2

We leased a car that was supposed to have an auto starter. I have written correspondence of this and I believe it is in the paperwork for the lease as well. The car does not. The dealer is unwilling to take any action.

If this were a purchase I'd get a quote for installing an auto-starter and sue for that amount. However, on a lease the car technically belongs to the leasing company, so I can't just make modifications to it the way I could if I owned it. I would ask the court to compel installation, but small claims courts can only award monetary damages if my understanding is correct.

How would we value the damages of this misrepresentation in an objective way that would hold up in court?

Improve this question

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2

The value of the car the lease is based on may be inaccurate if it included options not installed in the vehicle.

The sticker price of a car is usually a base price, plus options. It should be simple to objectively determine a revised sticker price without the auto start option. If your monthly payments are based on this sticker price you may be able to negotiate either installation of the option, or a lowering of your payment.

Read the terms of the lease to understand the terms you agreed to.

P.S. Lawsuits are expensive and court costs could eat up any small savings if you were sue for breach of contract. A better, (cheaper) solution if they are difficult and it's important enough feature to you would be to terminate the lease in accordance with the agreement turn the car in, and go find another one.

Improve this answer
2
  • 1
    How are there no damages? OP seems to have clearly gotten less than he bargained for.
    – bdb484
    Commented Jan 10 at 1:55
  • @bdb484, I put it in quotes and added per se, but you are right. I usually reserved the word "damages" to things of a more serious nature than the minor inconvenience of not having auto start. Removed.
    – Michael Hall
    Commented Jan 10 at 4:30
-2

How would we value the damages of this misrepresentation in an objective way that would hold up in court?

Lease another car elsewhere, make sure it does have the feature, cancel the lease in question, balance the books (including the time/hassle to change the lease), sue for the extra amount you had to pay to lease the right car.

Improve this answer
2
  • @Jen Such evidence would be challengeable. Given that the OP wants the right car, not just the damages, it would make perfect sense to go through the process — the evidence will be then bullet-proof.
    – Greendrake
    Commented Jan 10 at 7:28
  • @Jen This answer is not about how to get the right car, but how to value the damages. Given that the OP actually wants the right car and the lessor wouldn't budge, it makes sense to kill 2 birds with one stone: obtain the most accurate valuation of the damages by getting the right car. No expectation of specific performance is implied, just the monetary damages. What mitigation can possibly be here if the OP just needs the right car and the lessor wouldn't budge? And, yeah, I absolutely reserve the right to post intuitive answers. You are in no position to demand I do not.
    – Greendrake
    Commented Jan 10 at 13:00

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .