Consumer Protection Law
Consumer Protection Law Questions? Ask a Lawyer Now.
Hi! LegalGems here. My goal: To Do My Best To Assist You. Please remember, I can only provide general information,as this is a public forum. Was the car sold As Is, or with a warranty?
30 days or 1000 miles
50/50 but I dont want to pay anything they said the car was running properly and showed me what they put in the car
Ok Perfect. Then since it is not as is, there is also an implied warranty of merchantability. What this warranty guarantees is that the product sold will be operable and able to be used for its customary purpose ie a car is able to be driven. Additionally, if they fail to honor the warranty and are unable to fix the problem, then there is a breach of express warranty also. If it is a material breach (goes to the heart of the contract) then the typical solution is rescission - void the contract and restore the parties to the position they were in prior to the contract i.e. return car, return money. If it is immaterial (not a significant factor), then the buyer is generally paid for the damages suffered.
Also, if the sales person represented that the car was in good/great shape, and it wasn't, there is also a cause of action for misrepresentation.
So no buyers remorse involved it is a breach?
Also, per Nevada's Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act, specifically(NNN) NNN-NNNN(5), misrepresentations would be considered a violation. http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-598.html#NRS598Sec0915
If they don't fix it
Yes, it would be deemed a breach. Was the car purchased at the seller's normal place of business?
Then the right of rescission (buyer's remorse) is not applicable. That is a very common misconception. Please see: http://fightfraud.nv.gov/3DayRightToRecession.htm - if they told you you had a three day right of rescission, then that is further misrepresentation. Of course, parties are free to contract, so if it is in the contract - specifically that there is a right to rescind within a certain time frame- that would be binding.
no rescission was discussed, but the warranty is 50/50 but I think they should pay if a problem is found today
You could very well argue that under the implied warranty of merchantability. And of course misrepresentation if they made verbal representations re: the condition of the car.
ok then thank you for your help
Here is a copy of the implied warranty statute - http://law.onecle.com/nevada/ucc/104.2314.html You are welcome. Hope this resolves quickly.
NRS 104.2314 Implied warranty: Merchantability; usage of trade.
1. Unless excluded or modified (NRS(NNN) NNN-NNNN/a>), a warranty that the goods shall be merchantable is implied in a contract for their sale if the seller is a merchant with respect to goods of that kind. Under this section the serving for value of food or drink to be consumed either on the premises or elsewhere is a sale.
2. Goods to be merchantable must be at least such as:
(a) Pass without objection in the trade under the contract description; and
(b) In the case of fungible goods, are of fair average quality within the description; and
(c) Are fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used; and
(d) Run, within the variations permitted by the agreement, of even kind, quality and quantity within each unit and among all units involved; and
(e) Are adequately contained, packaged and labeled as the agreement may require; and
(f) Conform to the promises or affirmations of fact made on the container or label if any.
3. Unless excluded or modified (NRS(NNN) NNN-NNNN/a>) other implied warranties may arise from course of dealing or usage of trade.
(Added to NRS by 1965, 793)
You should print that out for reference.