Preview
1 Michael D. Mortenson, State Bar No. 247758
mmortenson@mortensontaggart.com
2 Craig A. Taggart, State Bar No. 239168
ctaggart@mortensontaggart.com
3 Hannah L. Miller, State Bar No. 333843
hmiller@mortensontaggart.com
4 MORTENSON TAGGART ADAMS LLP
300 Spectrum Center Dr., Suite 1200
5 Irvine, CA 92618
Telephone: (949) 774-2224
6 Facsimile: (949) 774-2545
7 Attorneys for Defendants
FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND
8 JIM BURKE FORD
9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10 FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN
11
KARINA VARGAS, GONZALO VARGAS, Case No. BCV-22-101682-JEB
12 and LIVIER VARGAS Hon. J. Eric Bradshaw
Dept. J
13 Plaintiffs,
DECLARATION OF HANNAH L.
14 vs. MILLER IN SUPPORT OF
DEFENDANTS FORD MOTOR
15 FORD MOTOR COMPANY; JIM BURKE COMPANY’S AND JIM BURKE FORD’S
FORD; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND
16 DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST
Defendants. AMENDED COMPLAINT
17
[Filed concurrently with Notice of Demurrer
18 and Demurrer to Plaintiffs’ First Amended
Complaint and (Proposed) Order]
19
20 DATE: January 6, 2023
TIME: 8:30 a.m.
21 DEPT.: J
22 Complaint Filed: July 7, 2022
23
24
25
26
27
28
-1-
DECLARATION OF HANNAH L. MILLER
1 DECLARATION OF HANNAH L. MILLER
2 I, Hannah L. Miller, declare and state as follows:
3 1. I am an attorney authorized to practice law in the State of California and admitted
4 to practice before this Court. I am an attorney at Mortenson Taggart Adams LLP, and I am an
5 attorney for Defendants Ford Motor Company (“Ford”) and Jim Burke Ford (collectively,
6 “Defendants”) in this case. I make this declaration based on my personal knowledge, the record
7 in this action, and the matters of public record, and ifcalled upon as a witness, I could and
8 would testify competently as to the matters discussed herein.
9 2. On July 7, 2022, Plaintiffs Karina Vargas, Gonzalo Vargas, and Livier Vargas
10 (“Plaintiffs”) filed their Complaint. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of
11 the Complaint.
12 3. On September 29, 2022, Defendants filed their demurrer to Plaintiffs’ initial
13 Complaint. On October 19, 2022, Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Complaint. Attached
14 hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the First Amended Complaint.
15 4. On November 17, 2022, I emailed Plaintiffs’ counsel attempting to initiate
16 contact with Plaintiffs’ counsel to schedule a meet and confer to discuss Defendants’ anticipated
17 demurrer to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint. Plaintiff’s counsel never responded.
18 Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the email, I sent to Plaintiffs’ counsel
19 attempting to meet and confer.
20 I declare under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the United States of America
21 and the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
22 Executed on November 22, 2022, at Irvine, California.
23
____________________
24 Hannah L. Miller
25
26
27
28
-0-
DECLARATION OF HANNAH L. MILLER PURSUANT TO C.C.P. § 430.41(A)(2)
Exhibit A
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
7/7/2022 3:13 PM
Kern County Superior Court
Tionna Dolin(SBN 299010) By Alejandra Velazquez, Deputy
1
Email: tdolinAslpattorney.com
2 Mark Gibson(SBN 258216)
Email: mgibson@slpattorney.com
3
(emailservices@slpattorney.com)
4 Strategic Legal Practices, APC
1888 Century Park East, 19th Floor
5 Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone:(310)929-4900
6 Facsimile: (310)943-3838
7
Attorneys for Plaintiffs KARINA VARGAS,GONZALO VARGAS,and LIVIER VARGAS
8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
COUNTY OF KERN
10
11
KARINA VARGAS,GONZALO VARGAS, Case No.:BCV-22-101682
12
and LIVIER VARGAS,
13 Hon.
Plaintiffs, Dept.
14
VS.
15 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF
FORD MOTOR COMPANY;JIM BURKE STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS
16 FORD; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,
17
Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Pt
1 Plaintiffs allege as follows:
2 PARTIES
3 1. As used in this Complaint, the word "Plaintiffs" shall refer to Plaintiffs
4 KARINA VARGAS,GONZALO VARGAS,and LIVIER VARGAS.
5 2. Plaintiffs are residents of Kern County, California.
6 3. As used in this Complaint, the word "Defendants" shall refer to all Defendants
7 named in this Complaint.
