Can I sue this car dealership for deceptive practices?

Factual Questions
1

We purchased a used Saturn about three months ago from a Saturn dealership. It’s a model year ’99, was leased new in August ’98 (3 year lease), turned in to the dealership August ’01, we bought it from the dealership it was turned in at. It had 23,900 miles when we got it.

When negotiating, I asked the dealership for the maintenance records.

When a Saturn dealership/service department works on a car, they keep a running record of it in their computerized tracking/billing/etc system. Thus any Saturn dealership can call up the service record of any car (by VIN) that has been serviced by any other Saturn dealership.

The dealership told me they (meaning Saturn in general, not just their particular dealership) did not have any maintenance records for it. They said the lessee must have had it maintained (oil change, etc) elsewhere or did it themselves.

I was particularly interested in buying a used car that had been leased, since I figured it may have been better maintained (and that maintenance documented). I though that with a lease, the dealership may charge a penalty upon turn-in if the car is not in good condition. Regular maintenance being necessary to maintain good condition, lack of regular maintenance would clearly detract from its resale value.

So, I bought a turned-in lease without any maintenance records. I asked for them, but was told they didn’t exist.

Today I take the car to the Saturn service center affiliated with, but located a few blocks away from, the dealership where I bought it. We just hit 27,000 miles. According to the service schedule booklet provided by the dealership it was time for the 27,000 mile maintenance package, which was just the basic oil change/top off /car wash and would cost about $50.

When I brought it in the guy in the service center calls up my records, and they have lots of ‘em, dating back 3 years! “And BTW, and they skipped the 24,000 mile maintenance, which is a “biggie” and will cost $350, would you like to do that now?” (They had record of the 27,000 maintenance package being performed about 6 months ago.)

So…. at the time I purchased the car, the dealership hid the fact that it was due for its scheduled $350 maintenance package (which was a factor I clearly would have considered in the final purchase price). The dealer flat out lied to me that they didn’t have any service records on the car.

Do I have any legal case? The dealer misrepresented the car to me. The only sticking point I can think of is…. did this misrepresentation A) materially influence my purchase, or B) cause me any damage?

As for A), I can not say for sure that seeing the service record would have made any difference in whether or not I bought the car. (I was in a hurry this morning and have not inspected the entire record, which I will get from the service center, and examine closely, tonight. It may shed some light on why they didn’t want to give it to me.)

As to B), I’m not sure it’s actually caused me any damage (yet).

Do I have any legal leg to stand on? Maybe to sue the dealership? What damages could I sue for, the $350? Do I have to prove damages? The dealer wasn’t just negligent, they were outright dishonest.

Thanks much.

2

I don’t understand your story - how can the 24k maintenance have been skipped if you hadn’t hit 24,000 miles yet?

Anyway, before you sue anybody, IMHO you should (1) call the dealer that sold you the car, explain what happened, and ask, sweet as pie, for whatever it is you want, e.g., a free service for the car; (2) call Saturn customer service and ask for the same thing; (3) write Saturn a nice letter, telling them what happened, tell them that otherwise, your car is great, and ask for whatever it is you want, e.g. a free 24k service for the car.

(Standard disclaimer about legal advice)

3

Howdy Jim,

Well first of all, different jurisdictions have different laws, and this ic civil code anyway. So, you would still have to check with your local attorneys. (Free initial visit is standard in the indsutry).

But, yes, you do have to prove damages. Currently, the only damages you have is the theoretical $350.00. No case. If the lack of maintenance caused some current problem, though. That could help.

However, depending upon what else is in the record, you may be able to get all of your money back for misrepresentation. The dealer must upon, upon request, provide you with information concering the drive train and body maintenance. Usually specific to body damage, if the engine has suffered major problems, that could also be considered.

Finally, considering the high cost of litigation (even if you choose to represent yourself), the small recovery may not be worth the trouble.

Note: I am not attempting in any way to offer legal advice or counselling. You should consult with an attorny in your town for more specific information pertaining to local laws.

4

It’s a bit of a misnomer. At 3,000 miles you are due for the 3,000 mile package (basic oil change, $50), at 6k due for the 6k package (oil change and something else, $90), at 9k due for the 9k (basic oil again, $50), at 12k the 12k package (oil, rotate the tires, inspect the brakes, etc. etc., $150), 15k back to the basic oil change.

They did the 27k maintenance, which was just the basic oil change, when the car had about 23k on it. Thus they “skipped” the 24k package in the series: assume they did the 21k package at 21k miles, the 27k package at about 23k miles, and said “let the next sucker worry about the 24k, $350 package we skipped.”

Make sense?

5

Yes, but it seems to me that, consistent with the recommended maintenance schedule, the former owners could have foregone both the 27k and 24k maintenance, since the car had not yet reached 24,000 miles.

Put another way, it seems to me that you received a car that had received more service than what is required by the maintenance schedule.

I don’t mean to jump on you, but this seems like a weak point in your case to me.

(standard disclaimer about legal advice)

6

If this is true, it wasnt due for its 24k service when you bought it, therefore you would have been the one to skip it.

7

Sounds to me like they just got an oil change, not the 27K service.

8

Per the other posters unless there’s something else you’ve not included in your description, it appears your claim that you were harmed in some fashion by the previous owner doing an inexpensive service ahead of time (for whatever reason), and not having done a more expensive service that was not due for another 100 miles when you purchased the car is going to tough to make.

There must be something I’m missing. I just don’t see where you have a credible claim of harm other than initially having dealt with a poorly informed/sloppy salesperson re the records issue.

9

OK, OK, we’re getting bogged down in the minutia here.

Main point: the dealer lied to me when he sold me the car.

What’s my recourse?

Assuming there’s nothing seriously amiss in the maintenance records (i.e. major repair or replacement), then no, they probably don’t owe me anything.

I just wondered what the consequences are, for the dealer, of lying to a customer in the course of making a sale. He didn’t just casually exaggerate or make inflated claims, he out and out lied to my face to move the sale along.

What are the consequences of that (in this situation)?

10

Jim, this isn’t minutia, this is what is relevant to being able to show damages.

You should speak to the dealership before you accuse them of “lying” to you. I suppose it is possible that they were unable to pull up the records at the time of purchase, or something like that.

Believe me, I’m not sticking up for the dealership here- hell, I am suing mine right now, albeit for a different reason! But you must give them an opportunity to remedy the situation, or at least offer you an explanation.

And BTW- the dealership did not “hide” from you the fact that the car was due for it’s 24K checkup- you knew that by looking at the odometer.

11

You mean a used car dealer lied to you!

To your face!

What is this world comming to when you can’t even trust a used car dealer?

Next you’ll be telling me that my elected reps don’t tell me the truth either.

:wink:

d

12

Without researching the law of your jurisdiction, it’s impossible to say for sure whether you have no (legal) recourse.

But from what you’ve said, it seems that you will have a difficult time articulating a theory of damages. The law usually requires that plaintiffs demonstrate how they were injured by the defendant’s wrongs.

As I suggested earlier, you could certainly appeal to Saturn customer service, and tell them that you love your car, but feel bad that the dealer misrepresented the situation to you, and feel that, under the circumstances, the gracious thing to do would be to waive any charges for the next service.

Or if you really want to know, you could consult with a local lawyer and see what he or she thinks. In many jurisdictions, there are lawyers who specialize in new and used car issues.

(standard disclaimer about legal advice)

13

>>OK, OK, we’re getting bogged down in the minutia here. Main point: the dealer lied to me when he sold me the car

SO? What do you want a judge to do? All he can do is award you damages. How were you damaged?

Or can my wife sue me if I tell her she does not look fat in that dress? You cannot be too careful these days.

14

Thanks all, very helpful so far.

