Facts

Plaintiff George Stanley filed a lawsuit against Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A. Inc. in relation to his purchase of a new 2017 Toyota Tacoma from Temecula Valley Toyota on Sept. 16, 2016.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended he began experiencing problems with uneven and excessive outside edge wear on the right front tire of his new Tacoma which he described as choppiness, cupping and feathering. He contended that the vehicle was taken to Toyota on four separate occasions and Toyota performed alignments and replaced the tires to no avail. Plaintiff contended that his Tacoma suffered from a defect causing abnormal and excessive wear of the right front tire. Plaintiff claimed that the right front tire would be worn down below the legal requirement in just a couple of thousand more miles. Plaintiff further claimed that the subject defect substantially impaired the use, value and safety of the vehicle. He claimed that the truck was driven less than it would have been had the defect not existed. He also claimed that he would not be able to sell the vehicle without taking a significant loss.

Plaintiff's expert claimed that the subject vehicle suffered from a condition which caused the camber angle in the alignment to change while the vehicle was being driven, causing the front right outside tire wear.

Plaintiff asserted causes of action for breach of express and implied warranties under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Toyota contended that there was no defect in the subject vehicle. Defense expert opined that the right front tire wear was the result of the conditions under which the vehicle was being driven. Defendant contended that the alignment angles were always found to be within specification and there was no evidence of any movement in the suspension, causing the camber angle to change during driving. Moreover, defendant contended that plaintiff intentionally failed to rotate the tires on the vehicle according to the maintenance schedule, which caused uneven tire wear and resulted in reduced longevity of the tires.

Settlement Discussions

Plaintiff made a repurchase demand for restitution in the amount of $44,000 and also demanded $53,000 for attorney fees. Defendant made an offer of $5,000, inclusive of fees and costs, with plaintiff to keep the vehicle.

Damages

Plaintiff sought a repurchase of the vehicle, restitution, incidental and consequential damages, a civil penalty, attorney fees and costs.

Result

The jury returned a defense verdict and found that Toyota did not breach its express or implied warranty obligations under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.

Other Information

Plaintiff George Stanley is a 68-year-old retired Riverside Sheriff's Deputy.

Poll

9-3 (express warranty), 12-0 (implied warranty)

Length

Seven days