Leaking Jeep leads to suit against auto dealer, maker

David Yates Jun. 25, 2007, 11:58am

Jeep Commander

Charles and Marcia Guillory bought a 2006 Jeep Commander from Greenville Automotive Partners. They claim the vehicle has an "uncontrollable leak" and are suing the dealer and vehicle's maker for the price of the jeep, plus $50,000 in attorney fees.

The Guillorys filed their deceptive trade practices suit with the Jefferson County District Court on June 22. Judge Donald Floyd, 172nd Judicial District, has been assigned to the case.

The suit names Green Greenville Automotive Partners, DaimlerChrysler Corp., Donalson Automotive Holdings and Allen Samuels Chrysler Jeep Inc. as defendants.

According to the plaintiffs' original petition, in December 2006, the Guillorys purchased a 2006 Jeep Commander from Greenville.

"Since that time, plaintiffs have been forced to bring their vehicle in for service on several occasions for an uncontrollable leak, which has caused permanent damages to plaintiffs," the suit said.

"They have also continued to have problems with their transmission and other parts of the vehicle which have been defective. Plaintiffs were forced to incur expenses in order to repair the transmission of the vehicle which purported were not covered under the plaintiffs' warranty on the vehicle," the suit added. "Plaintiffs have suffered permanent damages as a result of the defective product sold to them by defendants."

The suit faults the defendants with product liability, negligence, misrepresentation, breech of express warranties, breach of implied warranty, and violating the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices – Consumer Protection Act.

"Defendants violated the DTPA by knowingly and falsely representing that their products were fit to be used for the purpose for which they were intended, when in fact, they were defective and dangerous," the suit said. "Their representations were made in uniform promotional materials."

The plaintiffs are suing for the value of the vehicle, expenses paid for the costs of repairs to the transmission of the vehicle, depreciation of the value of the vehicle, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, additional damages under the DTPA, and attorney fees.

"Plaintiffs have been required to retain the services of counsel to prosecute this action," the suit said. "The sum of $50,000 is a reasonable sum for the prosecution of this action to judgment. In the event of an appeal to the court of appeals, the further sum of $20,000 would be due as reasonable attorneys' fee."

The Guillorys are represented by attorney Clay Dugas of Clay Dugas & Associates.

Case No. E179-553

More News