Oxygen Sensors
Ford Ranger
Check Engine Light

Can AutoZone be held liable for fixing your check engine light if they scan it and sell you a part because they sold diagnostic time as interpreted by the federal govt?

565758

Top Answer
User Avatar
Wiki User
2006-03-17 23:08:56
2006-03-17 23:08:56

I am not sure about the wording of this question. The fed doesn't mandate that a shop or repair facilty sell you anything, as if to say that you must buy what they say is wrong. The owner always has the final word as to what gets fixed on their car and what doesn't. It's up to you. When they scan a car, they are simply asking the car's computer to give the trouble code that caused it to turn the light on. The definition of that code is mandated by the fed. In other words, a P0452 has to mean the same thing that it does on a Ford, Chevy, Hyundai, VW, or any car sold in this country. However, that code does not actually tell you what is wrong. It tells what system there is a problem in(like the EGR system), or what symptom the car is having(like it is running too lean). It takes a technician to figure out why there is a problem in that system, or what is causing the symptom that set the code. Unfortunately, there is not much you can do to Autozone if they gave you the wrong info. A lawyer might tell you differently. One of my best sources of work is these auto parts stores trying to give out free diagnostics, and getting it wrong. I see cars all the time that people went to get something for free, and end up spending way more in wrong parts replaced, than what they would have if they would have just come to see me in the first place, and they still have to come to me afterall. I didn't really understand your question, but I hope I gave you what you wanted anyway.

1
๐Ÿ™
0
๐Ÿคจ
0
๐Ÿ˜ฎ
0
๐Ÿ˜‚
0

Related Questions

User Avatar

You can't. After 1995, the old ALDL diagnostic connector went to the new federal mandated OBD2 diagnostic port. You need to purchase a code reader, or have a local auto parts store such as AutoZone, Parta America, etc use their reader for free. (actron CP4500 Auto Xray)

User Avatar

No- the President can never make new laws. He can issue directives to federal employees about how existing federal law should be interpreted and enforced.

User Avatar

There are many powers not given to the Federal government in the Constitution. Specifically it states that any power not specifically granted to the government will be reserved for the States (interpreted as for the people).

User Avatar

If it is said to the person in a threatening manner, yes it is a federal offense to threaten a federal employee. Hint: If this person is anyone who is NOT a close personal friend then it would be interpreted by a court as a threatening statement.

User Avatar

because the bombing was on federal property because the bombing was on federal property

User Avatar

If the federal government can perform an enumerated power without a law or action, then that law or action is unnecessary and therefore unconstitutional.

User Avatar

Hamilton believed that the federal government could do as they needed to govern the country. He believed in a loose interpretation of the Constitution.

User Avatar

It is federal because both share responsibility in running the country

User Avatar

Regions of Iraq are federal. Iraq is a federal republic because it has a federation type of states.

User Avatar

the framers of the constitution created three branches of the Federal government. the executive branch (the president) enforced the laws, the legislative branch (congress) made the laws, and the judicial branch (the federal courts) interpreted and applied the laws.

User Avatar

The U.S. Constitution does not grant any :implied" powers to the federal government. The authority delegated to the federal government is narrow and explicit, according to Article 10, all powers not expressly provided by the Constitution is reserved exclusively to the States or to the People.

User Avatar

The branch of federal and state government that is broadly responsible for implementing, supporting, and enforcing the laws made by the legislative branch and interpreted by the judicial branch.

User Avatar

it would be federal because state does different things.

User Avatar

Federal inmates don't get parole dates because there is no such thing as parole in the federal system.

User Avatar

The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the due process clause to apply most of the Bill of Rights to the states, not just the federal government.

User Avatar

He meant exactly what was wrote. Power that doesn't belong to the Federal Government belongs to the individual states, and the people that inhabit them.

User Avatar

During the Founding Period of American History and in the years that initially followed, the Federalists consistently interpreted the Constitution in a 'robustly federalistic' manner. That is, they saw it as providing for a very active and responsible federal American government, whether in respect to its judicial, legislative, or executive branches and their various functions.

User Avatar

According to the Constitution, any powers not already given to the federal government are reserved by the individual states. You would have to see if the Constitution can be interpreted in such a way that medical research using animals is covered by any of its provisions.

User Avatar

Generally speaking, Article Four of the Constitution deals with the relationship between the Federal and State governments. In addition, the 14th Amendment is interpreted to extend all Constitutionally protected rights to be protected from both Federal and State law. That is, both State and Federal must pass US Constitutional muster (not just Federal law).

User Avatar

The federal government is considered a bureaucracy because it is administrated by officials in petty offices overseen by a president.

User Avatar

There is a major difference between federal and national unions which was interpreted in the 1700s. A national union is one in which the government that is responsible for operating the entire country makes one sets of laws which all citizens must follow. A federal union is one in which the states take part in the making of laws.

User Avatar

No, it did not because it felt that the federal government was "favoring" the north.

User Avatar

Because bankers who own the Federal Reserve will own u Because bankers who own the Federal Reserve will own u

User Avatar

This is because they believed the federal government would then have more control over what the states did. The states are supposed to be free to make their own laws without federal involvement.


Copyright ยฉ 2020 Multiply Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. The material on this site can not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with prior written permission of Multiply.