I just picked up an Addams Family and the shipping company drove a forklift into it and damaged the cabinet. Of course they offered me some ridiculous lowball offer as a settlement so I told them I would be suing them instead which I promptly filed the paperwork and served them. I wanted some feedback as to whether people thought the cabinet would be structurally sound if they repaired it or whether it would only cosmetically look better the true integrity of the cabinet and backbox would be forever impaired. Specifically, it appears they drove into the backbox on the right hand side as it was folded down on the machine. The top right hand corner of the backbox has split open. The impact forced the right side hinge into the side rail where it bent over the top of the machine and badly bent the side rail and then shattered the glass from the side impact. The lockbar on the front left is now out of alignment as can be scene from where it used to overlap the left side rail and is now out by about a quarter to a half inch. The vertical joint above the front left leg has now separated and when i looked under the cabinet, the seam for the where the left side meets up with the bottom of the cabinet has also started to separate and some of the plywood from the left cabinet side has started to splinter in the same spot. I'm attaching some photos of the damage but I wanted to find out people's opinions whether they think the structural integrity of the cabinet and the wood itself has been compromised. My thought is that it has been compromised badly from the torque caused by the impact and it will never be the same even if they can re-glue and patch some of the things back together. This will aid in my lawsuit against the shipping company so I thank you in advance for taking the time to read and to comment.

IMG_2910.jpeg

IMG_2911.jpeg

IMG_2912.jpeg

IMG_2914.jpeg

IMG_2915.jpeg

IMG_2917.jpeg

You can repair anything but the question is will the structural integrity be there. For the impact to cause enough torque that the opposite side of the machine starts splintering and splitting apart I would question or doubt the integrity of the structure or wood itself after that.

I forgot to add that the impact was also great enough to break the DMD as well as a number of the kick outs no longer working as well as other electronic issues. I'm sure the shipping company would want to repair it but I just don't know what it will do to the cabinet that you can't see.

Thanks Cleanroom, that is what I was thinking but wanted to get others feedback as well. I think the other guys are just focussing on the cosmetic aspect as opposed to the actual quality of the cabinet afterwards.

I'm in Canada so I used a company called Sameday Worldwide which is a subsidiary of Day & Ross which is supposedly the largest freight company in Canada or something like that. The pin was only travelling about 4.5 hours and it was supposed to arrive the next day but they mislabelled it and it arrived 2 days after it was supposed to show up and damaged from sitting in the warehouse for so long. I ordered the shipping and paid for it and they never mentioned anything about limited liability but I doubt they will be protected from negligence regardless. It says on the bill of lading that if value isn't filled out then they are only limited to $2/pound but there are 2 issues with that. Firstly, I was the client who ordered the shipping and proceeded to pay for it. They never showed me a bill of lading so my lawyer suggested they can not rely on that disclosure if they never showed it to me. Secondly, when they had the shipper fill out the bill of lading, they specifically told him which fields needed to be filled in and if they are going to provide instruction then that will supersede any small print disclosure on the document anyway. They think they can intimidate me into taking a useless settlement but I've already filed a lawsuit against them and they should be liable up to the value of the pin which I can prove because I paid for it while the drivers were loading it into their truck and the deposit slip from the bank is at exactly the same time as they picked it up as stated on the bill of lading. As for price, I paid around $300 for a 4.5 hour drive which I think is not particularly cheap. If they don't want to own up to their responsibility they will probably wind up spending more in legal fees than replacing the cabinet.

Playfield is ok. The impact was on the top edge at the rail and the playfield sits much lower down so I don't think there was any force at the edge of the playfield. Although the glass broke, it didn't move much so nothing touched the playfield.

Thanks for the suggestion but unfortunately I am just too busy to be able to take the time to get get it myself nor would it be economical to do so. I would have expected it to be a simple pickup and delivery if it wasn't for the fact that they seemed to misplace it for 2 days.

Thanks JoJoBear,

The damage is going to be primarily to the cabinet, glass, DMD and possibly some boards. The playfield seems to be completely unaffected. By the time the case comes up I will have already repaired the damage which they have refused to do so I would imagine if they try and argue that I should have repaired the cabinet instead of replacing it they will lose their ability to argue that considering they are refusing to do either at this point. The rest of the parts should be readily available so pricing shouldn't be an issue. They are just trying to limit their liability by trying to rely on a loophole that I have been told by a few lawyers that it will not hold up. Because the amount is relatively small I am suing them in small claims court which it is meant for non-lawyers and I don't think bringing lawyers in is looked upon favourably and I have no problem handling things myself as I am usually quite methodical about things. I would imagine the courts would also be more sympathetic to me as the shipping company is trying to weasel their way out even though there is no question they are 100% at fault. The legal principals that I remember from law courses I took back in university tells me they can not rely on the small print disclosure they are saying they are going by. It should be interesting but it seems like enough people on here agree that cosmetically fixing the cabinet up will not fix the integrity that is lost in the cabinet from the impact.

JoJoBear,

You seem to be a wealth of legal information. With regards to what you are referring to with "duty of care", I don't remember the terminology but I do recall from law courses I took once upon a time the same thing that you have said, that they don't resolve themselves but including small print. I remember the example in school from a coat check or valet where they have small print saying something to that effect but that does not absolve them of liability if they are careless which in this case they definitely were. The pin was wrapped to protect it from small bumps, not heavy equipment running in to it.

Our small claims are good to $25,000 but I don't believe they include any punitive damages though they do include court and filing costs which are relatively small. I hear you about not being a sue-happy guy but I find myself in the same position as you. I seem to have a number of different people that it seems I need to sue (not shipping or industry related) because they are just thieves or present themselves as "experts on something" but then refuse to take on responsibility which really is annoying. I guess the more things in general you do the more likely it is that you are getting screwed by someone. In my case I have a number of things related to my house renovation which was a very large job. Even though I'm up here in Canada it seems that I have no choice other than to sue a bunch of different idiots. This shipping company is one of them and I forewarned them not to screw around with me and now it is likely going to cost them much more than it would have if they would have owned up it properly.

I warned them on Friday and they didn't take it seriously so I filed in small claims court on Monday and served their lawyer with papers the same day. They have 14 days to file a defence and then it will go to some sort of mediator for settlement in something like 3 to 4 months I'm told. If both parties don't agree then it will go to court. In small claims it is frowned on to use attorneys I believe but they probably have no choice and will have to keep racking up costs if they continue to push it. If they don't file a defence then I can file for default judgement though I don't expect this to happen. They were probably hoping that I would be forced to take something they offer because I would need it to fix the pin but this is not an issue for me and I will just order a new cabinet and have it all swapped over and tested to see what boards are now damaged. When it comes to settlement or whatever, I will just supply all the invoices and they can either pay it or spend more money to take it to trial but I can't believe they would be that stupid to do so as they really do not have a leg to stand on and I'll take it as far as I need to.

Thanks BooyaNY,

On the bill of lading it specifies they are only liable to $2/lb if the value is not filled out. This is what the company will try and rely on. The drivers directed the seller what fields to fill in which will supercede the written disclosure any day. If they didn't direct him how to fill out the form that may be a different story. Also, I'm the client, I ordered the shipping and I was the one who paid for the shipping but they never showed me the bill of lading or directed me to look at it. All they did was take the bill of lading to the guy who they picked the machine up from and told him what fields to fill in. You mentioned that unless there was an exception on the BOL they wouldn't be responsible but there is an exception on the BOL and when they are directing the shipper what to fill out and don't tell him fill out that section then that would supercede any tariff they are trying to rely on and I'm fairly certain that I learned that in law courses I took back in university. There is also the other issue, that they may not be responsible for expected bumps and bruises in the normal course of business but they do have a duty of care and driving into something with a forklift I doubt would be covered by that. I'm sure there are numerous ways in this instance that they will not be able to hide behind the small print that they never even showed me in the first place.

Hi BooyaNY,

Sameday is the carrier, they are a division of Day & Ross Inc.

The case you are talking about is a little different as they did not disclose what the contents were nor the value. In my case, they knew it was a pinball as I told them it was and it was shipped with legs on so there is no way that they could not have known nor did they ever deny not knowing. In fact when they were preparing the quote, I wasn't sure of the dimensions so the guy preparing the quote (who was some kind of team leader or manager) told me he another client who shipped a pinball so he looked up in his file what the dimensions were. Actually, now that I think about it I had even asked them if they could prepare the shipment as the shipper had no supplies and they checked with the local terminal who said they could not so there was never any question as to whether they knew what they were shipping. I had the shipper go purchase some shipping supplies to package it up properly.

I'll keep you posted but I assume it is going to take a while unless their attorney tells them they are going to spend more in legal bills than it will cost them in damage or that they can not win.

By the way, I googled duty of care which is similar to standard of care and here is what came up in a legal dictionary:

duty of care n. a requirement that a person act toward others and the public with watchfulness, attention, caution and prudence that a reasonable person in the circumstances would. If a person's actions do not meet this standard of care, then the acts are considered negligent, and any damages resulting may be claimed in a lawsuit for negligence.