Facts

On Dec. 13, 2005, plaintiff John Barr leased a new 2006 Mazda 6 for three years. He immediately began experiencing problems with alignment and returned three days later with complaints of the vehicle pulling to the right. The dealer attempted to fix the vehicle, but was unable to do so and it returned three days later with the same complaint.

The dealer's repair attempts were again allegedly unsuccessful and, after waiting seven months for parts, the vehicle's lower control arms were replaced to correct the problem. The plaintiff then complained of a problem of with the brakes (vibration) and the rotors were replaced. The brake complaints continued for two years and the vehicle continued to experience repeated problems with brake vibration. The dealer had been repairing the vehicle under warranty, but in May 2008, another complaint of brake vibration resulted in a denial of further warranty coverage.

The plaintiff subsequently parked the vehicle citing safety concerns with the brakes and it was not driven until it was surrendered at the end of lease in December 2008.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that the vehicle was delivered with a defective suspension that Mazda knew about. The plaintiff contended that it was not until July 2006 that Mazda came out with improved control arms that were able to correct the situation. However, plaintiff contended that the control arms only compensated for an inherent design defect and that the alignment problem was not fixed.

The plaintiff also contended that vehicle suffered from a defect in the brake system that caused the brakes to overheat and the rotors to warp. This resulted in significant noise and vibration while braking, and caused extended braking distances.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Mazda claimed that it was able to successfully repair the problems with the alignment after three repair attempts. Mazda contended that the service history showed that there were no further complaints about the alignment after July 2006.

Mazda denied that there were any defects with the brake system. They contended that the repeated problems with brake vibration were caused by driver input, which caused the brakes to heat up and the rotors to warp.

Settlement Discussions

At trial, plaintiff requested a full repurchase of the vehicle amounting to $12,171 and a civil penalty in the amount of $24,242. Plaintiff was to have the court establish the amount of attorneys fees owed, which was claimed to be in excess of $100,000. Mazda served a C.C.P. section 998 offer to compromise in the amount of $7,001.

Result

Defense verdict.

Deliberation

45 minutes

Poll

12-0