Main Menu

Auto Dealer Fraud / Deceptive Trade Practices Alleged And Used Lemon Vehicle

Case Type:   Auto Dealer Fraud / Deceptive Trade Practices Alleged And Used Lemon Vehicle
Case:   Robert Fabrizio v. White Plains Lincoln
Plaintiff Attorney(s):   Anthony T. Ballato, Esq., Massapequa, NY
Defendant Attorney(s):   Erskine Law, Rochester, MI, Attn: Peggy Bowers, Esq.
Facts:   On February 19, 2016, Consumer Robert Fabrizio, purchased a used 2015 Lincoln MKZ from White Plains Lincoln of White Plains, New York. On March 23, 2016, the consumer brought the vehicle in for service alleging that the wrench light came on four (4) times stating to check the transmission shift system. The technician found that the transmission was leaking from the converter. The vehicle was sent out for repair to R&R Transmission. The consumer alleged that the driver’s side massage chair was not working. The technician ordered a new switch for the chair. On April 21, 2016, the consumer brought the vehicle in for service alleging that the car is not shifting properly, bangs into gear. When the vehicle comes to a stop it feels bumpy. It was determined that the rear shocks and mounts needed to be replaced. On July 27, 2016, the vehicle was brought in for service for the rear rotor. The technician discovered a lot of rust on them and the rotors were cut. The CS drive control malfunction message was displayed. When this light was on the vehicle rode harshly. The consumer alleges that he found spider cracks in the paint and that the front door speaker crackles. The consumer alleged that when the air conditioning was on that it made a weird sign, the heated steering wheel wasn’t getting hot and that the windows squeaked when they went up and down. The consumer brought the vehicle back to the massage chair again. The technician removed the seat back and rerouted the harness and installed a tap on the sharp edges. The seat was then reinstalled. The consumer alleges that the battery continues to die. The consumer stated that only half the steering wheel was getting hot. The technician replaced the steering wheel. The consumer brought the vehicle in for service alleging that the trunk left rear side is misaligned. It was determined that the vehicle was in an accident that was not reported to CarFax. The brake disc rotator and pads had to be replaced. The consumer brought the vehicle in for service alleging that once again the massage seat was not working. The technician determined that the driver’s seat was not equipped with a massage chair, despite stated on the window sticker / Monroney Label. The Manufacturer offered the consumer $750.00 for monetary compensation. The consumer also brought the vehicle in for recalls and further service.
Verdict:   After several attempts to fix the vehicle and over thirty days (30) days out of service, the consumer hired Anthony T. Ballato, Esq. of Massapequa, NY to represent him. Mr. Ballato sent a demand letter to the dealer White Plains Lincoln and to Ford the manufacturer demanding they repurchase the consumer’s vehicle pursuant to Notice of Revocation of Acceptance and Demand for Rescission Uniform Commercial Code Article 2; Fraud In The Inducement And Execution Of The Contract; Deceptive Trade Practices General Business Law Articles 22-A And 26, And Section 349; Notice Pursuant to Used Car Lemon Law New York General §Business Law Article 11-A, Sections 198-B, ET Seq.; Claims Under Dealer’s Warranties And Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act; Violations Of DMV Regulations 15 NYCRR §78.13 And Vehicle Traffic Law Section 417 Warranty Of Serviceability And Penal Law; Demand For All Sales, Financing And Service Documents; Undisclosed Accident; and Liability For Voiding Ford Warranty. After several attempts to contact White Plains Lincoln, Mr. Ballato sent the demand letter to the Manufacturer’s Attorney with all correspondence. Peggy Bowers, Esq. (of Ford’s attorney’s) had several telephone conversations and numerous emails regarding the case. On December 29, 2017 the case was settled. The manufacturers agreed to settle for a partial refund of $12,500.00 and let the consumer keep the car.

Lemon Law Cases