8 4. Defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY ("FMC") is a corporation organized
9 and in existence under the laws of the State of Delaware and registered with the California
10 Department of Corporations to conduct business in California. Defendant FMC's principal
11 place of business is in the State of Michigan. At all times relevant herein, Defendant was
12 engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing, constructing, assembling, marketing,
13 distributing, and selling automobiles and other motor vehicles and motor vehicle components
14 in Kern County.
15 5. Defendant JIM BURKE FORD ("JBF") is an unknown business entity
16 organized and in existence under the laws of the State of California. At all times relevant
17 herein, Defendant JBF was engaged in the business of selling automobiles and automobile
18 components, and servicing and repairing automobiles in Kern County.
19 6. Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true names and capacities of the Defendants sued
20 under the fictitious names DOES 1 to 10. They are sued pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure
21 section 474. When Plaintiffs become aware of the true names and capacities of the Defendants
22 sued as DOES 1 to 10, Plaintiffs will amend this Complaint to state their true names and
23 capacities.
24 TOLLING OF THE STATUTES OF LIMITATION
25 7. To the extent there are any statutes of limitation applicable to Plaintiffs' claims-
26 including, without limitation, the express warranty, implied warranty, and negligent repair —
27 the running of the limitation periods have been tolled by, inter alia, the following doctrines or
28
COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
1 rules: equitable tolling, the discovery rule, the fraudulent concealment rules, equitable
2 estoppel, the repair rule, and/or class action tolling (e.g., the American Pipe rule).
3 8. Plaintiffs discovered Defendants' wrongful conduct alleged herein on or about
4 October 2021 when they requested a buyback and/or restitution of the Subject Vehicle from
5 FMC,as the Vehicle continued to exhibit symptoms of defects following FMC's unsuccessful
6 repair attempts to repair them. However, FMC failed to provide restitution pursuant to the
7 Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act.
8 9. By filing this Complaint, Plaintiffs hereby revoke acceptance ofthe Subject
9 Vehicle yet again.
10 FACTUAL BACKGROUND
C.) 11 10. On or about October 24, 2016, Plaintiffs entered into a warranty contract with
12 Defendant FMC regarding a 2017 Ford Fusion vehicle identification number
44
13 3FA6P0G74HR215858 (hereafter "Vehicle"), which was manufactured and or distributed by
g 14 Defendant FMC.
15 1 1. The warranty contract contained various warranties, including but not limited to
)- 16 the bumper-bumper warranty, powertrain warranty, emission warranty, etc. A true and correct
44 .% 17 copy of the warranty contract is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The terms of the express
g
18 warranty are described in Exhibit A and are incorporated herein.
cn
19 12. Pursuant to the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (the "Act") Civil Code
20 sections 1790 et seq. the Subject Vehicle constitutes "consumer goods" used primarily for
21 family or household purposes, and Plaintiff has used the vehicle primarily for those purposes.
22 Plaintiff is a "buyer" of consumer goods under the Act. Defendant FMC is a "manufacturer"
23 and/or "distributor" under the Act.
24 13. Plaintiffs justifiably revoke acceptance of the Subject Vehicle under Civil Code,
25 section 1794, et seq. by filing this Complaint and/or did so prior to filing the instant Complaint.
26 14. These causes of action arise out of the warranty obligations of FMC in
27 connection with a motor vehicle for which FMC issued a written warranty.
28
2
COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
1 15. Defects and nonconformities to warranty manifested themselves within the
2 applicable express warranty period, including but not limited to, the electrical system; the
3 engine; among other defects and non-conformities.
4 16. Said defects/nonconformities substantially impair the use, value, or safety of
5 the Vehicle.
6 1 7. Under the Song-Beverly Act, Defendant FMC had an affirmative duty to
7 promptly offer to repurchase or replace the Subject Vehicle at the time it failed to conform the
8 Subject Vehicle to the terms of the express warranty after a reasonable number of repair
9 attempts.2
10 18. Defendant FMC has failed to either promptly replace the Subject Vehicle or to
11 promptly make restitution in accordance with the Song-Beverly Act.
12 19. Under the Act, Plaintiffs are entitled to reimbursement of the price paid for the
13 vehicle less that amount directly attributable to use by the Plaintiffs prior to the first
14 presentation to an authorized repair facility for a nonconformity.
15 20. Plaintiffs are entitled to replacement or reimbursement pursuant to Civil Code,
16 section 1794, et seq. Plaintiffs are entitled to rescission of the contract pursuant to Civil Code,
17 section 1794, et seq. and Commercial Code, section 2711.
18 21. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover any "cover" damages under Commercial Code,
19 sections 2711, 2712, and Civil Code, section 1794, et seq.
20
21
2 "A manufacturer's duty to repurchase a vehicle does not depend on a consumer's
22 request, but instead arises as soon as the manufacturer fails to comply with the warranty
within a reasonable time.(Krotin v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc. (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th
23 294, 301-302, 45 Cal.Rptr.2d 10.) Chrysler performed the bridge operation on Santana's
vehicle in August 2014 with 30,262 miles on the odometer—within the three-year, 36,000
24 mile warranty. The internal e-mails demonstrating Chrysler's awareness of the safety risks
inherent in the bridge operation were sent in September 2013, and thus Chrysler was well
25 aware of the problem when it performed the bridge operation on Santana's vehicle. Thus,
Chrysler's duty to repurchase or provide restitution arose prior to the expiration of the three-
26 year, 36,000 mile warranty. Moreover, although we do not have the actual five-year, 100,000
mile power train warranty in our record, Santana's expert testified that the no-start/stalling
27 issues Santana experienced were within the scope of the power train warranty, which was still
active when Santana requested repurchase in approximately January 2016, at 44,467 miles.
28 Thus the premise of Chrysler's argument—that Santana's request for repurchase was outside
the relevant warranty—is not only irrelevant, but wrong." Santana v. FCA US, LLC, 56 Cal.
App. 5th 334, 270 Cal. Rptr. 3d 335 (2020).
3
COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
1 22. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover all incidental and consequential damages
2 pursuant to 1794 et seq. and Commercial Code, sections 2711, 2712, and 2713 et seq.
3 23. Plaintiffs suffered damages in a sum to be proven at trial in an amount that is
4 not less than $25,001.00.
5 24. Plaintiffs are entitled to all incidental, consequential, and general damages
6 resulting from Defendants' failure to comply with its obligations under the Song-Beverly Act.
7 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
8 BY PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT FMC
9 VIOLATION OF SUBDIVISION(D)OF CIVIL CODE SECTION 1793.2
10 25. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in the paragraphs
11 set forth above.
12 26. Defendant FMC and its representatives in this state have been unable to service
13 or repair the Vehicle to conform to the applicable express warranties after a reasonable
14 number of opportunities. Despite this fact, Defendant FMC failed to promptly replace the
15 Vehicle or make restitution to Plaintiffs as required by Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision
16 (d)and Civil Code section 1793.1, subdivision (a)(2).
17 27. Plaintiffs have been damaged by Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its
18 obligations pursuant to Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision (d)and Civil Code section
19 1793.1, subdivision (a)(2), and therefore brings this cause of action pursuant to Civil Code
20 section 1794.
21 28. Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its obligations under Civil Code
22 section 1793.2, subdivision (d) was willful, in that Defendant FMC and its representative were
23 aware that they were unable to service or repair the Vehicle to conform to the applicable
24 express warranties after a reasonable number of repair attempts, yet Defendant FMC failed
25 and refused to promptly replace the Vehicle or make restitution. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are
26 entitled to a civil penalty of two times Plaintiffs' actual damages pursuant to Civil Code
27 section 1794, subdivision (c).
28
4
COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
1 29. Defendant FMC does not maintain a qualified third-party dispute resolution
2 process which substantially complies with Civil Code section 1793.22. Accordingly,
3 Plaintiffs are entitled to a civil penalty of two times Plaintiffs' actual damages pursuant to
4 Civil Code section 1794, subdivision (e).
5 30. Plaintiffs seek civil penalties pursuant to section 1794, subdivisions (c), and (e)
6 in the alternative and does not seek to cumulate civil penalties, as provided in Civil Code
7 section 1794, subdivision (1).
8 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
9 BY PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT FMC
10 VIOLATION OF SUBDIVISION(B)OF CIVIL CODE SECTION 1793.2
11 31. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in the paragraphs
12 set forth above.
13 32. Although Plaintiffs presented the Vehicle to Defendant FMC's representative in
14 this state, Defendant FMC and its representative failed to commence the service or repairs
15 within a reasonable time and failed to service or repair the Vehicle so as to conform to the
16 applicable warranties within 30 days, in violation of Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision
17 (b). Plaintiffs did not extend the time for completion of repairs beyond the 30-day
18 requirement.
19 33. Plaintiffs have been damaged by Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its
20 obligations pursuant to Civil Code section 1793.2(b), and therefore brings this Cause of
21 Action pursuant to Civil Code section 1794.
22 34. Plaintiffs have rightfully rejected and/or justifiably revoked acceptance of the
23 Vehicle, and has exercised a right to cancel the purchase. By serving this Complaint,
24 Plaintiffs do so again. Accordingly, Plaintiffs seek the remedies provided in California Civil
25 Code section 1794(b)(1), including the entire contract price. In the alternative, Plaintiffs seek
26 the remedies set forth in California Civil Code section 1794(b)(2), including the diminution in
27 value of the Vehicle resulting from its defects. Plaintiffs believe that, at the present time, the
28 Vehicle's value is de minimis.
5
COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
1 35. Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its obligations under Civil Code
2 section 1793.2(b) was willful, in that Defendant FMC and its representative were aware that
3 they were obligated to service or repair the Vehicle to conform to the applicable express
4 warranties within 30 days, yet they failed to do so. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to a
5 civil penalty of two times Plaintiffs' actual damages pursuant to Civil Code section 1794(c).
6 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
7 BY PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT FMC
8 VIOLATION OF SUBDIVISION (A)(3) OF CIVIL CODE SECTION 1793.2
9 36. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs set
10 forth above.
11 37. In violation of Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision (a)(3), Defendant FMC
12 failed to make available to its authorized service and repair facilities sufficient service
13 literature and replacement parts to effect repairs during the express warranty period. Plaintiffs
14 have been damaged by Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its obligations pursuant to
15 Civil Code section 1793.2(a)(3), and therefore brings this Cause of Action pursuant to Civil
16 Code section 1794.
17 38. Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its obligations under Civil Code
18 section 1793.2, subdivision (a)(3) was wilful, in that Defendant FMC knew of its obligation to
19 provide literature and replacement parts sufficient to allow its repair facilities to effect repairs
20 during the warranty period, yet Defendant FMC failed to take any action to correct its failure
21 to comply with the law. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to a civil penalty of two times
22 Plaintiffs' actual damages, pursuant to Civil Code section 1794(c).
23 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
24 BY PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT FMC
25 BREACH OF THE IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY
26 (CIV. CODE,§ 1791.1; § 1794; § 1795.5)
27 39. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in the paragraphs
28 set forth above.
6
COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
1 40. Pursuant to Civil Code section 1792, the sale of the Vehicle was accompanied
2 by Defendant FMC's implied warranty of merchantability. Pursuant to Civil Code section
3 1791.1, the duration of the implied warranty is coextensive in duration with the duration of the
4 express written warranty provided by Defendant FMC,except that the duration is not to
5 exceed one-year.
6 41. Pursuant to Civil Code section 1791.1 (a), the implied warranty of
7 merchantability means and includes that the Vehicle will comply with each of the following
8 requirements: (1) The Vehicle will pass without objection in the trade under the contract
9 description;(2) The Vehicle is fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used;(3)
10 The Vehicle is adequately contained, packaged, and labelled;(4) The Vehicle will conform to
11 the promises or affirmations of fact made on the container or label.
12 42. At the time of sale, the subject vehicle contained one or more latent defect(s)
13 set forth above. The existence of the said defect(s)constitutes a breach of the implied warranty
14 because the Vehicle (1)does not pass without objection in the trade under the contract
15 description,(2) is not fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used,(3)is not
16 adequately contained, packaged, and labelled, and (4) does not conform to the promises or
17 affirmations of fact made on the container or label.
18 43. Plaintiffs have been damaged by Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its
19 obligations under the implied warranty, and therefore brings this Cause of Action pursuant to
20 Civil Code section 1794.
21 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
22 BY PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT JBF
23 NEGLIGENT REPAIR
24 44. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in the paragraphs
25 set forth above.
26 45. Plaintiffs delivered the Subject Vehicle to Defendant JBF for substantial repair
27 on at least one occasion.
28
7
COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
1 46. Defendant JBF owed a duty to Plaintiffs to use ordinary care and skill in
2 storage, preparation and repair ofthe Subject Vehicle in accordance with industry standards.
3 47. Defendant JBF breached its duty to Plaintiffs to use ordinary care and skill by
4 failing to properly store, prepare and repair the Subject Vehicle in accordance with industry
5 standards.
6 48. Defendant JBF's negligent breach of its duties owed to Plaintiffs were a
7 proximate cause of Plaintiffs' damages.
8 PRAYER
9 PLAINTIFFS PRAY for judgment against Defendants as follows:
10 a. For general, special and actual damages according to proof;
11 b. For restitution;
12 c. For any consequential and incidental damages;
13 d. For reimbursement and/or restitution of all monies expended;
14 e. For diminution in value;
15 f. For a civil penalty in the amount of two times Plaintiffs' actual damages
16 pursuant to Civil Code section 1794, subdivision (c) or (e);
17 a For prejudgment interest at the legal rate;
18 h. For costs of the suit and Plaintiffs' reasonable attorneys' fees pursuant
19 to Civil Code section 1794, subdivision (d); and
20 i. For such other relief as the Court may deem proper.
