Main Menu


Man claimed that used Bentley didn’t function properly.

Settlement:   Non-monetary
Case Type:   Lemon Law
Case:   Thomas LaRusso v. Carriage House Motor Cars
Venue:   Matter not filed, NY
Date:   Friday, June 13, 2003
Plaintiff Attorney(s):   Anthony T. Ballato; Massapequa, NY, for LaRusso
Defendant Attorney(s):   K. May; Sheldon May & Associates P.C.; Rockville Centre, NY, for Carriage House Motor Cars
Facts:   On Aug. 25. 2001, plaintiff, Thomas LaRusso purchased a used 1993 Bentley automobile from Carriage House Motor Cars in Greenwich, Conn. The vehicle was covered by a one-year warranty. On Nov. 5, 2001, LaRusso noted that the car was exhibiting poor engine performance. He contended that it was not idling steadily, that it was vibrating at speeds of 70 mph or greater, and that it was shaking excessively. He brought the car to Carriage House Motor Cars and to Manhattan Motorcars Inc. in New York. The latter establishment inspected the car and gave LaRusso an estimate for repairs, which included a fuel-head refitting; cleaning and adjustment of the car's throttle plate; and removal , refitting, cleaning and resealing of the car's fuel injectors. Two days later, LaRusso presented the car and the repair estimate to Carriage House Motor Cars. The dealership rotated and balanced the car's tires, tightened its air-induction hoses, centered its steering wheel, installed secondary door seals, and performed other maintenance tasks. On April 17, 2002, LaRusso returned the vehicle to Carriage House Motor Cars. He contended that the car was not idling steadily, that it was vibrating, and that it was shaking excessively. The dealership inspected the car, but found nothing wrong. No repairs were made. On Aug. 31, 2002, LaRusso returned the vehicle to Carriage House Motor Cars. He again complained that the vehicle was not idling properly, that it was shaking excessively, that its engine-trouble light was Illuminated, and that it was making pronounced front-end noise when braking on turns. The dealership inspected the car, but made no repairs. Carriage House Motor Cars rebuffed LaRusso's efforts to compel a refund of the vehicle's purchase price. LaRusso served a written complaint on Carriage House Motor Cars. He claimed that the dealership had violated the used-car lemon law, General Business Law article 11- A, § 198-b et. seq. He noted that the vehicle had exceeded the law's threshold that dictates that a vehicle may not undergo three repair attempts and/or be out of service for 15 days during the first 90 days or 4,000 miles following its purchase.
Injury:   LaRusso sought recovery of the car's $60.000 purchase price. Alternatively, he sought full credit of the purchase price for use toward the purchase of another vehicle.
Verdict:   The parties reached a settlement agreement, which will permit LaRusso to exchange the Bentley for a replacement vehicle of the same value. LaRusso will choose the replacement vehicle from Carriage House Motor Cars' stock.

Lemon Law Cases