Main Menu

Jeep Grand Cherokee

Case Type:   Lemon Law New Car Purchase
Case:   Lalino, Stephen J. v. FCA US LLC (JEEP)
Date:   December 23, 2016
Plaintiff Attorney(s):   Anthony T. Ballato, Esq., Massapequa, NY
Defendant Attorney(s):   Rose Waldorf PLLC Attn: Michael J. Gregg, Esq.
Facts:   On March 31, 2014, claimant Stephen Lalino purchased a new 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee from Huntington Jeep Chrysler Inc. d/b/a Huntington Jeep Chrysler Dodge. Claimant alleges that when accelerating the vehicle hesitates. Claimant brought the vehicle to Huntington Jeep Chrysler Inc. d/b/a Huntington Jeep Chrysler Dodge for service. While claimant was driving the vehicle the hesitation began again. Claimant took the vehicle back for service. The claimant turned on the vehicle and the check engine light was on. While driving the vehicle the claimant alleges that the malfunction indicator light was on. The claimant brought the vehicle back because the check engine light was on and it was low on Def fluid.
Injury:   The technician scanned for codes and found reflash for PCM, TCM available for drivability enhancement. The PCMA and TCM were flashed to the latest level. The technician flashed the BCM and HVAC module. A multipoint inspection was performed and a new Nox sensor was ordered. The order for the Nox sensor was cancelled and a software update per TSB 18-018-14 REV. C. They reset the SCR AD Aptation. The technician performed the P64 recall for the steering col control module and also performed an RRT 14-087, an update to the HVAC module. The technician performed more updates and found the code P20EE SCR Catalytic converter efficiency was below threshold. A new Catalytic Converter was ordered. The check engine light states that the vehicle will shut down in 40 miles. Fluid was installed. The technician found codes P20EE-00 and P2BA9-00 and had to replace the defective SCR cat assembly and Deficiency system per star case S1425000006. They also performed a recall to update the radio software. A multipoint inspection was performed. The oil was changed because the oil viscosity code caused inhibit regeneration to DPF to fill up.
Verdict:   After numerous (9) attempts to fix the vehicle and over 15 days out of service, the claimant hired Anthony Ballato, Esq. to represent him. Mr. Ballato sent a demand letter to FCA US LLC demanding they repurchase the claimant’s vehicle. Mr. Ballato then filed for lemon law arbitration. After conversations and emails with the manufacturer’s representative, Kerry Shanley, Case Manager and attorney Michael J. Gregg, in Albany, New York, the manufacturer settled just prior to the arbitration hearing and after voluminous disclosure. The manufacturer repurchased the vehicle in the full amount of $46,137.50 including dealer fees and the $250.00 arbitration filing fee.

Lemon Law Cases