Legal Question in Business Law in California

Re: Autmobile Purchase Misrepresentation

There are two possible approaches - the largely non-statutory fraud and misrepresentation or breach of warranty route, and the route you allude to based on some statutory duty to disclose that the car had been in a wreck.

As to the former, there is probably a duty to disclose the wreck damage and repair (if they knew about it) and I'd say re-read any warranty and disclaimer-of-warranty statements in your purchase agreement. Some warranties cannot be disclaimed.

As to statutory duties, I'd guess the Lemon Law (Civil Code sections 1793.23 and 1793.24) would not apply, because it applies to manufacturing defects, not wrecks, but take a look and decide for yourself. If the car were damaged to the point of uneconomical repair, the salvage-title laws of the Vehicle Code may apply; look at VC 544a, 11515 and 24007.

Re: Autmobile Purchase Misrepresentation

Who told you that you could rescind the contract?

IF you could prove the dealer knew, or should have known, of the 'severe' damage, and affirmatively represented that the car had never been damaged, then you could claim in a lawsuit that he had a duty to disclose, and you could seek damages for breach of contract and duty of fair dealing, and fraud, and a claim based upon B&P sect 17200.

If you think you can prove what is required, which would be tough to do unless you have something in writing from them on this issue, feel free to contact me to discuss the facts, issues and costs involved.

Even if you can't prove what is required, an attorney may be able to 'persuade' the dealer to unwind the deal to avoid a lawsuit. Contact me if serious.