21 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
22 Plaintiffs hereby demand a jury trial on all causes of action asserted herein.
23 Dated: June 21, 2022 STRATEGIC LEGAL PRACTICES, APC
24
BY:
25
Tionna Dolin
26 Attorney for Plaintiffs KARINA VARGAS,
GONZALO VARGAS,and LIVIER
27 VARGAS
28
8
COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Exhibit A
2017 Model Year Ford Warranty Guide
(Except F-650/750, Hybrid and Electric Vehicles)
owner.ford.com ford.ca
June 2016
Second Printing
Warranty Guide
Litho in U.S.A.
FSC
MIX
Paw
R30 C107271)
HW7119T201 BA
Your satisfaction is our #1 goal. If you have any questions or concerns, or
are unsatisfied with the service you are receiving, follow these steps:
1. Contact your Sales Representative or Service Advisor at your
selling/servicing dealership.
2. If your inquiry or concern remains unresolved, contact the Sales
Manager, Service Manager or Customer Relations Manager.
3. If you require assistance or clarification on Ford Motor Company policies
or procedures, please contact the Ford Customer Relationship Center.
I the UnIteck State's:, In Cariad'a:
Ford Motor Company Customer Relationship Centre
Customer Relationship Center Ford Motor Company
P.O. Box 6248 of Canada, Limited
Dearborn; MI 48121 P.O. Box 2000
1-800-392-3673 (FORD) Oakville, Ontario L6J 5E4
(TDD for the hearing impaired: 1-800-565-3673(FORD)
1-800-232-5952) wwwiord.ca
www.customersaskford.com
,
In A,ia-rakitic•Rk:gioll, Silb,ba1i,ar:41:41* a ,„Iii,Piicri.0.11
—i.co:
: • ii•S
VI Oil IslaridCenOalr,Oiariii, th",•
' ..,,Cariihheinw,:and.:Israe)
,, ••••
Ford Motor Company Ford International
Ford Export Operations Business Development, Inc.
Attention: Customer Relations P.O. Box 11957
1555 Fairlane Drive Caparra Heights Station
Fairlane Business Park #3 San Juan, PR 00922-1957
Allen Park, MI 48101 Telephone: (800) 841-FORD (3673)
Telephone: (313) 594-4857 Fax:(313) 390-0804
For customers in Guam, the Commonwealth of E-mail: prcac@ford.com
the Northern Mariana Islands (CNIVII), America www.ford.com.pr
Samoa, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, please feel
free to call our Toll-Free Number:
(800) 841-FORD (3673)
Fax: (313) 390-0804
E-mail: expcac@ford.com
Ford Middle East
Customer Relationship Center
P.O. Box 21470
Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Telephone: 971-4-3326084
Toll-free Number for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia:
800 8971409
Local Telephone Number for Kuwait:
24810575
Fax: 971-4-3327299
E-mail: menacac@ford.com
www.me.ford.com
1. INTRODUCTION
2. IMPORTANT INFORMATION YOU SHOULD
KNOW 2
If You Need Customer Assistance 2
Know When Your Warranty Begins 2
Check Your Vehicle 2
Maintain Your Vehicle Properly 2
Who Pays For Warranty Repairs? 3
Do Warranties Apply In Other Countries? 4
3. THE NEW VEHICLE LIMITED WARRANTY FOR
YOUR 2017-MODEL VEHICLE 5
Limitations And Disclaimers 5
What Is Covered? 8
What Is Not Covered? 12
4. IN ADDITION ... 16
Roadside Service Assistance (United States,
Puerto Rico, And U.S. Virgin Islands) 16
5. FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR EMISSIONS
WARRANTIES 17
What Is Covered? 20
What Is Not Covered? 21
6. CALIFORNIA REQUIREMENTS FOR EMISSIONS
WARRANTIES 22
What Is Covered? 26
What Is Not Covered? 29
7. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR
EMISSIONS WARRANTY COVERAGE, UNDER
FEDERAL AND CALIFORNIA REQUIREMENTS 30
8. NOISE EMISSIONS WARRANTY 32
9. FORD PROTECT EXTENDED SERVICE PLAN 33
10. BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU (BBB)
AUTO LINE PROGRAM 34
11. STATE WARRANTY ENFORCEMENT LAWS 35
12. IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT
AMBULANCE CONVERSIONS 36
Ford Motor Company arid your selling dealer thank you for selecting
one of our quality products. Our commitment to you and your vehicle
begins with quality protection and service.
When you need warranty repairs, your selling dealer would like you to
return to it for that service, but you may also take your vehicle to -
another Ford Motor Company dealership authorized for warranty repairs.
Certain warranty repairs require special training though, so not all
dealers are authorized to perform all warranty repairs. That means that,
depending on the warranty repair needed, the vehicle may need to be
taken to another dealer. If a particular dealership cannot assist you, then
contact the Customer Relationship Center at 1-800-392-3673.
This booklet explains in detail the warranty coverages that apply to your
2017-model car or light truck. If you bought a previously owned
2017-model Vehicle, you are eligible for any remaining warranty
coverages.
Ford Motor Company provides the Emissions Defect Warranties and
Emissions Performance Warranties which cover your emissions
control systems, and Noise Emissions Warranty which applies only to
medium/heavy duty trucks over 10,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight
Rating (pages 17-32).
1
2. Important information you should know
IF YOU NEED CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE
Your Ford Motor Company dealer is available to assist you with all your
automotive needs. Please follow the procedures outlined on the front
page of this booklet.
In addition, if you are an eligible U.S. owner, you may use - at no cost -
the services of the BBB AUTO LINE program. For details, see Better
Business Bureau (BBB) AUTO LINE program, page 34 or call
1-800-955-5100.
KNOW WHEN YOUR WARRANTY BEGINS
Your Warranty Start Date is the day you take delivery of your new
vehicle or the day it is first put into service (for example, as a dealer
demonstrator), whichever occurs first.
CHECK YOUR VEHICLE
We try to check vehicles carefully at the assembly plant and the
dealership, and we usually correct any damage to paint, sheet metal,
upholstery, or other appearance items. But occasionally something may
slip past us, and a customer may find that a vehicle was damaged before
he or she took delivery. If you see any damage when you receive your
vehicle, notify your dealership within one week.
MAINTAIN YOUR VEHICLE PROPERLY
Your glove compartment contains an Owner's Manual which indicates
the scheduled maintenance required for your vehicle. Proper
maintenance guards against major repair expenses resulting from neglect
or inadequate maintenance, may help increase the value you receive
when you sell or trade your vehicle, and is important in allowing your
vehicle to comply with applicable emissions standards.
It is your responsibility to make sure that all of the scheduled
maintenance is performed and that the materials used meet Ford
engineering specifications. Failure to perform scheduled maintenance as
specified in the Owner's Manual will invalidate warranty coverage on
2
Preview
1 Michael D. Mortenson, State Bar No. 247758 mmortenson@mortensontaggart.com 2 Craig A. Taggart, State Bar No. 239168 ctaggart@mortensontaggart.com 3 Hannah L. Miller, State Bar No. 333843 hmiller@mortensontaggart.com 4 MORTENSON TAGGART ADAMS LLP 300 Spectrum Center Dr., Suite 1200 5 Irvine, CA 92618 Telephone: (949) 774-2224 6 Facsimile: (949) 774-2545 7 Attorneys for Defendants FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND 8 JIM BURKE FORD 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 FOR THE COUNTY OF KERN 11 KARINA VARGAS, GONZALO VARGAS, Case No. BCV-22-101682-JEB 12 and LIVIER VARGAS Hon. J. Eric Bradshaw Dept. J 13 Plaintiffs, DECLARATION OF HANNAH L. 14 vs. MILLER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS FORD MOTOR 15 FORD MOTOR COMPANY; JIM BURKE COMPANY’S AND JIM BURKE FORD’S FORD; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND 16 DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST Defendants. AMENDED COMPLAINT 17 [Filed concurrently with Notice of Demurrer 18 and Demurrer to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint and (Proposed) Order] 19 20 DATE: January 6, 2023 TIME: 8:30 a.m. 21 DEPT.: J 22 Complaint Filed: July 7, 2022 23 24 25 26 27 28 -1- DECLARATION OF HANNAH L. MILLER 1 DECLARATION OF HANNAH L. MILLER 2 I, Hannah L. Miller, declare and state as follows: 3 1. I am an attorney authorized to practice law in the State of California and admitted 4 to practice before this Court. I am an attorney at Mortenson Taggart Adams LLP, and I am an 5 attorney for Defendants Ford Motor Company (“Ford”) and Jim Burke Ford (collectively, 6 “Defendants”) in this case. I make this declaration based on my personal knowledge, the record 7 in this action, and the matters of public record, and ifcalled upon as a witness, I could and 8 would testify competently as to the matters discussed herein. 9 2. On July 7, 2022, Plaintiffs Karina Vargas, Gonzalo Vargas, and Livier Vargas 10 (“Plaintiffs”) filed their Complaint. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of 11 the Complaint. 12 3. On September 29, 2022, Defendants filed their demurrer to Plaintiffs’ initial 13 Complaint. On October 19, 2022, Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Complaint. Attached 14 hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the First Amended Complaint. 15 4. On November 17, 2022, I emailed Plaintiffs’ counsel attempting to initiate 16 contact with Plaintiffs’ counsel to schedule a meet and confer to discuss Defendants’ anticipated 17 demurrer to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint. Plaintiff’s counsel never responded. 18 Attached hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the email, I sent to Plaintiffs’ counsel 19 attempting to meet and confer. 20 I declare under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the United States of America 21 and the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. 22 Executed on November 22, 2022, at Irvine, California. 23 ____________________ 24 Hannah L. Miller 25 26 27 28 -0- DECLARATION OF HANNAH L. MILLER PURSUANT TO C.C.P. § 430.41(A)(2) Exhibit A ELECTRONICALLY FILED 7/7/2022 3:13 PM Kern County Superior Court Tionna Dolin(SBN 299010) By Alejandra Velazquez, Deputy 1 Email: tdolinAslpattorney.com 2 Mark Gibson(SBN 258216) Email: mgibson@slpattorney.com 3 (emailservices@slpattorney.com) 4 Strategic Legal Practices, APC 1888 Century Park East, 19th Floor 5 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone:(310)929-4900 6 Facsimile: (310)943-3838 7 Attorneys for Plaintiffs KARINA VARGAS,GONZALO VARGAS,and LIVIER VARGAS 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF KERN 10 11 KARINA VARGAS,GONZALO VARGAS, Case No.:BCV-22-101682 12 and LIVIER VARGAS, 13 Hon. Plaintiffs, Dept. 14 VS. 15 COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF FORD MOTOR COMPANY;JIM BURKE STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS 16 FORD; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, 17 Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Pt 1 Plaintiffs allege as follows: 2 PARTIES 3 1. As used in this Complaint, the word "Plaintiffs" shall refer to Plaintiffs 4 KARINA VARGAS,GONZALO VARGAS,and LIVIER VARGAS. 5 2. Plaintiffs are residents of Kern County, California. 6 3. As used in this Complaint, the word "Defendants" shall refer to all Defendants 7 named in this Complaint. 8 4. Defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY ("FMC") is a corporation organized 9 and in existence under the laws of the State of Delaware and registered with the California 10 Department of Corporations to conduct business in California. Defendant FMC's principal 11 place of business is in the State of Michigan. At all times relevant herein, Defendant was 12 engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing, constructing, assembling, marketing, 13 distributing, and selling automobiles and other motor vehicles and motor vehicle components 14 in Kern County. 15 5. Defendant JIM BURKE FORD ("JBF") is an unknown business entity 16 organized and in existence under the laws of the State of California. At all times relevant 17 herein, Defendant JBF was engaged in the business of selling automobiles and automobile 18 components, and servicing and repairing automobiles in Kern County. 19 6. Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true names and capacities of the Defendants sued 20 under the fictitious names DOES 1 to 10. They are sued pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 21 section 474. When Plaintiffs become aware of the true names and capacities of the Defendants 22 sued as DOES 1 to 10, Plaintiffs will amend this Complaint to state their true names and 23 capacities. 24 TOLLING OF THE STATUTES OF LIMITATION 25 7. To the extent there are any statutes of limitation applicable to Plaintiffs' claims- 26 including, without limitation, the express warranty, implied warranty, and negligent repair — 27 the running of the limitation periods have been tolled by, inter alia, the following doctrines or 28 COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 1 rules: equitable tolling, the discovery rule, the fraudulent concealment rules, equitable 2 estoppel, the repair rule, and/or class action tolling (e.g., the American Pipe rule). 3 8. Plaintiffs discovered Defendants' wrongful conduct alleged herein on or about 4 October 2021 when they requested a buyback and/or restitution of the Subject Vehicle from 5 FMC,as the Vehicle continued to exhibit symptoms of defects following FMC's unsuccessful 6 repair attempts to repair them. However, FMC failed to provide restitution pursuant to the 7 Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. 8 9. By filing this Complaint, Plaintiffs hereby revoke acceptance ofthe Subject 9 Vehicle yet again. 