Fulton v. Altanta Luxury Motors Inc.
Oct 03, 2017OUTCOME: Plaintiff verdict $77,000
I got a jury verdict on Wednesday after a three day trial in which a conservative North Atlanta jury awarded treble and punitive damages against a slimy car dealer. The $6999 car sale turned into a $7 ... 2,000 debacle for the defendant dealer. This is the long version The consumer found this car a nine year old Scion Tc with 106k miles online. The car was advertised as very clean inside and out, well maintained, runs and drives great, generally very good condition. The client visits the dealer and test drives this car and several others. She was not allowed the test drive alone. She never asked to take to a mechanic to check out. On her first drive of this car she heard what she thought was a brake noise on the left rear brake. The 2d test drive she rode with the owner. She asked if he would allow his daughter to drive this car. He stated not my daughter, she is too young. But my wife yes. She testified she was shown a clean autocheck report on this car.All kinds of issues with car soon after purchase. She contacts me. I have her arrange to have her car inspected by Mercer Blalock. He advises that there is significant structural damage to the car and it is unsafe to operate. WE file suit alleging violations of Georgia FBPA, Georgia Used Car Dealer Act, Fraud and Revocation of Acceptance.. Defendant answers pro se, is ordered to hire an attorney and hires counsel. I discover from Manheim that the car was announced at auction as structural damage rough condition with thousands of needed repairs. Check engine light on. I find from autocheck that dealer never pulled his own authocheck on this car. He could not have shown her an AutoCheck as claimed with structural damage because he didn’t pull it. We surmise he pulled autocheck at Manheim and used the pre auction autocheck which did not show structural damage. Dealer deposes that he personally inputs info in his web pages. Dealer offer to settle for $5000 and he gets back the car. We offer to settle for $25000 including fees and he gets back the car. We pick a jury. I call defendant for cross. Make him acknowledge the bad facts though he tries hard not to. The jury sees him squirm and gets a bad vibe from him right away. He states that yes he new the car was structurally damages, that his number one job in making PSI is consumer safety, that he puts the info on his web page, and that he thinks well maintained clean inside and out and good condition are truthful about this car. He claims he showed her a autocheck that disclosed the structural damage and he had her sign 4 as is statements. Call client and go through the purchase in minute details. Very clear she told them no wrecks or damage. No she didn’t check VIN number on autocheck shown to her for this car but relied on salesman. She states she rode with the dealer in the car, asked if he would let his daughter drive, he says no she is too young, my wife yes. Call Mercer Blalock who goes through all the photos and shows the damage that he states any dealer would have discovered. Dealer closing he states client needs to take personal responsibility for her mistake. I ask the jury to return verdict in all four choices (FBPA, Used Car Dealer, Fraud, Revocation) for plaintiff and ask for $11,600 for plaintiff. Jury returns verdict for $25,000 punitivesJudge awards all $25000 fees and costs.
