We recently blogged about a man trying to get his money back on a Forest River RV because of safety issues - "Should a consumer get a refund for a lemon?" The Michigan Supreme Court sided with the consumer.
In RV Daily Report, there is a report of a woman who purchased a used RV for almost $135,000. She said it was so drenched in pet urine that even $17,000 in repairs and janitorial work couldn't salvage it. The woman, Lou Hayes Woodruff, signed an arbitration clause when she purchased the RV and the dealer, Bretz RV & Marine, wants to hold her to it. Woodruff sued for the right to have a jury trial, where she'd be more likely to get a favorable settlement.
At the Supreme Court level, the debate is not whether she gets her money back, but a point of law. In this case, her lawyers claimed it was a contract where she had no ability to negotiate the terms. The lawyers for the RV dealer contended that she had willingly signed a memorandum of agreement agreeing to arbitration and should be held to that.
The Montana Supreme Court ruled in favor of Woodruff. This means she has the right to a jury trial to determine whether or not she can get her money back for this urine-soaked RV. You can read more about the reasoning at the Missoulian.
We'll have to see what the jury decides - IF it goes to court. Perhaps the dealer will be willing to settle before then. I believe most people would be sympathetic to Woodruff in this case. If I were a jury member, I'd certainly vote to give her her purchase price back plus fees spent trying to get the odor out. Do you agree? Jaimie Hall Bruzenak
I am sure if I was on the jury with what I have read so far the dealer would have to pay. hopefully they will step up to the plate and settle this out of court.
Posted by: Mike Erps | October 17, 2009 at 03:03 PM
I agree. The RV sounds unusable as is. The dealer apparently did not let the buyer know it had a urine smell. That wasn't evident until it warmed up. Phew!
Jaimie
Posted by: Jaimie Hall Bruzenak | October 17, 2009 at 03:14 PM