Our clients, Joe and Sabine D., are a couple from Thousand Oaks, California who purchased a 2012 Chevrolet Camaro Convertible from Santa Paula Chevrolet, in July of 2012, looking forward to years of top-down enjoyment. Unfortunately, their hopes were dashed when the vehicle developed a series of squealing noises from the engine, strange smells, recalls, interior issues, electrical problems, and other warranty defects. Our attorneys were able to settle this case for approximately three times what our clients had purchased the car. In addition, as part of the settlement, General Motors agreed to pay all of our clients’ attorney fees and costs.
Marlene and Dino D. v. FCA US, LLC
Los Angeles County
Our clients, Marlene and Dino D., are a teacher and firefighter from Ventura, California, who purchased a defective and unfixable 2011 Dodge Durango from Motor Village LA. Their vehicle developed a series of strange electrical problems, including tail light issues, problems with the camera, check engine lights, and other such issues. Frighteningly, at some point the vehicle began to stall out on them in addition to developing strange transmission issues which could not be duplicated by the dealership. We litigated their case vigorously and were able to negotiate a substantial settlement equal to roughly three times their Lemon Law buy back from Chrysler. In addition, as part of the settlement, Chrysler agreed to pay all of our clients’ attorney fees and costs, which were later awarded by the Court.
Chris and Regina G. v. FCA US, LLC
Our clients Chris and Regina G. are a young couple that reside in Palm Desert, California. At the time of their case, Chris was a student at the police academy while his wife was a student at Cal State University San Bernardino. Chris and Regina purchased a 2011 Dodge Nitro used from their local Toyota dealership. Like other used cars, they were covered by California’s Lemon Law because the Nitro was still covered by Chrysler’s powertrain warranty. The Nitro developed a series of engine issues, for which our clients took the vehicle four different times to Crystal Chrysler Jeep Dodge, in Cathedral City, CA. In spite of the numerous repair presentations and the many days that their vehicle spent out of service, Dodge stubbornly refused to voluntarily repurchase their vehicle. When our attorneys stepped in, they were able to negotiate a substantial settlement with Dodge equal to over two and a half times what our clients paid for the vehicle and payment of al of our clients’ attorney fees and costs by Chrysler.
Clayborne H. v. FCA US, LLC
Our client, Clayborne H., is a retired contractor residing in El Dorado Hills, California. He has purchased a 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee for approximately $40,000 in November of 2011. Unfortunately, his vehicle developed a series of transmission issues, recalls, and electrical problems. Frighteningly, at some point his vehicle actually caught on fire because of a widespread issue with the the electrical connection to the sun visor in 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokees. Our attorneys were able to settle this client’s case for a substantial settlement equal to over three times his Lemon Law buyback. Also, the court in Sacramento later ordered that Chrysler pay all of Clayborne’s attorney fees and costs on his behalf.
Danielle H. v. Ford Motor Company
Santa Barbara County
Our client, Danielle H. resides in Santa Barbara, California and loves her horses. Danielle purchased a 2013 Ford F-350 for its towing capacity to help her tow her horse trailer and travel throughout the county. Unfortunately, the vehicle developed a series of unfixable and inexplicable stalls, which stranded Danielle and her horses many times on the road. Throughout her many presentations, Ford Motor Company was unable to fix the vehicle and refused to voluntarily repurchase it from her. However, when we stepped in, we were able to negotiate a substantial settlement equal to over two and a half times what she paid for the truck. Of course, as part of the deal, Ford Motor Company also paid all of her attorney fees and costs.
Mark L. v. Ford Motor Company
Our client, Mark L., was a firefighter in Atwater, California with Cal-Fire that purchased a 2006 Ford F-350 from Century Ford. Unfortunately, Mark’s truck suffered a series of all too common Super Duty turbocharger problems, which resulted in numerous check engine lights, rough driving, and poor performance. While he was forced to get rid of the truck early, Ford Motor Company refused to do right by its customer and voluntarily repurchase the truck. When we stepped into the litigation, we were able to negotiate a substantial settlement for Mark, which was equal to over seven times his Lemon Law buy back. Also, as part of Mark’s settlement, Ford Motor Company agreed that it would pay all of Mark’s attorney fees and costs.
Randall L. v. Ford Motor Company
Our client, Randall L., runs a plaster business in Norwalk, California and purchased a 2007 new Ford F-350 flatbed for use in his business. Unfortunately for Randy, like many other Ford super duty trucks from that era, his truck developed a series of very serious and unfixable issues with the truck’s engine management system. Randy tried to resolve his issues with Ford direct and sought a buyback of his truck through the Better Business Bureau. However, Ford refused to do right by its customer until we stepped in and were able to settle his case for over seven times a Lemon Law buy back. Ford Motor company was also ordered to pay all of Randy’s attorney fees and costs as part of the settlement.
Andrew C. v. Hyundai Motor America
Los Angeles County
Our client, Andrew C., leased a Hyundai Genesis as a reward to himself after years of hard work. Unfortunately, Andrew’s vehicle developed a constant and frustrating oil consumption problem wherein the vehicle would consume oil in between oil changes. Hyundai repeatedly told Andrew there was nothing wrong with his car, but he was sorely disappointed that he could not enjoy the vehicle in the way it was intended because of the constant oil consumption. We represented Andrew Choi at trial in Los Angeles Superior Court and were able to obtain a significant verdict in his favor, and the jury awarded him even more than what he had paid for the vehicle. Also, the Court found later that Hyundai was responsible for paying Andrew’s attorney’s fees and costs.
Soon C. v. FCA US LLC
Los Angeles County
Our client, Soon C., was the owner of a 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee whose vehicle was plagued by serious electrical malfunctions. Soon’s Grand Cherokee included FCA’s infamous Totally Integrated Power Module (“TIPM”), which caused a series of vehicle no-starts, spontaneous stalling, and a host of other electrical issues. Prior to commencing a lawsuit, Soon attempted to resolve his case directly with FCA but was unable to do so because they wouldn’t give his case any serious consideration. We represented Soon in Los Angeles County Superior Court and were able to resolve his case for nearly three times what he paid for the vehicle. Of course, we were also able to obtain payment of all our attorney’s fees and costs from Chrysler.
Olga C. v. FCA US LLC
Los Angeles County
Our client, Olga C., is a resident of Palmdale, California and purchased a 2014 Fiat 500 L from Fiat Los Angeles for approximately $43,000. Unfortunately, after only 13,000 miles, the vehicle developed a series of serious and troubling transmission and engine issues. Olga attempted to resolve her problems directly with Fiat but was unable to do so because they refused to follow the law, do right by their customer, and repurchase her vehicle. When we became involved in her matter, we were able to settle the case for a significant sum, which included repayment of all of her payments, the payment of a significant civil penalty by Fiat to Olga, and of course, FCA paid all of Olga’s lawyer bills and costs as well.
Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Website developed in accordance with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0.
If you encounter any issues while using this site, please contact us: 833.536.6634