A court has ordered a car importer to rescind a contract of sale of a vehicle and refund a buyer who complained about defects so many times that the garage receptionist got to know the vehicle number by heart.
The case was instituted by Doreen Baldacchino against Auto Sales Ltd, from which she bought a brand new Renault Clio in January 2016 for €17,200, paid on delivery.
Within a short time, Baldacchio complained about the radio not working, seats moving, a fault in the steering, unusual noise and other issues which, although fixed, kept cropping up.
Baldacchino ended up abandoning the car at the importer’s garage and filed the case after legal and official letters did not produce a solution.
She demanded that the purchase contract be rescinded and a refund of the purchase money, with compensation for damages.
The company responded that the faults were insignificant. Parts had been replaced and other issues only merited changes in settings. They did not impact the use of the car and did not merit repealing the contract. It also denied responsibility for damages.
Mr Justice Grazio Mercieca, in handing down judgment, observed that the court-appointed technical expert had tested the vehicle without the complainant being present, despite being told by the court to advise the parties.
He found no defects in the vehicle. The complainant’s lawyer subsequently attacked his credibility and impartiality but did not seek a fresh appointment of a technical expert.
The court said that while the parties disagreed on the seriousness of the defects, it was morally convinced that there were defects. There was no indication that the complainant was out of her mind or heard noises when there were none. The woman, a widow with an 11-year-old son, had bought a brand new car made by a reputable firm and paid for it on delivery.
She had no motive to undermine the importer or come up with any excuse not to pay for the car, or to pay less.
She bought the car to have a comfortable method of transport for herself and her son. She had bought a new car, not a second-had one. Whoever bought a new car did not expect to keep coming and going to a mechanic but expected the car to be available all the time, without waste of time, the court said.
Therefore, despite some conflicting evidence, it did not result that there were no defects. What had resulted what that the complainant went to the garage for a considerable number of times over a period of seven months because the car did not function as one expected a brand new one to.
Although the technical expert did not find fault when he examined the car, what applied was the state of the car when it was bought and not afterwards. That the car was still in a useable state was not enough, since the owner could not use it when she had to take it to the garage.
The court therefore rescinded the contract and ordered a refund of the €17,200 purchase price and the costs of the official letters but said the damages suffered by the complainant had not been specified by her.