Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardsFRS
UGH, why did it cost 17k for a block and some exhaust work. Why did they have to replace the exhaust, WTF did this guy do to the car before. Sounds like an idiot owned this car before you did. Did you see a carfax on this car? Never touch a used car without a carfx.
Extreme heat bent that thing, hydro lock, does that, LOCKS the engine and that happens when you start pumping water instead of fuel thru it. Im going with what the guy said, this idiot drove that car under extreme heat conditions. It was running hot and the fool drove anyway.
To bad you are the end user. Hopefully someone does something for you, because right now you are getting the shaft
Also not sure about lemon law there, but it only applies to new cars here and the same owner has to take the car in three times with failure to resolve before they can lemon it.
|
Out of boredom I checked it out and in Ca used cars are covered by Lemon Law:
How the Used Car Lemon Law Protects You if You Received a Dealer Warranty
If the dealer provided a warranty with your used car, then you are protected in two significant ways. First, during the term of the warranty you are protected in much the same way as the new car lemon law for the parts and components covered by the warranty. Dealer warranties usually cover only certain parts and components, but if one of those components fails causing a
substantial defect then the dealer must fix it within a
reasonable number of attempts or offer you a lemon law buyback if it is unable to do so.
Looks like the "reasonable" number of repair attempts is normally 2.
http://thelemonlawcalifornia.com/lem...ar-is-a-lemon/
Now, all of that is irrelevant in that the dealer (at this point) will not even attempt to repair and is denying warranty coverage. From everything I could find a denial of warranty coverage is not going to get the car covered by Lemon Law since it distinctly requires attempts to be made. Sort of a Catch 22 in the OP's case.
If neither the factory or extended warranty holders want to cover the repairs then the OP needs to lawyer up. It is not clear which party bears the burden of proof (dealer proving there was an outside influence and owner proving there was not) when it comes to warranty denial and cases seem to have been decided both ways. It would appear from what we know here that the OP may have a good case but then we have not heard the other side of the story.