

This is why retailers have insurance...its for their own protection and the protection of their merchandise. If they have an issue with having customers handling gtrs then an employee of the store should be responsible for handling gtrs off racks or hangers. If the store allows the public to handle merchandise other than to try it out the the retailer is still are liable for their instruments.

Accidents happen...this is why businesses have insurance. Retailing is a business dependant on the public. A business has their own liability here when it allows the public through its doors.

I worked in music retail for 4 years and the customer is not necessarily held responsible here. At best its a 50-50 split...at most the customer could be on the hook for half of the repair cost. I agree, the store should be insured for something like that. Stuff like this falls under "the cost of doing business" category.

[cherrick]

pLEAse let this thread die.

[guitarfish]

pLEAse let this thread die.
"Unsubscribe"

All fixed. :)

[Stubee]

Old thread? Oh well, I'm a dinosaur & if I walked into any store and damaged anything it would be on me to make it right. It was my mistake, my responsibility. So simple.

[jtees4]

To me the legal issue is that you immediately agreed to pay for the guitar...you said "put it on my bill". So IMHO that was your mistake, any mitigation you tried to do after that was breaking your verbal agreement. That is why you never should admit fault in a car accident (or any other situation) BEFORE you speak to either your lawyer or insurance rep or whomever it may be in a given situation.

[guitarfish]

To me the legal issue is that you immediately agreed to pay for the guitar...you said "put it on my bill".
IMO, such a statement doesn't make it legally binding at all. The manager's statement about Guitar Center in the US tells me all I need to know. He doesn't know what he's talking about. He used intimidation and veiled threats and bullied him into buying it, plain and simple.

[GCDEF]

Old thread? Oh well, I'm a dinosaur & if I walked into any store and damaged anything it would be on me to make it right. It was my mistake, my responsibility. So simple.

If you were out car shopping and got into an accident while test driving, would you feel obligated to buy the car? That's what insurance is for. Any store should have it to protect their merchandise.

[jtees4]

I don't see intimidation or veiled threats. I agree the manager may not know what he's talking about...but so what, that's 75% of the general population, maybe even higher in the guitar player community;-) If it were me, I would not agree to pay, nor would I pay....In fact I'd walk out and refuse to pay (unless I really did it on purpose or really negligently, like sword fighting with it or something really stupid)....but I still think saying "put it on my bill" means "put it on my bill"....which is an agreement to pay. I just never would have said that.

[nealpolitan]

Bob: You know you boys owe me a lot over money for that Grosh you dropped tonight goddammit.
Jake Blues: Bob, we loved playing here tonight. My brother's writing out an American Express traveller's cheque to cover the extensive damage tab.
Bob: Well, I sure would appreciate it.
Jake Blues: I'd better check up, see how he's doing, see I have to sign it too. I usually sit in the car and write it out on the glove compartment lid. Okay?

<jumps in car, peels out>

[ubermutant]

Flawed analysis. The insurance company is only able to pursue the individual to the extent of the law. Here, a pure accident...probably no legal claim under which to recover. It doesn't sound like negligence, and it certainly wasn't intentional. It's the very thing you pay insurance for, and the very risk the insurance company accepts your premium payment for in relation to the risk. Here, the insurance company "lost" (despite the fact that premiums probably more than make up for the claim several times over) the risk equation.

There are plenty of cases like this where courts have simply found that the reason the an insurance company accepts premiums and assess risk is with the understand that at some point, it is going to need to make payment on a claim with no avenue for recovery. That's the game of insurance in a nutshell.

Right, this is why they call it 'Insurance'. Its a pooled risk, and occasionally they have losses. Customer has no obligation whatsoever and if I ever found myself in a position as a customer where a store tried to get me to pay for something I inadvertently caused while in the store, not only would I avoid that store forever, I'd be sure to toss up a web site explaining what a bunch of asshats those guys are and why. Additionally if I found out that another store had hired those jerks I'd boycott that one forever too.

The purpose of premiums is to cover this sort of stuff when it happens, going back after the fact and recouping damages like this is simply double dipping on their part. It ought to be illegal, and probably is in some states.

