Ball joint failure on car. Pursue or count myself lucky

We want a big consequence to every small issue. If you followed this thinking through we would end up with a highly regulated car repair system where we as consumers will pay for it.
On the contrary, it seems as though that is what you "want" ... reckless work going on until there is a serious incident, which will be costly too in other ways - medical bills, repairs, insurance payouts. It was only a matter of luck there wasn't a "big consequence" here.
 
Yes to ensure that it sends out a strong message to anybody else thinking about sending out substandard work which could result in a road death.

It's a subject close to my heart, if you lost a loved one on the roads you might feel differently.

Sorry for your loss.

But to "ensure that it sends out a strong message" provides a very understandable motivation for legal action. But I still don't get the basis for the legal action. Is it to seek compensation for some specified loss, damage or suffering?
 
It’s never going to be gross negligence in the legal sense of the term. Lots of hot air here, but maybe the OP can clarify what they are looking for with taking legal action?
 
A wheel falling off a car sounds like a failed wheel bearing instead of a ball joint.
Maybe a miss diagnosis by the mechanic?
 
Our regular garage flagged a worn ball joint during servicing a few weeks ago. We paid for replacement. A week later the wheel came off the car. As luck would have it I had just pulled off the main road into a retail car park so was not travelling at speed. I had my 3 kids in the car and 4 km previously had travelled on the M50. It was very close to being a different outcome. I had the car towed under insurance back to the garage who replaced the part FOC but have blamed the parts supplier for supplying a misfitting part. They have offered the next service FOC as a gesture of goodwill. I still don't feel at ease but I'm not sure if taking further legal action is just foolish or worthwhile. I ended up sitting on the side of the road with 3 stressed out kids for 3 hours trying to get this sorted and feel a bit aggrieved at the lack of accountability. In hindsight I should have requested the "faulty" part be returned to me but I have gotten the details of the manufacturer of the failed part. Do I just count my lucky stars none of us were injured or pursue legal action
I Did the wheel really come off the Car I suspect not
I know I was a big shock when it happened and possibly a bigger shock when you think back on the ball joint failure,

Did you request a OEM original replacement part often the specs on a OEM part and the testing before putting into service may be higher than that requested by an aftermarket supplier,

having said that now and then you will get a fault in steel when it is manufactured that does not show up until put into service,

The Garage blamed the parts supplier but you say you have gotten the details of the Manufacture which to me suggest it was a failure or a faulty part not a misfitting part,
I would consider it reckless of the Garage to have given you the failed part if you requested it if it snapped it should go back for Metallurgical testing to trace the reason for the failure to see was it made in compliance with the standard as laid when the part was manufactured,

If it was my good self for peace of mind my first port of call is to insist the Garage trough the supplier send the part back to the Manufacture to find out the cause of failure, if it appears to be a Manufacturing fault,

The owner of the part your good self along with the garage who fitted and checked they bought the correct ball joint in the first place along with the supplier all the way back to the manufacture need to find out where the fault developed from in the first place,

This is the first thing you need to do starting with the garage first thing in the morning of next working day,
 
Last edited:
The SIMI represents and protects the interests of their paid-up members, car dealers, repairers, etc. They play no role in protecting motorists, quite the opposite, their "standard" contract which Sean or Sheila Citizen is asked to sign when buying a car from one of their members is anti-consumer, referring any and all disputes or issues to their reconciliation process. The dealers maintain that signing the SIMI contract is a pre-requisite to them completing their VRT and VAT returns for Revenue - utter rubbish of course.
 
Back
Top