That’s why you make the big bucks, to figure this stuff out 
How could he argue it was manufactured wrong if it was noted the bumper was already repaired/replaced (albeit a shoddy job) by (2) 3rd party shops? Or is this just a point of attack from a legal perspective?
But in cases like this the the actual facts are irrelevant. You just put the car maker on notice of impending legal action in a court of your choosing and they almost certainly make it right. Otherwise they need to pay outside counsel tends of thousands in legal fees and if they lose they have a car branded a lemon that is worth a fraction of its MSRP. Before the car gets branded they can usually work a dealer trade which preserves some of the value of the defective car.
Wouldn’t FCA have in-house counsel?
BTW, I totally get what you’re saying, and it makes sense.
That’s a disputed fact and a self interested statement from a repairman. If I’m the lawyer I’m disputing it and stating that it’s a question of fact for the court.
key point - Yes but corporate attorneys almost never do litigation. You have to be barred where the suit happens so FCA doesn’t have on staff lawyers barred in all 50 states, DC and PR. You hire outside counsel as needed.
Thanks for the insight.
EC99, you raise an interesting point: Auto Express told me that they bought this car from another Alfa dealership in the DC area. Wonder if the DC dealer sold it to Auto Express to avoid the title branding dilemma?? Who knows. Either way, Auto Express should’ve know exactly what they had before putting it up for sale. As for the argument that many cars receive repairs before they’re sold as new cars, that may be the case for certain very minor cosmetic repairs, but it should NEVER be the case for a major safety component like a rear bumper. Am I supposed to take the dealer’s word for it that this is purely a cosmetic issue if one of my kids happens to be injured in a rear end collission if the rear bumper didn’t perform as specified by the manufacturer??
It’s possible, but dealer trades are done all the time. Perhaps the car was damaged during transport, or perhaps the DC dealer knew and failed to tell Erie. Or, Erie backed into a light post when they were trying to send it through the car wash.
Are you referring to the plastic cover on the back of the car that most people would call the bumper, but is actually a bumper cover, and really is just cosmetic? Or, are you referring to the structural part of the car behind the bumper cover that does the job in an accident? If the former, there’s not much to worry about there. If the latter, yeah, that’s a problem.
At this point, we really don’t know if the problem is structural, or if it’s only with the bumper cover itself . . . and I’m not willing to have a body shop take it apart to find out. I don’t think that this is my responsibility.
Contact the local Erie news channels…maybe they’d be interested in your story.
NBC - WICU
CBS - WSEE
ABC - WJET
That said, you did take delivery knowing the damage was there, so IDK if they’d be much help or not. It’s worth a shot I suppose.
A dealer’s trade Cruz sideswiped my wife’s Forester. Someone bought the brand new repaired Cruz.
You might not be privy to this, but was the damage disclosed, or was it under the threshold?
How would I know? I didn’t buy that Cruz 
But the damage to it was substantial.
I assumed since you knew the Cruze was sold, you knew of the dealer that sold it.
The Erie dealer has told me that they were unaware of any issues.
Yes, I completely understand that the predicament I find myself in now is partly due to me putting trust in Auto Express’ assurance that they would make things right and taking the car anyway. They had a very good reputation on Leasehackr; however, we all know how quickly a reputation can be destroyed.
that comment was to @ursus RE: his Cruze story.
That said, how can Auto Express say they didn’t know anything when they clearly did at delivery as well as took pictures? That doesn’t make sense
No idea. But how it could not be sold? It wasn’t totaled, just cosmetic damage. It happened right in front of dealership, when the kid driver almost passed it and decided to make right turn from the middle lane.
Hell, I’d lease a Cruze at a substantial discount after repair, if it was cosmetic and not structural. I could live with it for 3 years if I was paying 45/month for it 
Mp11477, what I meant is that Auto Express has told me that they were unaware of any previous damage/repairs when they allegedly bought the car from the DC dealer. Yes, Auto Express did take photos of the misaligned panels before I left Auto Express’ lot the night of delivery.
I’m not surprised. I leased a car on dealer trade that one of the wheels was gashed, and a gouge in the tire. The dealer claimed it was the other dealer’s fault…at the end of the day, you’ll never know. I told them to find a new wheel and tire, and I’ll be on my way. They grabbed one from another car and took that out of commission until they ordered replacements.
Either the kids who washed it were completely blind, underpaid and didn’t care, or they did it when they were driving it through the car wash and were afraid to say anything, or a combination of all.
Maybe their perception of the damage is quite different than yours? I assume this is the bumper skin and that part I don’t think is integral to crash protection. Would be nice if you posted some pictures…