From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Baker v. Ontario Import Cars, Inc.

City Court of Canandaigua
Jan 16, 2013
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 50095 (N.Y. 2013)

Opinion

SC-000643-12/CA

01-16-2013

Kirk Baker and Jennifer Baker, Plaintiffs, v. Ontario Import Cars, Inc., d/b/a Ontario Honda, Defendant.

Plaintiffs: Kirk Baker and Jennifer Baker, pro se Defendant: Ontario Import Cars, Inc., d/b/a Ontario Honda, by Daniel Richards, President


Plaintiffs: Kirk Baker and Jennifer Baker, pro se

Defendant: Ontario Import Cars, Inc., d/b/a Ontario Honda, by Daniel Richards, President

Stephen D. Aronson, J.

Is a car dealer responsible for fixing a rust perforation that happened within the manufacturer's five-year warranty period? Under the circumstances of this case, where there was only a manufacturer's warranty at the time of sale, the new-car dealer is not liable for the repairs.

In this small claims case, the plaintiffs (hereinafter buyers) seek $739.40 from the defendant (hereinafter dealer). A hearing was held on December 20, 2012. The buyers contend that they purchased a new 2007 Honda Civic from the dealer in October 2007. The buyers contend that in January 2012 they took the car to the dealer because they had experienced a rust problem that they contend is covered under their new-car warranty. The buyers produced a warranty booklet showing that they have a five-year warranty for rust perforation: "Honda will repair or replace any original body panel that rusts completely through from the inside out (perforated by corrosion)." The buyers contend that the dealer's service manager said they should be covered. The dealer does not contest the fact that the rust is covered under the manufacturer's warranty. The dealer contends that the warranty is actually with American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (hereinafter Honda); that it is up to Honda to determine whether there is coverage under the warranty; and that the buyers met with the district service representative, who told the buyers that there was no coverage but that Honda would pay for 50% of the cost of repairs. The buyers contend that they had the rust repaired by a body shop in Wolcott, New York, for $739.40, which is about $1,000 less than what Honda would have charged. The buyers contend that the dealer should pay them for the repairs under the five-year warranty, on the ground that the dealer and Honda are "collaborating supplier partners"; and on the ground that a representative from Honda told them that the dealer should honor the warranty if their service manager said there was coverage. The dealer denies that his service manager would ever make such a representation.

In every small claims case, the court is bound to perform substantial justice to the parties in accordance with principles of substantive law (Uniform City Court Act § 1804). An exhaustive search of research databases has unearthed no New York authority mentioning "collaborating supplier partners." Under New York law, in the absence of any proof that the dealer contracted in any capacity for itself, a dealer (disclosed agent) is not liable for the contractual representations of Honda (principal) (Katims v. Daimler Chrysler Corp., 9 Misc 3d 503 [NY Dist Ct 2005]). Here, there was no evidence offered by the buyers showing that the dealer assumed responsibility for the new-car rust perforation warranty of Honda. The fact that the dealer's service manager may have said that the rust "should be covered" does not unequivocally bind the dealer. The warranty booklet produced by the buyers sets forth the warranty responsibilities. It clearly distinguishes between the responsibilities of the Honda dealer and those of Honda itself. The dealer's warranty disclaimer is clearly spelled out on the back of the purchase and sale contract.

Under these circumstances, the claim against the dealer must be dismissed. The warranty booklet suggests that a customer may write the Better Business Bureau Auto Line to seek a resolution of a dispute with the vehicle manufacturer. This is the only remedy available to the buyers under the circumstances of this case.

The outcome of this case is disturbing. The credible evidence presented by the buyers demonstrates that they had a five-year rust perforation warranty. The credible evidence further demonstrates that Honda failed to honor the five-year warranty protection. Under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 465 every franchiser (e.g. Honda) is required to properly fulfill any warranty agreement and is required to compensate dealers for warranty parts and labor. Apparently, rust perforation claims are treated differently than some other claims because the dealer does not do body work. Hence, reimbursement to the dealer does not take place as it might, for example, with certain mechanical work that is under warranty. Although there is no legal recourse against the dealer, there most certainly should be some legal recourse for the plaintiffs and for persons similarly situated to them. However, there is no recourse against the manufacturer in this court since Honda (a California corporation) is not subject to our small claim jurisdiction (Uniform City Court Act § 1801).

Judgment for the defendant dismissing the claim.

ENTERED: Canandaigua, New York

DATED: January 16, 2013

/s/ Stephen D. Aronson

Hon. Stephen D. Aronson

City Court Judge

"An appeal from this judgment must be taken no later than the earliest of the following dates: (i) 30 days after receipt in court of a copy of this judgment by the appealing party, (ii) 30 days after personal delivery of a copy of the judgment by another party to the action to the appealing party (or by the appealing party to another party), or (iii) 35 days after the mailing of a copy of the judgment to the appealing party by the clerk of the court or by another party to the action."

Exhibits will be held for 30 days, at which time they will be destroyed if not picked up.


Summaries of

Baker v. Ontario Import Cars, Inc.

City Court of Canandaigua
Jan 16, 2013
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 50095 (N.Y. 2013)
Case details for

Baker v. Ontario Import Cars, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Kirk Baker and Jennifer Baker, Plaintiffs, v. Ontario Import Cars, Inc.…

Court:City Court of Canandaigua

Date published: Jan 16, 2013

Citations

2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 50095 (N.Y. 2013)