If the store chooses not to ensure against this sort of damage, well sucks to be them I suppose.

[mfitz804]

The current issue was a $54.00 repair.
The thread has been resurrected from 2010.
The OP from 2010 was in a $700.00 jam.

OK, insert $54 where I wrote $700. The analysis remains the same.

[DustyRhodesJr]

If you were out car shopping and got into an accident while test driving, would you feel obligated to buy the car? That's what insurance is for. Any store should have it to protect their merchandise.


Good point.

[cardamonfrost]

Bob: You know you boys owe me a lot over money for that Grosh you dropped tonight goddammit.
Jake Blues: Bob, we loved playing here tonight. My brother's writing out an American Express traveller's cheque to cover the extensive damage tab.
Bob: Well, I sure would appreciate it.
Jake Blues: I'd better check up, see how he's doing, see I have to sign it too. I usually sit in the car and write it out on the glove compartment lid. Okay?

<jumps in car, peels out>

lol, brilliant.
C

[splatter]

This is why retailers have insurance...its for their own protection and the protection of their merchandise. If they have an issue with having customers handling gtrs then an employee of the store should be responsible for handling gtrs off racks or hangers. If the store allows the public to handle merchandise other than to try it out the the retailer is still are liable for their instruments.

Accidents happen...this is why businesses have insurance. Retailing is a business dependant on the public. A business has their own liability here when it allows the public through its doors.

I worked in music retail for 4 years and the customer is not necessarily held responsible here. At best its a 50-50 split...at most the customer could be on the hook for half of the repair cost.
^
this
I wouldn't pay squat .Thats the price of doing business and thats waht insurance is for . The shop shouldn't have a guitar that is that expensive in a place that can be reached by the customer :jo

[AudioWonderland]

I like the intention behind your post, VanR, but from an economics perspective, it's flawed.

No it isn't. The store is made whole and can purchase another for sale. I guarantee you their insurance company will not be reimbursing them retail. They will pay them their cost less deductable.

[Bman40]

You generally can't just grab a $3600 guitar off the wall. They are usually behind the counter or to high to reach without asking for help. it's a total bummer of a situation. I think the insurance deductable would be alot more reasonable to ask of a customer. Who is doing the repair if he pays for it? The same store? At cost or retail? Unless it is a truly boutique store that only carries high end gear I think it should be on the employees to keep pricy gits like that out of reach. Just my .02


A good friend of mine was in a shop lookign around and the vendor had his guitars displayed on hangign racks on the shop floor. my buddy stepped to the side to let another customer get by and his shoulder bag knocked a $2600 guitar off the rack. He didnt pick it up or anything - brushed up against it and it fell to the foor. There was damage. but liek yousay - why put such an expensive guitar on a floor dispaly, and then display it in such a flaky manner?

The shop owner freaked and demanded that he pay the damage or buy the guitar. hes a super nice, gentle guy and he politely refused either. The owner rushed past him, locked the front door, trapping my friend and his wife inside and called the police. They arrived and told the owner to file an isnurance claim - turns out he was underinsured.

My friend walked away. Ugly ugly scene.

[guitarfish]

If someone held my wife against her will like that, the guitar wouldn't be the only thing lying on the floor.

[PhishinPole]

A good friend of mine was in a shop lookign around and the vendor had his guitars displayed on hangign racks on the shop floor. my buddy stepped to the side to let another customer get by and his shoulder bag knocked a $2600 guitar off the rack. He didnt pick it up or anything - brushed up against it and it fell to the foor. There was damage. but liek yousay - why put such an expensive guitar on a floor dispaly, and then display it in such a flaky manner?

The shop owner freaked and demanded that he pay the damage or buy the guitar. hes a super nice, gentle guy and he politely refused either. The owner rushed past him, locked the front door, trapping my friend and his wife inside and called the police. They arrived and told the owner to file an isnurance claim - turns out he was underinsured.

My friend walked away. Ugly ugly scene.

Your friend should have told the officers he wanted to press charges for false imprisonment too. :brick

[jetydosa]

nealpolitan http://img.thegearpage.net/board/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showthread.php?p=14678294#post14678294)
Bob: You know you boys owe me a lot over money for that Grosh you dropped tonight goddammit.
Jake Blues: Bob, we loved playing here tonight. My brother's writing out an American Express traveller's cheque to cover the extensive damage tab.
Bob: Well, I sure would appreciate it.
Jake Blues: I'd better check up, see how he's doing, see I have to sign it too. I usually sit in the car and write it out on the glove compartment lid. Okay?

<jumps in car, peels out


Thats the funniest post Ive read here on TGP in a looooooonng time!! :dude

[Guitarworks]

The store can't hold any customer hostage literally or figuratively. If they don't want people handling guitars, then they need to institute a policy whereby they only allow customers in by appointment and the staff handles the guitars. If that's not an option, then the merchandise needs to be insured against accidents, even if it isn't full retail price. At least the repair amount will be covered.

[Ogrekingdad]

I've had the salesman at GC literraly shove a very expensive guitar in my hands and it amazes me . . .

My personal GOLDEN RULE is not to take down or ask to play a guitar I know I'm never going to buy. Why would I play a $4,000 guitar if I have a budget of $800? So I can feel bad as I carry my $800 purchase out the door?

[luv]

"Customer Accidentally Damages Guitar"

"Guitar Accidentally Damages Customer"

^Here's where the real danger lies. As a business owner, you'll take scenerio 1 over scenerio 2 every time.......and they are both on you.

[straycat113]

Arguments can be made both ways all month long! The best advice is to always ask a salesman to pull down a very expensive model high near the ceiling so there is no mishap. Honestly I cant see just walking in to a store and damaging a guitar worth a few grand then telling the owner "well you have insurance". Does that mean if someone asked you to play your 5K ax (even a friend) and he drops it and breaks off the headstock a "I'm sorry" is all you would settle for?

[Slipperywhenwet]

What a dumbass thread, the OP's post is way ****ed up, the person did not intentionally break the instrument, it was an "accident".

/end of story.

[Slipperywhenwet]

Arguments can be made both ways all month long! The best advice is to always ask a salesman to pull down a very expensive model high near the ceiling so there is no mishap. Honestly I cant see just walking in to a store and damaging a guitar worth a few grand then telling the owner "well you have insurance". Does that mean if someone asked you to play your 5K ax (even a friend) and he drops it and breaks off the headstock a "I'm sorry" is all you would settle for?

If it was an "accident". yes, you would have no choice but to just accept it...shit happens.

[DarthElvis]

If you were out car shopping and got into an accident while test driving, would you feel obligated to buy the car? That's what insurance is for. Any store should have it to protect their merchandise.

Round here, if your car shopping and want to test drive, they get a copy of your DL and your insurance. If you trash their car, and its your fault, YOUR insurance covers it. Lot insurance is for lot damage (however, if they see you back into one of their cars, you'll get dinged for it. If you take off, that's a criminal charge, baby) and EMPLOYEES driving the vehicle. So this is a bad comparison, the two scenarios are nothing alike.

What a dumbass thread, the OP's post is way ****ed up, the person did not intentionally break the instrument, it was an "accident".

/end of story.

So he's not responsible for his actions? Butterfingers dropped an expensive item and he gets a pass? Nice. People do lots of things that are not intentional and are held to account everyday. Why is this different from the guy on the previously mentioned car lot who is distracted by something and hits a brand new vehicle? The guy should have been more careful.

[GCDEF]

Round here, if your car shopping and want to test drive, they get a copy of your DL and your insurance. If you trash their car, and its your fault, YOUR insurance covers it. Lot insurance is for lot damage (however, if they see you back into one of their cars, you'll get dinged for it. If you take off, that's a criminal charge, baby) and EMPLOYEES driving the vehicle. So this is a bad comparison, the two scenarios are nothing alike.



From what I can find, that's not usually the case. Regardless, the point is insurance pays. The customer isn't forced to buy the car or pay the repairs out of pocket. In the case of the music store, the store is going to be the one with the insurance.

[Dumdeediddle]

Never played one. And while they look like nice Guitars - $3400 ? No way. More like 2000$ TOPS.