This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Consumer Law
Song-Beverly Act
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act

Raymont Skaggs v. FCA US LLC, and Does 1 through 10, inclusive

Published: Mar. 29, 2024 | Result Date: Nov. 21, 2023 | Filing Date: Jun. 9, 2022 |

Case number: 2:22-cv-03943-WLH-RAO Settlement –  $126,630

Judge

Wesley L. Hsu

Court

CD CA


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Nino Sanaia
(Strategic Legal Practices APC)

Rabiya F. Tirmizi
(Strategic Legal Practices APC)

Elizabeth A. LaRocque
(Strategic Legal Practices APC)


Defendant

James P. Mayo
(Gordon & Rees LLP)

Spencer P. Hugret
(Gordon & Rees LLP)

Reshma A. Bajaj
(Gordon & Rees LLP)


Facts

Around December 27, 2017, Raymont Skaggs bought a 2018 Jeep Cherokee. After several attempts at servicing the vehicle for purported issues and after the request for a buyback and/or restitution failed, Skaggs filed suit in USDC Central against FCA US LLC, the manufacturer, for violations of several consumer protection laws.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that after experiencing various problems with the vehicle, including electrical, engine, stalling, and transmission problems, he brought in the vehicle to be serviced several times to an authorized repair facility. However, despite the attempt to fix the problems with the vehicle, the problems were never resolved and the vehicle continued to experience problems despite being told that the vehicle was fixed. Plaintiff asserted that the vehicle was manufactured with defendant's defective 9HP transmission and Power Control Module which could result in stalling, shutting off, and/or loss of power, thus effectively affecting ability to control the vehicle's speed, acceleration, and decleration.

DEFENDANT’S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied all material contentions, asserting that it issued a safety recall to resolve any purported issues.

Result

The case settled for $126,630.


#142483

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390