(EJsGirl, I’m sure it was a lie, not a mistake (I was there when it happened, twice). He told me twice, a week apart, that they did not have records. Not that they were unable to pull them up or <insert other lame excuse>, he assured me he had checked and none existed.)

I understand that I probably can’t recover any damages since I probably haven’t suffered any. So in any further replies please don’t cover that aspect, I think it’s been asked and answered.

Here’s what’s confusing me…

We agreed that the dealer would supply something (the car) in return for some consideration on my part (the purchase price). This is a valid contract, right?

However, the car he agreed to supply was not the one he actually delivered. The one he agreed to supply did not, by his explicit assertions, have any maintenance records that Saturn was aware of. The one he actually delivered really does have those maintenance records (and Saturn is aware of them, they’re Saturn’s records!).

Those are two different things, right? The car he sold me was not what he said it was (even though I have not suffered any damages because of it).

We had entered into a valid contract, right? Didn’t the dealer breach this contract by not delivering what he agreed to deliver? Can someone please give a brief primer on contract law as it pertains specifically to this situation?

If this is a breach of contract (big “if”, which is what I’m trying to find out here), well… what happens?

15

I am not anything even resembling a lawyer, but I don’t think this is a good point. After all, what you got was more than what you thought you got. You thought you were getting a car that had no maintenance history, and instead you got a car that did have a maintenance history. I don’t think he mis-represented, but rather under-represented his car. As the car was under 24K miles, it was your responsibility to read the owner’s manual and get that check up done.

You should consider why you want to sue this person. If you want to punish this person for his actions, the best way really is going to be a letter to Saturn HQ. Explain what happened in a very innocent, neutral tone, but include that you seriously considered going to a different dealer because of the supposed lack of maintenance records. I seem to remember that this was one of the selling points for Saturn. (Does anyone remember the donut commercial?)

16

Well, let’s suppose that you had signed an agreement with the dealer relating to the purchase of the car, and the contract had contained the following provision:

And let’s further suppose that the contract contains no provision allowing rescission or liquidated damages if the contract is breached.

Generally speaking, there are two elements to a breach of contract action. One is breach. I’ll let you guess what the other is, but let me give you a hypothetical:

Suppose you and I have a contract whereby I am to deliver you, in 30 days’ time, 6 ounces of gold and you are to pay me $280 per ounce.

30 days later, I tell you “go to hell, I’m not delivering any gold to you.” Meanwhile, the spot price of gold has dropped to $250 an ounce.

What do you suppose would happen if you took me to court over it?

(standard disclaimer about legal advice)

17

You know, when you file a suit you have to specify what you are demanding. What are you demanding? What is it you want? You agree you have not suffered any damages. What is it you want? A judge to say to the guy “Liar, liar, pants on fire”? I don’t think you’d get him to do this but is it worth your time?

18

Hey Dude! Please stop offering other lawyers professional services for free. If you want to do a consult for free, that is up to you. I charge $250 an hour, but only $40 for an initial consult of up to an hour, for which you get to pick my brain. Otherwise I would never get any work done and starve to boot.

As for the advice, I think it is pretty good. You may also want to consider filing in small claims court if your jurisdiction has one. I had some clients do this in a similar case and they came out pretty good.

19

Regardless of what you want, how would you even possibly go about getting proof that the lied to you?

Does sound pretty shifty though. My sympathies.

20

Sorry DP,

Where I come from, we always offer free initial consultations. After all, that is the cheese in the trap. After which. we either

  1. attempt to explain to them the lack of merit for their case and thus push them right back out the door, or we
  2. convince them of the need for our services, and then start charging the exhorbitant rates.
    It is also easier to convince people to stop on in, when they can compare a free consultation with one that is not so free. That is probably why those new "coffee/cafe lawyers are turning out so much business. They make it so easy to consult, that everybody just wants to try their luck, I guess. Have not actually seen one of those except on the news, though.