Woman Gets Dealership Oil Change For Her Brand-New Toyota Tundra. Then She Catches the Technician In a Lie
'Jesse went to go get an oil change at the Cerritos Toyota dealer, AutoNation, yesterday,' she says, adding that the appointment took almost four hours. She holds up a receipt from the dealership, showing her husband paid $120 for the oil change service.
Gabbattack claims that after the appointment, her husband returned home with the intention of attaching a skid plate to the bottom of the truck. However, when he went to install the plate under the truck, he found the undercarriage coated with a thick layer of mud. This immediately raised suspicions.
'We've been off-roading, going outdoors, all that stuff,' the woman explained about the source of the mud, while displaying photos of the dirty underside of the truck taken on her husband's phone. While the presence of the mud itself wasn't an issue, what raised red flags was the condition of the supposedly new oil filter and the bolt holding it in place, both of which were still caked in mud.
According to the woman, this strongly suggested to her and her husband that the oil change her husband paid for was never really performed.
'I don't know about you but that does not look like a brand-new oil filter,' she says, before adding that her husband was going to go back to the dealership to see what they had to say.
Viewers Weigh In
The video garnered over 429,000 views, and several commenters sent in their advice for the couple.
'I marked a dot on oil filters with a sharpie so I know they are changed! My mechanic told me that trick,' one person shared.
'This is why I do my oil changes myself. The dealers are absolutely terrible,' another said.
Several claimed that this isn't an issue unique to Toyota dealerships. Owners of cars made by other well-known brands like Nissan and Honda report similar experiences.
'First and only time I went [to the Honda dealership] they said they also rotated my tires but the one I had fixed at discount tires was in the same spot. A friend also checked my oil and said it wasn't fresh,' someone complained.
'Please report it to the Bureau of Automotive Repair (BAR),' another person suggested.
How Can Customers Ensure Their Car Is Being Serviced Properly?
There are several ways to ensure your car is properly serviced at the dealership.
Always ask for a detailed invoice listing each service performed, including any parts and fluids that were changed. Before leaving the dealership, inspect the vehicle if possible. Check for clean oil, new filters, or any other visible signs of work.
It's also helpful to ask the technician to walk you through what was done, and request that any old parts be returned. Keep a maintenance checklist to compare to the dealership's records so you can keep track of services that have recently been completed.
We've reached out to Toyota and the TikToker for comment. We'll be sure to update this article when we hear back.
Now Trending
'The Best Or Dumbest Thing I've Ever Done': Woman Buys $500 Toyota Tacoma. Then She Takes It Off-Roading
Woman Starts Driving. Then Water Starts Pouring Onto Her Mercedes G-Wagon's Dashboard and Touchscreen
Get the best news, reviews, columns, and more delivered straight to your inbox, daily.
back
Sign up
For more information, read our
Privacy Policy
and
Terms of Use
.
Share this Story
X
Got a tip for us? Email:
tips@motor1.com
Join the conversation
(
)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Motor 1
an hour ago
- Motor 1
Customer Walks Into Dealership With Bad Credit Score. Then They Get the Highest Interest Rate This Salesman's Ever Seen
A dealership worker shares the highest interest rate he's ever seen a car buyer secure. Then he reveals the credit score that got them the deal. TikTok user Joseph Rodriguez ( @jrodsellscars ) is a car salesman based in New Jersey. In a video posted on July 10, Rodriguez reveals the interest rate on his most recent sale. It's an eye-popping number. Get the best news, reviews, columns, and more delivered straight to your inbox, daily. back Sign up For more information, read our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use . 'You think you have a high interest rate on your car?' Rodriguez says. 'I can guarantee you somebody has it worse.' Rodriguez shows a brief summary of the deal on a piece of paper. It shows an initial retail price of $17,767 at an interest rate of 33.4% over 72 months. The total they're borrowing is $18,767. "This was an approval to a 520 score," Rodriguez says. "For all you guys out there who might have a 15% rate, an 18% rate—that's still way better than this." This is why having a good credit score is so important, Rodriguez says. "The difference in payment between a 10% rate and a 34% rate is significant. I'm talking hundreds of dollars a month,' he adds. 'Nevertheless, this is the reality of coming to the dealership with a low credit score." If your credit score is currently on the lower end, Rodriguez recommends first working with a credit repair program and waiting six to 12 months before heading to the dealership for a new car. In a direct message to Motor1 , Rodriguez said, 'Consider rebuilding your credit before taking on high-interest loans.' 'Don't Give Up' As Rodriguez suggests, this customer will pay a significant sum in interest alone. According to NerdWallet's auto loan calculator, an $18,767 loan with a 30.4% interest rate and 72-month (six year) term will cost $569 a month. Over the life of the loan, NerdWallet says the individual will pay just shy of $41,000 for the vehicle—or over $22,000 in interest. Trending Now 'What Do I Do?:' Woman's Car Gets Boxed-In On the Street. What Can She Do to Get Out? 