LAW advice

[The Saint]

So I had a luthier build me 2 guitars. One a parlor and the other an OM cutaway.

I had played the guitars he had built previously and found them very nice. They had beautiful tone and the workmanship was spot on. So I trusted that he could build me a fine custom build.

The Parlor was made with Granadillo B&S and Carpathian Spruce top. The OM made with Cocobolo B&S and torrified Adi Top.

The Parlor he messed up by making the scale too long so the intonation was way off. He was embarrassed and he apologized for the blunder and said he would replace the top... My expense so far is 3350 paid in full.

The OM he sent off to Vancouver for a high gloss finish. Apparently it came back with a small crack in the top, which he had repaired. My expense so far is $1000 down
As a replacement for the cracked guitar he made a second OM (a replica), without consulting with me. For the original OM I had initially hand picked the Cocobolo pattern from his stock as being the most aesthetic. With the 2nd guitar the wood grain/pattern obviously is not going to be the same.

Since I was going to be away til mid May I told him not to rush, so all guitars are still in progress.

My question to someone who knows Canadian Law is.. am I obligated in any way to accept any of these guitars if I feel they are not up to standard since they have been repaired or replaced?

Thanks

[The Bard Rocks]

I don't pretend to know Canadian law. It sounds as if he is a standup guy, trying to make things right for you. On the OM, can he put a new top on the original back and sides? Or at least show you the wood he proposes to use for B&S. Maybe it would be even better.

[GCWaters]

How does replacing the top on the parlor fix the scale problem?

[Athens]

Originally Posted by GCWaters

How does replacing the top on the parlor fix the scale problem?

By placing the bridge properly. My guess would be that the neck is fine, just that he put the bridge in the wrong position.

[Martin_F]

Originally Posted by The Saint

So I had a luthier build me 2 guitars. One a parlor and the other an OM cutaway.

I had played the guitars he had built previously and found them very nice. They had beautiful tone and the workmanship was spot on. So I trusted that he could build me a fine custom build.

The Parlor was made with Granadillo B&S and Carpathian Spruce top. The OM made with Cocobolo B&S and torrified Adi Top.

The Parlor he messed up by making the scale too long so the intonation was way off. He was embarrassed and he apologized for the blunder and said he would replace the top... My expense so far is 3350 paid in full.

The OM he sent off to Vancouver for a high gloss finish. Apparently it came back with a small crack in the top, which he had repaired. My expense so far is $1000 down
As a replacement for the cracked guitar he made a second OM (a replica), without consulting with me. For the original OM I had initially hand picked the Cocobolo pattern from his stock as being the most aesthetic. With the 2nd guitar the wood grain/pattern obviously is not going to be the same.

Since I was going to be away til mid May I told him not to rush, so all guitars are still in progress.

My question to someone who knows Canadian Law is.. am I obligated in any way to accept any of these guitars if I feel they are not up to standard since they have been repaired or replaced?

Thanks

I would have a talk with the luthier and discuss your reservations about the guitars now that they have both had so many issues. I'm sure that the luthier will understand where you are coming from.

Given the values of the instruments (still not very high in terms of dollars), I doubt you would want to get too involved in any legal avenues of recourse. I'm no lawyer, but I know that it can become very expensive to pursue court action. My guess is that you two could work any issues out. Plus, until you try the guitars, you don't know what they are going to be like. It just might be that you love them and this gives you a story to tell about the purchase that almost went wrong.

Luthiers are human too. They make mistakes and can understand that we might be nervous about purchases, especially after so many problems.

In the future, I recommend that you purchase one guitar from a luthier at a time to make sure that you really do like them and the luthiers work!

Martin

[ManyMartinMan]

I don't see any legal advice needed. The builder is still within the build time you allowed him. No contract appears to have been broken or anything delivered that strays from what you ordered. I would use my energy communicating with the builder and explaining exactly what you want and expect. If, at some point in time, that doesn't work, then request a refund. If that isn't forthcoming, contact your credit card company (if that's how you paid) and challenge the guitars and/or contact a local attorney for a free consultation.

[jaymarsch]

What is the luthier’s return policy? I have had 2 custom orders from small shop luthiers and each had a 48 hour review period upon delivery. I could return the guitar for cost minus initial deposit as long as there were not any personalized features such as a crazy inlay that would make it harder for the luthier to sell it to someone else. Then the cost of changing that would be subtracted. Check what their website says. I wouldn’t recommend having a custom build done without knowing the return policy. Best of luck on either getting the guitars the way that you want them or receiving a reasonable refund.
Best,
Jayne

[Deliberate1]

Lawyer here, though not Canadian, my advice is universal.
Document. Document. Document.
Memories fade. Words are misinterpreted. Sequences are twisted. Feelings get hurt. Bad stuff follows. Both you and your builder want the same thing - to resolve this in a mutually satisfactory way so that you can write a gushing NGD review and live in peace with your new guitars. That is advertising that he just cannot buy.
To avoid any unfortunate detours, chronicle every conversation you have. Follow up with a text or email to so as to avoid any misunderstandings. And if, this does not turn out well, there will be a record that details the controversy. People accept the written word.
I wish you the best of luck. Stay calm and positive and cooperative and it will all work out. And if it doesn't, there will be a history that you can produce.
David

[redir]

It sounds like you just need to continue working with him. I've had to retop guitars for dumb mistakes and various reasons before. It's not really that too big a deal, it sucks but humans are prone to make errors.

IDK why he would need to retop the parlor either, a new neck might be in order, or at least a new fretboard with a wider nut or some other way of hiding the extra length. The top would need to be refinished though. Maybe that is is concern IDK.

[Jobe]

I am not a professional in Canadian law but I will tell you this without a retainer: You do not have to accept or pay for the guitars in question if you are not satisfied. Your initial agreement has already been broken. That agreement was a contract even if it was simply verbal. The window is now open for you to accept or deny the final result. You are in charge in this decision. I wish you a happy ending.

[charles Tauber]

Originally Posted by Deliberate1

Lawyer here, though not Canadian, my advice is universal.
Document. Document. Document.

Both you and your builder want the same thing...

Good advice. The start of that documentation is - or should be - what are the terms of the agreement/contract, including things such as the luthier's return/refusal policy, what happens if mistakes are made while making the instrument, damage/repairs while the instrument is being made...

As David pointed out, you both want your interaction to mutually end well. If your luthier seems willing to discuss the situation, and work towards a mutually satisfying result, that is the starting point.

There might be options that you haven't yet discussed. For example, depending upon the "crack" in the top, it might be easily repaired. You might be able to purchase that guitar, repaired both structurally and cosmetically, at a suitably-agreed-upon discount.

Similarly, there might be options for the OM with its incorrect scale that might not involve replacing the top and/or making a second one with different wood. Again, if there are viable options for that instrument, perhaps, once those repairs are made, that instrument could be purchased at a discount.

[GCWaters]

Originally Posted by Athens

By placing the bridge properly. My guess would be that the neck is fine, just that he put the bridge in the wrong position.

Thanks—I was focusing on the neck!