Public Fairness AssessmentTM
Initiated by: M.D.

Claimant vs. Testarossa Motors, League City, Texas

(Car sold with faulty transmission)
Public verdict: Dealer should refund $5,266 to the customer and cover his cost of transportation while the car was out of service.
114 jurors voted to form this verdict and were awarded 2,280 RHU. Check your balance to see if you qualified. Log in
Parties has been invited to settle under the public verdict or make a counteroffer
Case description

Claimant's account. Customer/claimant says he purchased from Testarossa Motors of League City, Texas, a 2005 Volkswagen Beetle for $7,145, advertised as having a properly functioning engine and transmission. The morning after taking delivery, the transmission failed while driving at 40+ mph, damaging the lower gears. The customer says AAMCO inspected the transmission and told him it was defective, and had been for some time. The customer complained but Testarossa Motors did not offer a solution. The customer had the transmission repaired at a cost of $5,266, and incurred additional expense for transportation while the car was in the shop. Customer believes that Testarossa Motors knew when they sold him the car, or should have known, that the transmission was faulty but failed to disclose the defect; he therefore believes he’s entitled to full compensation.

Respondent's rebuttal. Testarossa Motors says the claimant is a not a customer. They ask if it's logical for someone to spend $5,266 on a used transmission for a $6,100 car. They say they help all their customers, within reason. Customers drive the vehicle before purchase and are encouraged to have a third party check it before deciding to buy. They say the claimant has been "racist and demeaning" in communicating with them, and because of threats they called the police. They say they will not settle with the claimant despite messages from PeopleClaim suggesting they try to resolve the claim prior to public posting. They also say that Texas does not have a "lemon law" for used car sales.

352 total voters
How the public voted
114 votes
"Dealer should refund $5,266 to the customer and cover his cost of transportation while the car was out of service."
90 votes
"Dealer should purchase the car from the customer at the original price of $7,145 and cover his cost of transportation while the car was out of service."
62 votes
"Dealer should split the cost of repair with customer, i.e. refund $2,633."
47 votes
"Dealer should fully reimburse the customer with an 18-month payout schedule of equal payments."
38 votes
"No award / compensation to customer."
See who voted: 4 jury categories.View more

What happens next

Disputing parties will be invited to resolve the matter based on this public verdict. If the parties have agreed beforehand to use the results to arbitrate the case the verdict will be binding. If not, the results are nonbinding but can be used as input to guide further negotiation. Depending on the case, results may be distributed to other interested parties such as regulators and media.