Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2014 21:09:05 GMT -6
Oh..sometimes justice can be sweet to watch. Judges can also have a sense of humor! Who knew?
Now that is a real bad decision, as it turns out. Wisconsin is downright serious about their lemon laws and they add zeros on the end to emphasize the point!
Source (emphasis added)
I guess that will teach one company to be stingy over $53. Some folks just don't tolerate it on principle alone. Indeed!
James Michael Leasing Company bought a new Kenworth semi-truck from Paccar Inc. in 2007, and drove it for approximately 3,000 miles before concluding that the truck was a lemon.
It sought a refund from Paccar under Wisconsin's Lemon Law, and the manufacturer agreed to refund the purchase price of $135,847 plus interest, but would not refund the $53 title fee.
It sought a refund from Paccar under Wisconsin's Lemon Law, and the manufacturer agreed to refund the purchase price of $135,847 plus interest, but would not refund the $53 title fee.
Now that is a real bad decision, as it turns out. Wisconsin is downright serious about their lemon laws and they add zeros on the end to emphasize the point!
The three-judge panel noted that Wisconsin's Lemon law is particularly pro-consumer, which made Paccar's decision to withhold payment a particularly bad call, culminating in a judgment almost quadruple the value of the truck.
Paccar's only options were only to pay either the amount requested by JM Leasing, or the amount it believed it owed within 30 days."Playing chicken with the consumer regarding the amount of the refund and the return of the vehicle is not a viable alternative to those narrow options. As the Wisconsin Supreme Court has stated, the manufacturer 'must weigh very carefully when 'to hold 'em and when to fold 'em,'' Dow wrote, "and PACCAR made a bad bet here."
Paccar's only options were only to pay either the amount requested by JM Leasing, or the amount it believed it owed within 30 days."Playing chicken with the consumer regarding the amount of the refund and the return of the vehicle is not a viable alternative to those narrow options. As the Wisconsin Supreme Court has stated, the manufacturer 'must weigh very carefully when 'to hold 'em and when to fold 'em,'' Dow wrote, "and PACCAR made a bad bet here."
I guess that will teach one company to be stingy over $53. Some folks just don't tolerate it on principle alone. Indeed!
