A vehicle owner's attempt to drastically increase the amount of an award under California's "lemon law" was denied earlier this month by a Los Angeles Superior Court judge, but only following a bench trial.
In his claim against FCA USA involving his 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee, plaintiff Joshua Strom attempted to add together lease payments and the vehicle's purchase price to calculate the overall total of a damages award under the Song-Beverly Warranty Act.
Superior Court Judge Mark Mooney rejected Strom's argument, which had he been successful, would have netted $102,000.
Strom was represented by Strategic Legal Practices attorney Payam Shahian and attorney Hallen Rosner.
According to background in Mooney's Jan. 6 ruling, the parties agreed the vehicle qualified for repurchase or replacement under Song-Beverly. Under the act, if a vehicle cannot be repaired after a “reasonable” number of attempts, then it must be replaced or bought back by the manufacturer for the price paid minus mileage offset.
Mooney awarded Strom lease payments of $21,061 and a small registration fee, with a mileage offset of $8,351 for a total $13,033. Under the statute, claimants are entitled to a civil penalty that is equal to double actual damages. As a result, Strom was awarded a civil penalty of $26,067, for a total of $39,100.
The bench trial that took place on Dec. 10, 2020, centered on a further claim for the vehicle's purchase price of $21,211.
However, Mooney held there was no basis to that claim and found the automaker to be the prevailing party.
"Considering the litigation objectives, the court determines defendants to be the prevailing party with regards to the bench trial," Mooney wrote.
"The court apportions and awards defendants those costs related to the bench trial only. All other cost and fees are awarded to plaintiff."
As detailed in the judgment, Strom bought the truck in 2015 under a lease agreement with an option to purchase. His "lemon" action was filed July 18, 2018.
"On August 20, 2018, defendants served a statutory offer to compromise. This offer was accepted by plaintiffs on September 17, 2018," according to the judgment.
"Subsequent to this acceptance, a disagreement arose between the parties as to the amount of damages to which plaintiffs were entitled."
The plaintiff’s last lease payment was made on Oct. 1, 2018. Plaintiff then exercised the purchase option on Nov. 23, 2018, for $21,211.
Strom argued the amount of actual damages should include the amount the purchase price, inflating damages to $102,000.
Mooney further held that restitution is for the amount “equal to the actual price paid or payable.”
"It does not provide for additional damages for obligations plaintiffs voluntarily assumed," Mooney wrote.
Strom "could have simply returned the car at the end of the lease period and they still would have been entitled to full restitution in the amounts they had actually paid."
Attorney Judd Gilefsky of Lewis Brisbois represented FCA.