3-year/36,000-mile Bumper-to-Bumper: INSERT DATE (START) INSERT DATE (END)Ĭorrosion Limited Warranty Đ MI đ00,000 MI LIST ALL WARRANTIES AND SPECIAL COVERAGES, IF ANY, FOR THIS VIN, WITH START DATE(S) AND EXPIRATION DATE(S):Į.g. This argument will be hard to win as there are no facts showing how GM should have known that this specific vehicle qualified for repurchase.ĭue to the above facts and the amount of the negative equity and mileage offset that is not included in the 998 offer, I am recommending that GM reject Plaintiff’s 998 offer. Plaintiff will argue that since these “defects” are known issues in these vehicles, GM was on notice that this vehicle should be repurchased. They never called and requested a repurchase from CAC, TAC was never contacted, nor was the subject vehicle out of commission for 30 days or more leading the dealership to contact GM. Plaintiff will have a hard time arguing for civil penalties. Plaintiff will argue that this engine could not be fixed at all as it took 7 tries and it still was having the same issue. GM is required to repurchase a vehicle if it has not, within a reasonable number of attempts, fixed a non-conformity that substantially impaired the use, value or safety of the vehicle. A California jury is likely to conclude that the 7 engine repair attempts were an unreasonable number of repair attempts for the same issues with this vehicle and that these non-conformities rise to the level of a substantial impairment. This vehicle qualifies for repurchase pursuant to Song-Beverly under Express Warranty due to the 7 engine repair attempts performed on the vehicle during the warranty period. All 7 presentments for the engine were due to oil/coolant leakage which are known issues in these vehicles. The subject vehicle has been presented to a GM dealership on fourteen occasions for service to the engine 7x, 3x brakes, 2x battery, 2x recall, 1x radio, and 1x electrical. Total Settlement Authority - Must Match Settlement Calculation Not unless we are unable to reach a resolution MTD / MSJ identify all potential legal issues for decision and evidence necessary for development.ĩ98 or Offer of Judgment - if yes, what amount Pre-suit Request result (amount if approved - if not approved, why denied?)Įvidence of abuse, modification or accident (if yes describe)ĭate and manner of communication (email, letter, telephone) of presuit offer or denial Pre-suit decision (CEC decison approved or denied) Pre-suit Repurchase Request Date (if none date ) (9 court days prior to hearing) Complete: (have not received from PLTF as of 6/10) Complete: : GM's Opposition due to Pltf's MTC Depo of GM's PMK Complete: : GM's opposition is due to P's MTC re GM PMK DEPO PLTF Response Due DEF RFA: Complete: PLTF Response Due DEF RFP: Complete: PLTF Response Due DEF ROG: Complete: GM’s Defense in ≤ 250 Words (i.e., how will we defend this case if it were not settled)?ĭEF Response Due PLT RFA: Complete: DEF Response Due PLT RFP: Complete: DEF Response Due PLT SROG: Complete: