Man and I thought the last one was bad.
Where is my popcorn! Keep us updated OP! Thanks and good luck.
1 Like
Will do sir!
Late to the thread but posting so i can follow. Years ago when I prepared for MA bar, I remember constantly getting practice questions wrong for forgetting 93A. It applies really broadly. The killer provision in it is attorneys costs for consumer if they prevail at trial.
If 93a applies, the better the dealer’s lawyer is the quicker they will settle with you. They have way more to lose than you (treble damages and attorney costs)
2 Likes
good luck man.
1 Like
Thank youuuu!!!
Don’t think I’d shop for a car at a dealer with the “shoupuslast” business name 
5 Likes
You have nothing to loss in this case. The dealer will pay for your attorney fee. Almost certain, they will have to refund you full price that you paid plus other damages for putting the driver which is you in a harmful situation if you involved in an accident. Frame damage severely lower passenger protection in accident. Intentional putting someone in harmful way is HUGE for punitive damage.
I don’t agree another reply that the dealer made a honest mistake or it was a dealer trade. Even if it is a dealer trade, your legal action will bring out the real dealership that try to hide the facts. It just happened to me few weeks ago that my car fell from the lift during service in dealership. Everyone in the dealer know about it. The dealer is very apologetic even myself did not blame anyone for what happened. It’s an accident. IMO, someone must know what happened to your car and went above and beyond to hide it. Besides, you leased it, so, they think the car will be back to them after the lease term which is significantly less risky compare to selling it.
This is an unfortunate situation. But, you will be compensated and the someone will be and should be punished financially and legally.
2 Likes
I agree!! The dealer did know about the damage. The carfax and autocheck confirms that.
Moving right along. Met with the appraiser/auto body expert today. Took two hours to inspect the car. Thought it was cool being able to watch the process.
It was determined that the front passenger door was replaced, which was verified by the RDOT sticker on the door.
The vehicle’s structure has been compromised as the vehicle is not squared. Apparently the air bag sensors could be thrown off with the timing.
Roughly 40% of the passenger front door well has been replaced, all the way down to the rocker panel frame. He used a paint meter to determine exactly where they made the cuts. The paint job to conceal this repair was terrible btw.
When the door is shut, the gaps between the door and front quarter panel are very tight and not factory.
On the passenger door front side, and underneath the vehicle/rocker panel, there’s some type of rubber spray coating they used, but it’s all falling apart and pealing away. On the opposite side of the vehicle there is no issue of peeling and it looks facotry.
He estimated a repair job like this would cost $4,000+.
Smh!
1 Like
This is more like a fraud. Arbitration is for dispute between you and the dealer. There is nothing to dispute for your case. Your attorney should do everything possible to avoid arbitration. Arbitration will not award you punitive damage.
I was in an arbitration for my car (first generation MDX). My car was in shop for over 6 months within first 9 months of ownership. They couldn’t fix it after numerous attempts. Not until I brought them Acura internal bulletin for the exact same problem, they fixed it after they almost disassemble entire front part of the car including dashboard.
Arbitration was hosted by retired judges who is at least 70 years old in my case. They found that it was not safety related and I have no financial damage. Entire front part of the car was disassembled but still a new car??? anyway, I have no faith in arbitration. Guess who’s funding the arbitration?
1 Like
I’m not sure where you live but laws vary by state. Whatever your experience, it has little relation to the OP. The original post sets forgot the consumer protection statute he is seeking redress under. Punative damages are almost never available under this statute beyond the treble damages clause.
What is the bank’s angle in all of this? They are leasing you the car. Are they in way liable?
If they feel threatened, they will butcher the dealer.
Not a great analogy, but a hospital wants to be on the good side of an insurance company. If not, they can put you on a different pay scale, lower your reimbursements, even stop payments if you are not compliant with certain standard of medical practice.
The ramifications could be quite significant. Maybe your layer can use this relationship to your advantage.
1 Like
I’d say the bank is also being defrauded as it is a lease.
I own the vehicle outright. I bought out the lease at the 3 year mark.
You essentially had a three year test drive and, in spite of noticing the car was out of alignment, you purchased it without an inspection…
1 Like
Right, but at that time you didn’t, the bank owned a damaged vehicle. They would have had to get rid of it at a discount, cause no dealer would touch it at full RV. I wouldn’t like it as a bank.
1 Like
The alignment was fixed by the dealer 5 months after I leased it, have you read anyhing that I posted? I shouldnt have to inspect a brand new car as I was the only driver during the 3 years!
7 Likes
I do not think we can blame the OP at all here. I have witnessed many posts where the individual is trying to excuse their negligence or lack of thorough due diligence, but this (in my opinion only), is entirely different. He did everything right. He leased a car brand new and was aware he took care of it and did not cause damage to it.
I do not think many would consider having such a defined vehicle inspected.
1 Like
Thank you my friend!