'I'm Guessing You Have a Bad Radiator:' Woman Puts 'Whole Tub' of Coolant in Her Car. She Doesn't Understand Why It's Still Dry In the comments, viewers offered a torrent of disbelief over the terms of this loan. "That's a credit card APR," wrote one person. A second person agreed, "Buying a cash car off of a credit card makes more sense at that point." Other people said this deal made them feel better about their situations. "I have a 2.9 and I still complain," wrote one person. And one person even offered some words of encouragement to those who are still building or repairing their credit after financial struggles. "I filed bankruptcy back in 1998, but from 2005 it's been 832 to 848. So, people, don't give up," they wrote. Should You Repair Your Credit Before Getting a Car Loan? Credit score reporting agency Experian backs up much of what Rodriguez says. In a blog, the company states that, with the average new car price and car loan interest rates skyrocketing, it's a good idea to work on raising your credit score before securing an auto loan. Loan applicants with higher credit scores get lower interest rates. That means saving money over the life of the loan. Experian recommends first checking your credit report to see your score and what is dragging it down. Although Rodriguez pointed his followers to a credit repair agency, you can also track inaccurate entries on your credit report and sent dispute letters to the creditors on your own. After that, Experian says to start making your bill payments on time, getting serious about tackling any credit card debt, and limit any new credit applications going forward. More From Motor1 'What Should I Do?' Chevrolet Salesman Says His Client Owes $23,000 on a 2012 Chevrolet Cruze. How? 'Why Did They Do This?': Car Salesman Checks Over Buick Cascada. Then He's Taken Aback by Its Unusual Trunk Design 'Toyota Tacoma. Chevy Tahoe:' Car Salesman Can Tell the Make And Model By the Sound Of The Hood Closing. Then He Proves It 'BEAT ME IN A FOOTRACE:' Car Salesman Offers Unconventional Deal on New Car. Would You Do It? Share this Story Facebook X LinkedIn Flipboard Reddit WhatsApp E-Mail Got a tip for us? Email: tips@ Join the conversation ( )
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Why The Future Of Trucking Litigation Is An Expert Arms Race
Robotic truck company Aurora shows off a self-driving semi-truck at the CES tech show in Las Vegas. A quiet revolution is reshaping America's trucking industry, and it's about to transform how trucking accident cases are fought in courtrooms across the country. Semi-autonomous systems—where drivers monitor AI-controlled vehicles—are already being deployed across commercial fleets, while companies like Aurora have logged five million fully autonomous commercial miles, proving that driverless freight is no longer science fiction. For the legal industry, this technological shift represents one of the most significant changes in commercial transportation litigation since the interstate highway system was built. With both human drivers and AI systems 'behind the wheel,' the fundamental nature of legal liability is being rewritten. To understand why this matters, consider how trucking accident cases are typically fought today. I interviewed Kenneth Williams, Transportation Practice Leader at the law firm Segal McCambridge, who has spent decades defending trucking companies in court. For the past fifteen years, plaintiff attorneys have relied heavily on "Reptile Theory," a litigation strategy designed to activate jurors' primitive survival instincts and make them feel that corporate conduct threatens community safety. This emotional approach has proven remarkably effective, generating billions in verdicts and settlements. As Williams explains, common questions include, "Does the trucking company agree that safety must be paramount?" and "A company must make the safest possible choice in all circumstances, correct?" These questions attempt to force defendants to agree with broad safety principles, then use those agreements to argue any deviation endangered the community. While data from today's trucks is already used by experts for accident reconstruction and determining driver distraction, the widespread adoption of semi-autonomous trucking systems will create more data, giving the truck more of a "voice" in litigation. These systems require drivers to monitor AI-controlled vehicles, but the AI handles part of the driving decisions. As Williams explains, "In near future jury trials involving commercial trucking litigation, you will hear from the commercial owner and from the driver, but the jury is now going to hear a new voice. They're going to hear from the vehicle itself—and vehicles don't give conflicting testimony, don't forget, and don't get nervous on the witness stand." Litigation Strategy Will Change As this technology continues to advance, litigation strategy will fundamentally shift from subjective human testimony to objective machine data. Instead of relying on a driver's recollection of events that occurred in milliseconds during a high-stress situation, through experts, legal teams can access precise sensor data showing exactly what the vehicle detected, when it detected it, and how the AI system responded. This includes everything from the exact speed and trajectory of surrounding vehicles to weather conditions, road surface quality, and even the driver's attention level as monitored by interior cameras and biometric sensors. The data richness extends beyond the moment of impact. Modern semi-autonomous systems continuously monitor and log driver behavior, creating detailed profiles of attention patterns, response times, and compliance with system alerts. This information provides unprecedented insight into the human-machine interaction that defines semi-autonomous operation, offering litigators objective evidence of driver performance that was previously impossible to obtain. As increasingly autonomous systems become more prevalent in commercial trucks, the litigation advantage will shift dramatically toward those who can secure and effectively utilize technical experts, but this shift also fundamentally changes litigation economics. Williams outlined the comprehensive expert team that will become essential, and why insurance carriers need to start wrestling with questions like, "Are you pricing policies to incorporate a digital forensic expert, an artificial intelligence expert, a biomechanical engineer, an accident reconstructionist, and a human factors expert on every case involving autonomous trucks? Let alone your medical doctors and toxicologists. Companies like Rimkus that are at the forefront of data retrieval, data interpretation, and AI expertise—that's who will be the industry leaders in assisting litigators." The Human Element Remains Williams noted the