NHTSA Complaint #10070034 — 1994 PLYMOUTH VOYAGER

I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PEELING PAINT PROBLEM FOR TWO YEARS. I DISCUSSED THIS WITH THE DEALERSHIP SEVERAL TIMES - THEY OFFERED TO GIVE ME A FREE ESTIMATE FOR A NEW PAINT JOB! I HAVE A CHRYSLER CASE #9230347. THE ZONE REP HAS LOOKED AT THE VAN AND OFFERED TO ASSIST WITH REPAINTING. I WAS TOLD TO GET AN ESTIMATE FROM MAACO WHICH WAS $1400 TO REPAINT THE ROOF AND HOOD. HE OFFERED TO PAY $400. I DECIDED TO TAKE THEM TO SMALL CLAIMS COURT AND HAD ANOTHER ESTIMATE TO REPAINT THE ENTIRE VAN FOR $3040.79. WE WENT FOR OUR PRETRIAL CONFERENCE ON JUNE 10, 2003. I WAS TOLD I NEED TO PROVE THAT THIS DEALERSHIP KNEW IN 1994 THAT THE PAINT WOULD FAIL... I CAN'T FIND A SERVICE BULLETIN. BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU ONLY KEEPS RECORDS FOR 3 YRS. WE WENT TO MEDIATION - ME, THE LAWYER FROM THE DEALERSHIP, AND THE ZONE REP FOR CHRYSLER (BILL SEDICK). THE LAWYER WAS A STEREOTYPICAL SLEAZE... HE SAID THE STATUE OF LIMITATIONS WAS 6 YRS AND THIS CASE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO COURT. HE TRIED TO GET THE JUDGE TO THROW IT OUT BEFORE WE EVEN WENT TO MEDIATION. THEN HE THREATENED TO MAKE ME PAY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN LEGAL FEES... I DISMISSED THE CASE AGAINST THE DEALERSHIP BECAUSE I LEARNED SEVERAL MONTHS AGO THAT I SHOULDN'T HAVE GONE THAT ROUTE ANYWAY. BUT I HOPE THAT SLEAZY LAWYER DOESN'T THINK IT WAS BECAUSE OF HIM... I TOLD HIM HE WASN'T TELLING THE TRUTH - THAT THERE WAS NO STATUE OF LIMITATIONS UNDER THE MAGNUSON MOSS FED. LAW... HE WAS SUCH A CREEP - HE EVEN MADE THE COURT CLERK MAD BECAUSE HE SAID THEIR DISMISSAL FORM WAS BOGUS. THEN THE CHRYSLER GUY OFFERED $1,500.00 FOR A PAINT JOB. HE EVEN APOLOGIZED FOR THE LAWYER GUY. I'M SUPPOSED TO GO TO A PAINT SHOP FOR AN ESTIMATE AND MR. SEDICK SAID HE'D WORK WITH THEM AND ME TO GET THE VAN REPAINTED. HE WAS PRETTY NICE ACTUALLY. HE SAID HE DIDN'T WANT A DISSATISFIED CUSTOMER AND HE HOPED I WOULD DO BUSINESS WITH THEM AGAIN - I SAID PROBABLY NOT...ANYWAY THANKS FOR YOUR HELP.