Main Menu

Nabieva Madina v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC

Case Type:   Lemon Law / New Car Purchase
Case:   Nabieva Madina v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC
Date:   December 14, 2019
Plaintiff Attorney(s):   Anthony T. Ballato, Esq., Massapequa, NY
Defendant Attorney(s):   Steven S. Krane, Esq. of Krane LLP
Facts:   On August 16, 2016, Consumer Madina Nabieva purchased a new 2017 Mercedes-Benz GLS 550 from Benzel Busch Motor Car Corp., Englewood, New Jersey. The consumer brought the vehicle into Benzel Busch for service alleging that the windshield was distorted. The windshield was replaced. That the malfunction lights were coming on and the display showed that the rear air bag was not working. The technicians replaced fuses in the cigarette lighter and cup holder. The consumer brought it back for service again alleging that the heated cup holder and cigarette lighter were not working. The fuses were replaced again. The consumer also stated that when the vehicle was cold when you put it in reverse, it was bumpy and made banging noises. Consumer alleged that the front wheels had minor bends in them and that the traffic sign assist in inoperable. The technician repaired the wheels and balanced the tires. They removed the Heads up display and reinstalled the system. The consumer brought the vehicle in for recalls. The housing and socket operations had to be replaced. The consumer alleged that there was water leaking under the rearview mirror. The windshield was removed and replaced again. The consumer alleged that the brakes were wearing and that the heated cup holder and cigarette lighter weren’t working again. The rotors were replaced and the fuses were changed again. The consumer also alleged that the multiple codes were present that there was an internal electrical fault.
Verdict:   After multiple attempts to fix the vehicle and over 66 days out of service, the consumer hired Anthony T. Ballato, Esq. of Massapequa, NY to represent her. Mr. Ballato sent a demand letter to the manufacturer Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC demanding that they repurchase the consumer’s vehicle pursuant to Notice Pursuant to New Car Lemon Law; New York General Business Law Article 11-A, Sections 198-A, Et Seq.; Notice of Revocation of Acceptance and Demand for Rescission Uniform Commercial Code Article 2; Claims Under Manufacturer’s Warranties and Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act; and Demand for all Sales, Financing and Service Documents. On July 23, 2018, Mr. Ballato received a letter from the Manufacturer denying the claims in the demand letter. Mr. Ballato advised the consumer to file for an Arbitration Hearing. On August 31, 2018, Mr. Ballato filed for arbitration with the New York Attorney General’s Office. The Hearing date was scheduled for October 15, 2018. On October 5, 2018, Mr. Ballato received an email from Steven Krane, Esq., stating he was retained from the manufacturer to handle the Hearing and he requested an adjournment to review all documents. The Hearing was adjourned to October 30, 2018. The Arbitrator had to recuse himself from the case and the Hearing was adjourned until November 29, 2018 with a new arbitrator. After numerous conversations, correspondence and emails with Steven Krane, the manufacturer settled the case settled on November 28, 2018, the day before the Hearing was scheduled. The Manufacturer agreed to repurchase the vehicle in the amount of $84,182.78.

Lemon Law Cases