demographic implications: "The ramifications will impact who's on your jury. All the kids familiar with TikTok, WhatsApp, Instagram—they're miles ahead in technology compared to war veterans, retired school teachers, and end-of-career white-collar professionals.' However, even tech-savvy jurors need expert guidance to understand complex AI decision-making processes. The challenge lies in making sophisticated technology accessible to jurors with varying technical backgrounds while maintaining emotional resonance. As Williams explains, the most successful litigation teams will combine technical accuracy with compelling human narratives. They'll explain not just what the AI system did, but why those decisions matter for human safety and justice. The Shift from Personal Injury to Product Liability Perhaps the most fundamental legal transformation will be the gradual shift from traditional personal injury claims to product liability cases. In conventional trucking accidents, liability typically centers on driver negligence—whether the driver was distracted, fatigued, speeding, or otherwise failed to exercise reasonable care. The legal framework focuses on human error and company policies around driver training, hours of service, and vehicle maintenance. As AI systems assume greater control over vehicle operations, the liability calculus fundamentally changes. When an autonomous system makes a split-second decision that results in an accident, the question shifts from "did the driver act reasonably?" to "did the AI system function as designed?" This transformation moves cases from the realm of personal injury law—where human behavior is scrutinized—into product liability territory, where the focus becomes whether the technology itself was defective. Williams expects this shift to reshape commercial vehicle accident litigation, creating distinct categories of legal arguments. "Instead of arguing whether a driver should have seen a hazard or reacted faster, we'll be arguing whether the AI's object recognition algorithms were adequate, whether the sensors worked properly, or whether the decision-making protocols were reasonable given the circumstances," he explains. This evolution has profound implications for how cases are prepared and tried. Product liability cases require different expertise, different discovery processes and different legal theories. Rather than deposing drivers about their training and experience, attorneys will need to engage experts in software engineering, data science and artificial intelligence. The focus shifts from company safety policies to algorithmic decision-making processes and driver logs to code repositories. The transition also affects damages calculations. In traditional personal injury cases, damages often reflect the individual driver's actions and the trucking company's vicarious liability. In product liability cases, damages may encompass broader questions about whether entire fleets of vehicles share the same algorithmic vulnerabilities, potentially exposing manufacturers to massive aggregate liability that dwarfs today's trucking settlements. For insurance carriers, this shift represents a fundamental recalibration of risk assessment. The predictable patterns of human error that have long guided actuarial models give way to the more complex challenge of quantifying AI system reliability across millions of driving scenarios. The Coming Competitive Advantage While the full transformation remains years away, competitive advantages in the courtroom are already emerging. Williams emphasized: "Success will depend entirely on securing the best data interpretation experts early in the process. In this new reality, the side with superior technical expertise doesn't just have an advantage—they have an insurmountable one." The window for preparation is open now. As Aurora expands operations and other manufacturers accelerate deployment with semi-autonomous and fully autonomous commercial vehicles, those who build expert networks and develop technical competencies early will dominate the industry. The autonomous trucking revolution will transform commercial transportation litigation from emotion-driven to expert-driven. While human emotions and compelling narratives will remain important, the attorneys and insurance companies who can best interpret and present complex technical data in understandable, emotionally resonant ways will control the courtroom. The change is coming. The full transformation may take years, but the time to build expert relationships and develop technical competencies is now.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Tesla Faces First Jury Trial Tied to Its Autopilot System
Tesla has faced a string of lawsuits over the last five years stemming from fatal crashes involving cars equipped with its Autopilot driver-assist system. The automaker has settled some of the lawsuits and others have been dismissed, allowing the company to avoid any legal judgments about Autopilot's safety and whether it is flawed. But a new case that is set to begin in federal court in Miami on Monday is the first to go to a jury trial, representing a serious threat to Tesla, its self-driving technology and its reputation. The suit stems from a 2019 crash of a Tesla Model S sedan driven at night on a two-lane road in South Florida, with the Autopilot engaged. When the driver dropped his cellphone and bent to look for it, the car crashed into a parked sport-utility vehicle, killing one pedestrian and injuring another. The case, which is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, was filed by the family of Naibel Benavides, who was killed in the crash, and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo, who survived with grave injuries. Documents in the case indicate that Tesla's attorneys plan to argue that Autopilot was not fully in control of the car at the time of the crash and that the driver, George Brian McGee, was solely responsible. Data from the car shows he had his foot on the accelerator, pushing its speed to 62 miles per hour, above the posted limit of 45 m.p.h. Pressing the accelerator overrode the cruise control part of Autopilot, which is designed to brake for obstacles or other vehicles. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
