9 Radiators in 6 Years

[jazzandjerz]

What is the name of your state? CO

I bought a 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee in April of 2003. A few months later I had to have a new radiator put in. Less than a year after that, we were hit, and had to have another new one put in. Today, a warning light came on, and I was looking in the manual to find out what it meant, and saw a 2 page note that someone had written towards the back of the manual (I am guessing it was the previous owner) saying that this car was a lemon, it had required 7 different radiators by that time (now up to 9), and that Chrysler was doing nothing to help. I believe that now it needs another radiator.

Do I have any course of action with either the dealer that sold us the car, or the dealership? I am guessing not, since it is not a new car. I am just wondering if the dealership did something wrong if they knew the history of the car and didn't disclose it to us.

Alternatively, what duty do I have to disclose these problems if we decide to get rid of the car?

[averad]

Do you always believe what you read on a stickier note? If the stickie note had told you the car was haunted what would you have done?

No, you have no recourse as I bet you bought the car As-Is

When you had a independent mechanic look over the car before you bought it, did he/she notice anything?

[jazzandjerz]

Wow! That was pretty rude, and I would say, uncalled for. Of course I don't believe everything I read, but it seems that the evidence I have now (getting ready to have to replace the radiator for the third time in 3 years) would corroborate the note, now doesn't it???

When the mechanic looked over the car, they didn't notice anything, as it had been repaired before they sold it.

My main questions are:

1. Does it matter that Chrysler has most likely known all along there was a problem?
2. Does it matter if the dealership knew about the problem, and didn't disclose it, even when we asked them if there had been problems with the car?

[averad]

Originally Posted by jazzandjerz

it seems that the evidence I have now (getting ready to have to replace the radiator for the third time in 3 years) would corroborate the note, now doesn't it???

Originally Posted by jazzandjerz

Less than a year after that, we were hit, and had to have another new one put in

I didn't know that being hit was considered a defect of the car.

Originally Posted by jazzandjerz

When the mechanic looked over the car, they didn't notice anything, as it had been repaired before they sold it.

Was this the dealerships mechanic? If this was not the dealerships mechanic was he/she certified on your type/make of car?

My main questions are:

1. Does it matter that Chrysler has most likely known all along there was a problem?
2. Does it matter if the dealership knew about the problem, and didn't disclose it, even when we asked them if there had been problems with the car?

Did you buy the car as-is?

Here is a quote about As-Is from a senior member here:

Originally Posted by You Are Guilty

Which part of the "as-is" wasn't clear? The "as" or the "is"? Either way, is it safe to assume you didn't conduct your own inspection of the vehicle before purchase? (Because if you did, and the mechanic failed to pick up on the problems, that would be the only, albeit remote, person you could go after).

[url]http://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=320927[/url]


What exactly is breaking on the radiators?
Where they all new and from the dealership?
What if it was an after market part defect?
Who did the repairs?
What if the repair shop broke something?
What if you broke it?

Now the big question:
What can you prove?

I figured you might try searching google for "CO Lemon Law" but, that hasnt happened in 3 years, so why would you now?

Let me do it for you
[url]http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=CO+lemon+law&btnG=Google+Search[/url]

First result (Colorado Attorney general John W. Suthers Colorado Department of Law)
[url]www.ago.state.co.us/FAQ/lemonlaw_FAQ.cfm[/url]

Colorado's Lemon Law, C.R.S. 42-12-101, covers only new, self-propelled vehicles

And a PDF version of ARTICLE 10 MOTOR VEHICLE WARRANTIES
[url]http://www.ago.state.co.us/CONSPROT/consumerlaws/LemonLaw.pdf[/url]

Statute of limitations.
Any action brought to enforce the provisions of this article shall be commenced within six
months following the expiration date of any warranty term or within one year following the
date of the original delivery of a motor vehicle to a consumer, whichever is the earlier date;

Originally Posted by jazzandjerz

Wow! That was pretty rude, and I would say, uncalled for.

Rude, Direct, Wrong or Right my responses are my opinion of the situation and your opinion isn't going to change that.

Thanks for the $0.02 I think I gave you a $1.50 back.

