What damages should I seek for a small claims case in California? An automotive repair shop sold me a new radiator which failed and left us stranded on an out-of-state camping trip. Contacting the radiator manufacturer, I discovered that the radiator was actually a reconditioned one. I am seeking compensation from the repair shop for the cost of replacing the radiator, the tests conducted to verify the engine was not damaged, and lodging while stranded. Would it be unreasonable to try to also recover the cost of a ruined vacation: our wages, for instance, for lost vacation time and other trip expenses such as food and gas?
-
Welcome to our legal community! Click here or the create new topic button to ask a question and receive answers and comments from our friendly and helpful legal community.
Articles that answer frequent legal questions are in our Law Guide. Important legal news is reported in The Law JournalYou can find a lawyer near you in the Lawyer Directory. If you know that you need to hire an attorney, you can submit a case review from a lawyer.
Consumer Law, Warranties Contract Breach
- Thread Starter Robert
- Start date
- Status
You can claim whatever you want up to the statutory maximum allowed in Small Claims Court (usually $3,000-5,000, 5,000 in CA) but the court may limit the damages for lost wages and cost of the vacation and food. A good guide to the CA Small Claims court system is provided by the State of CA at http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp/smallclaims/ and is somewhat comprehensive. Also take a look at the CA Consumer's Guide to Automotive Repair at http://smogcheck.ca.gov/stdPage.asp?Body=/GenInfo/Publications/Auto_Repair_Guide-Jul_1998.htm#Know Your Rights which may also provide you with some other rights and claims.
It seems that you should be able to recover the direct and consequential damages due to the installation of a reconditioned unit. Regarding the cost of the lost vacation, that is questionable since that might be considered as too far removed from the damage caused. That should not stop you from asking for it properly (at worst you'll be denied). Don't claim the cost of the entire trip, just the portion which was ruined due to the problem (many plaintiff's go too far and say that it ruined the entire trip from a psychological perspective, etc.). After all, you would have had to pay for food and gas and the other necessities regardless of whether you had a problem with the radiator.
Is this a fraud action -- did the seller know or should the seller have known that the radiator was reconditioned but misrepresented it to you as new? That should probably be the focus if the answer to the question is in the affirmative. This makes for a more heinous act by the seller and changes the perception of this case as a request to award several thousand dollars in damages due to a defective radiator that cost only a few hundred dollars. Typically judges may very well wish to use their innate sense of economics to award you damages. It is possible that the seller did not know (but possible he should have known -- from whom did he buy the part?) Note, you can subpoena the seller and acquire the seller's records before trial and the court can help you with that process. You should probably ask the manufacturer what the process is of selling remanufactured components.
It seems that you should be able to recover the direct and consequential damages due to the installation of a reconditioned unit. Regarding the cost of the lost vacation, that is questionable since that might be considered as too far removed from the damage caused. That should not stop you from asking for it properly (at worst you'll be denied). Don't claim the cost of the entire trip, just the portion which was ruined due to the problem (many plaintiff's go too far and say that it ruined the entire trip from a psychological perspective, etc.). After all, you would have had to pay for food and gas and the other necessities regardless of whether you had a problem with the radiator.
Is this a fraud action -- did the seller know or should the seller have known that the radiator was reconditioned but misrepresented it to you as new? That should probably be the focus if the answer to the question is in the affirmative. This makes for a more heinous act by the seller and changes the perception of this case as a request to award several thousand dollars in damages due to a defective radiator that cost only a few hundred dollars. Typically judges may very well wish to use their innate sense of economics to award you damages. It is possible that the seller did not know (but possible he should have known -- from whom did he buy the part?) Note, you can subpoena the seller and acquire the seller's records before trial and the court can help you with that process. You should probably ask the manufacturer what the process is of selling remanufactured components.
- Status
Share this page
