wrote in message
oups.com...
JimH wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
I hope that this is a good lesson to those in the industry.
Lying about the condition of a boat you sell may not produce the
intended results. I'll bet that MarineMax thought that they had just
clipped another pigeon. It looks like the pigeon won the battle in the
end.
Chuck, I know you are in the industry. The title of the thread seems
to
indicate that you think that this was excessive.
What makes you feel that way?
You made a very quick leap from an assumption that the title "seems to
indicate" something to asking me to defend what you presumed the title
must have meant.
"Ouch!" means that for even a company as large as Marine Max, a $2.5mm
settlement, (plus attorney fees for both sides etc that will probably
bring the total to $3mm) is a good sized bite out of the bottom line.
Unless the judge ordered otherwise...........their insurance company was
left holding the bill. No big deal for Marine Max other than possible
higher insurance rates.
snip
Maybe not; It wouldn't be unusual for an insurance company to exclude
from coverage any damages awarded to purchasers proving blatantly
dishonest sales practices.
Actually not. Unless the judge or State orders/mandates otherwise they are
paid by the insurance company under most standard commercial insurance
policies.
Even if the insurance company winds up paying that insurance company
will then raise its rates to all businesses that it insures, which will
then show up in higher boat prices for everybody.
Yep.
But in any case.........this was not as big of hurt to MarineMax as it first
appears.