Google is kinda like teaching a person to fish:
Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you have fed him for a lifetime

[jazzandjerz]

Wow...not only is my opinion that you are rude, but also an a$$!

As far as being hit not being a defect of the car...I didn't write all the details in the original post, but the radiator we had put in the car a few months after we bought it was actually having problems right before we got hit and it got replaced again. At the time, we viewed it (getting hit) as a blessing in disguise, as opposed as a sign of deeper trouble, since it got replaced again anyway.

Also, for your information, the very first thing I did was google CO lemon law, even though it didn't give me a whole lot of new info, as I already knew that lemon laws here only cover new cars, and we are way outside of any warranty.

Thus, the reason I came here was to hopefully get answers to my questions that go beyond that narrow law. Believe me, if this was as simple as just googling something, I would have stuck with that, as opposed to coming on here (a place that is created just for this purpose...to ask questions, and get free advice) and trying to explain my situation to a pompous, rude, self absorbed person who doesn't really care to actually look at the question the person is asking.

So, let me try and rephrase the question in a broader sense, so we don't get hung up on stickie notes and haunted cars that have been hit...

Q. A dealership takes a car in on a trade, and the owner tells the dealer that the car has had a habitual problem, and the dealer sees records to back that up. A customer comes to the dealership to buy that car and asks the dealer, point blank, if the car has had any habitual problems that they know about. The dealer says the car hasn't. Has that dealership commited any type of fraud? Do they have a duty to disclose that if asked? If the customer then wants to re-sell the car, do they have a duty to disclose?

[averad]

You still have not answered my questions.

Did you buy the car as-is?

Was this the dealerships mechanic or your own mechanic that inspected this car before purchase?

Originally Posted by jazzandjerz

Q. A dealership takes a car in on a trade, and the owner tells the dealer that the car has had a habitual problem, and the dealer sees records to back that up. A customer comes to the dealership to buy that car and asks the dealer, point blank, if the car has had any habitual problems that they know about. The dealer says the car hasn't. Has that dealership committed any type of fraud? Do they have a duty to disclose that if asked?

You can't prove any of that, unless you count the sticky note.

Originally Posted by jazzandjerz

If the customer then wants to re-sell the car, do they have a duty to disclose?

What are they going to do use the lemon law?

You would sell the car AS-IS and it would be the buyers responsibility to get an inspection. (Like you should have or did I can_t get an answer out of you)

[jazzandjerz]

The car was as-is. Does this mean that it is okay for the dealership to lie about a known problem? This is a serious question...I am not being sarcastic.

My own mechanic, certified on my make and model.

[averad]

How can you prove it was a known problem?
How much money and time are you willing to put into proving they deceived you?

Below is a Senior Members responce to AS-IS:

Originally Posted by You Are Guilty

Which part of the "as-is" wasn't clear? The "as" or the "is"? Either way, is it safe to assume you didn't conduct your own inspection of the vehicle before purchase? (Because if you did, and the mechanic failed to pick up on the problems, that would be the only, albeit remote, person you could go after).

[url]http://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=320927[/url]

You would have to sue your mechanic.

AS-IS
Words in a contract intended to signify that no guarantees, whatsoever, are given regarding the subject and that it is being purchased exactly as it is found.

[moburkes]

Q. A dealership takes a car in on a trade, and the owner tells the dealer that the car has had a habitual problem, and the dealer sees records to back that up. A customer comes to the dealership to buy that car and asks the dealer, point blank, if the car has had any habitual problems that they know about. The dealer says the car hasn't. Has that dealership commited any type of fraud? Do they have a duty to disclose that if asked? If the customer then wants to re-sell the car, do they have a duty to disclose?

Out of curiosity, what makes you think that someone who is trading in a car is going to TELL the dealership that the car they are trading in SUCKS? And what records did the dealership SEE to back this up?

Now, are you able to PROVE that the dealership did not disclose something that they knew about to you?

And what part of "as-is" don't you understand? Seriously?

[Zephyr]

and has the vehicle been maintained as per the manufacture instructions.....granted even if it hasn't been, there should not have been9 radiator, but if it hasn't been, it likely voids any recourse you MAY have had