Purchased a vehicle at a Nevada dealership. The title was not transferred appropriately to the lienholder, vehicle was sold with a "safety inspection" and they failed to disclose the fact that the truck didn't not come with necessary safety equipment (jack, lug wrench, nor the tools to drop the spare tire from under the vehicle), they also failed to disclose the fact that the transfer case under the vehicle was damaged, cracked, and leaking fluid and the transmission was dented from being dropped. They sold us into a warranty that will not honor the repairs to supposedly "covered" parts because the damage was pre-existing and hidden to us by a skid plate.
Dealerships are notorious for this sort of behavior. I am assuming that this was a used vehicle. Personally in order to give you a more complete answer, I would have to read your sale and warranty contract, but based on the limited facts available to me, I would argue that the warranty would have to cover those damaged parts (provided they are covered parts) because there is no proof that there was pre-existing damage to them. If the Dealership is saying that they KNEW they sold you the automobile in a damaged condition, which they didn't disclose to you, that would not play particularly well in any court in this great nation that I know of. I would recommend that you call an attorney to discuss this. At the very least a letter from an attorney would be a fairly inexpensive step, and 9 times out of 10 in a situation like this, it can get the job done.
You could have grounds to seek reimbursement if you can establish they misrepresented the condition of the car at the time of sale, either through the documents you received or other evidence. Legal action could be ultimately suing them if they don't concede to fix the car (or take it back and refund your money if that would be cheaper).
Your greatest difficulty in presenting a claim here will be proving that you purchased the vehicle with all the alleged defects. Their defense will be that they performed their standard "116-point inspection" that would surely have revealed any such flaws ... and it passed with flying colors. Thus, they will argue, you MUST HAVE caused all the damages after you drove it off the lot. Do you see the difficulty of proving they knew of the damages and your difficulty in proving you did not cause them? You are in a very unenviable position here. These things occur occasionally, but no dealership wants negative publicity so it may be your best course of action to try to negotiate reasonably with them to avoid ending up on the evening news "consumer watchdog" report. You need to recognize they will probably be found more credible than a consumer in a court of law, and since neither side can prove the other side caused the damages, any concessions you can get will be to your advantage. Try to approach them with a suggestion of compromise that keeps them out of the public eye but gets you something less than the whole of what you are seeking.
Mr. Williams is licensed to practice law in the state of Nevada. The foregoing response does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney/client relationship. The response is, essentially, educational only, and is intended to provide general legal information about the matters presented by the question. Often, the question does not include significant and important facts, dates and other information that, if known, could significantly affect the appropriateness of the response and make it unsuitable. Mr. Williams strongly advises consulting directly with an attorney licensed in your state in order to ensure proper advice and counsel is received.
Years licensed, work experience, educationLegal community recognition
Peer endorsements, associations, awardsLegal thought leadership
Publications, speaking engagementsDiscipline