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.

Construction Law
Song-Beverly Act
Lemon Law

John Hounslow, Frances Hounslow v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Stead Motors

Published: May 25, 2004 | Result Date: Aug. 29, 2003 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: C0202546 Verdict –  $149,439

Judge

Peter L. Spinetta

Court

Contra Costa Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Susan J. Bates


Defendant

Jon D. Universal
(Universal & Shannon LLP)


Experts

Plaintiff

Daniel Calef
(technical)

Defendant

David Cushing
(technical)

Facts

In September 2000, plaintiffs John and Frances Hounslow bought a 2000 Mercedes-Benz SL 600 for $143,998 from defendant Stead Motors. The fuel tank would not fill completely. There were fuel fumes in the cabin. Oil leaked. Intermittently, the electrical system in the car prevented the center console from opening. The "check engine" light activated without cause. Beginning in November 2001, at 8,900 miles, the first repair order was written evidencing the problems. The dealer replaced the fuel purge system and the fuel tank. That same month, another repair order showed the fuel gauge did not register accurately and that there was a fuel smell in the car. The dealer replaced the fuel sending unit due to a leaking o-ring. In March 2002, at 9,885 miles, a repair order showed the check engine light kept activating and the fuel gauge did not read accurately. The dealer replaced a fuel purge valve. In April, a repair showed the fuel gauge did not read accurately, so the dealer replaced the fuel level sensor. In May, the plaintiffs requested via letter that defendant Mercedes-Benz take the car back. Mercedes-Benz sent a field representative, who claimed problems with the fuel system could not be verified. The field representative declined the plaintiffs' request for a repurchase. Later repair orders were written for complaints regarding filling the gas tank, oil leak and with opening the center console. The plaintiffs stopped driving the car because of the fumes in the car.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiffs made a demand of repurchase of the car and reimbursement of costs. No offer was made by defendants.

Damages

The plaintiffs sought to recover the purchase price of the car, plus interest.

Result

Before trial, the plaintiffs dismissed Stead Motors. The jury found against Mercedes-Benz and awarded plaintiffs $149,439. The plaintiffs returned the car. They filed a post-trial motion for attorney fees, and were awarded in the amount of $100,574.

Deliberation

one day

Poll

10-2

Length

seven days


#95806

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

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