Demand for Arbitration, The Car Has Prior Damage (part II)

Demand for Arbitration, the Car has Prior Damage:

Subsequent to purchasing the vehicle, the plaintiff learned that the vehicle had been in a prior accident. The prior accident was demonstrated by the pulling of a CARFAX and an AutoCheck. Specifically, on or about XXX, the vehicle was in an accident in Connecticut. This was contrary to the representations as stated by the dealership and their representatives.

When the plaintiff learned this, he did some research, had it taken to three body shops, confirmed the damage and approached the defendant, their agents, servants and/or employees with regard to an attempt to have them repurchase the vehicle. They flatly denied that the plaintiff would have the vehicle repurchased, stated that the plaintiff had signed an agreement to waive his rights to go to court.

The plaintiff’s research through the body shops indicates that the vehicle has undergone, sustained and otherwise subject to frame damage as a result of the prior automobile accident.
The defendants committed acts of fraud and consumer fraud as a result of the aforementioned transaction.

They intentionally misrepresented the fact that the vehicle had not been in an accident when in fact it had been in an accident. In addition, the defendants, their agents, servants and/or employees were aware that the vehicle had been in an accident since they put it through in extensive inspection checklist.

Their failure to advise the plaintiff and misrepresenting the condition of the vehicle constitute an affirmative and intentional misrepresentation of fact, upon which the plaintiff will rely to his detriment which resulted in damages. The plaintiff attempted to mitigate and/or reduce this damage and/or rescind the transaction; however, the defendants, their agents, servants and/or employees refused to do so.

The plaintiff has sustained an ascertainable loss actionable under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and makes claims only under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and under common law fraud and does not make any claims for breach of warranty, which are specifically excluded from the jurisdiction of arbitration.