10 FACTUAL BACKGROUND C.) 11 10. On or about October 24, 2016, Plaintiffs entered into a warranty contract with 12 Defendant FMC regarding a 2017 Ford Fusion vehicle identification number 44 13 3FA6P0G74HR215858 (hereafter "Vehicle"), which was manufactured and or distributed by g 14 Defendant FMC. 15 1 1. The warranty contract contained various warranties, including but not limited to )- 16 the bumper-bumper warranty, powertrain warranty, emission warranty, etc. A true and correct 44 .% 17 copy of the warranty contract is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The terms of the express g 18 warranty are described in Exhibit A and are incorporated herein. cn 19 12. Pursuant to the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (the "Act") Civil Code 20 sections 1790 et seq. the Subject Vehicle constitutes "consumer goods" used primarily for 21 family or household purposes, and Plaintiff has used the vehicle primarily for those purposes. 22 Plaintiff is a "buyer" of consumer goods under the Act. Defendant FMC is a "manufacturer" 23 and/or "distributor" under the Act. 24 13. Plaintiffs justifiably revoke acceptance of the Subject Vehicle under Civil Code, 25 section 1794, et seq. by filing this Complaint and/or did so prior to filing the instant Complaint. 26 14. These causes of action arise out of the warranty obligations of FMC in 27 connection with a motor vehicle for which FMC issued a written warranty. 28 2 COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 1 15. Defects and nonconformities to warranty manifested themselves within the 2 applicable express warranty period, including but not limited to, the electrical system; the 3 engine; among other defects and non-conformities. 4 16. Said defects/nonconformities substantially impair the use, value, or safety of 5 the Vehicle. 6 1 7. Under the Song-Beverly Act, Defendant FMC had an affirmative duty to 7 promptly offer to repurchase or replace the Subject Vehicle at the time it failed to conform the 8 Subject Vehicle to the terms of the express warranty after a reasonable number of repair 9 attempts.2 10 18. Defendant FMC has failed to either promptly replace the Subject Vehicle or to 11 promptly make restitution in accordance with the Song-Beverly Act. 12 19. Under the Act, Plaintiffs are entitled to reimbursement of the price paid for the 13 vehicle less that amount directly attributable to use by the Plaintiffs prior to the first 14 presentation to an authorized repair facility for a nonconformity. 15 20. Plaintiffs are entitled to replacement or reimbursement pursuant to Civil Code, 16 section 1794, et seq. Plaintiffs are entitled to rescission of the contract pursuant to Civil Code, 17 section 1794, et seq. and Commercial Code, section 2711. 18 21. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover any "cover" damages under Commercial Code, 19 sections 2711, 2712, and Civil Code, section 1794, et seq. 20 21 2 "A manufacturer's duty to repurchase a vehicle does not depend on a consumer's 22 request, but instead arises as soon as the manufacturer fails to comply with the warranty within a reasonable time.(Krotin v. Porsche Cars North America, Inc. (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 23 294, 301-302, 45 Cal.Rptr.2d 10.) Chrysler performed the bridge operation on Santana's vehicle in August 2014 with 30,262 miles on the odometer—within the three-year, 36,000 24 mile warranty. The internal e-mails demonstrating Chrysler's awareness of the safety risks inherent in the bridge operation were sent in September 2013, and thus Chrysler was well 25 aware of the problem when it performed the bridge operation on Santana's vehicle. Thus, Chrysler's duty to repurchase or provide restitution arose prior to the expiration of the three- 26 year, 36,000 mile warranty. Moreover, although we do not have the actual five-year, 100,000 mile power train warranty in our record, Santana's expert testified that the no-start/stalling 27 issues Santana experienced were within the scope of the power train warranty, which was still active when Santana requested repurchase in approximately January 2016, at 44,467 miles. 28 Thus the premise of Chrysler's argument—that Santana's request for repurchase was outside the relevant warranty—is not only irrelevant, but wrong." Santana v. FCA US, LLC, 56 Cal. App. 5th 334, 270 Cal. Rptr. 3d 335 (2020). 3 COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 1 22. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover all incidental and consequential damages 2 pursuant to 1794 et seq. and Commercial Code, sections 2711, 2712, and 2713 et seq. 3 23. Plaintiffs suffered damages in a sum to be proven at trial in an amount that is 4 not less than $25,001.00. 5 24. Plaintiffs are entitled to all incidental, consequential, and general damages 6 resulting from Defendants' failure to comply with its obligations under the Song-Beverly Act. 7 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 8 BY PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT FMC 9 VIOLATION OF SUBDIVISION(D)OF CIVIL CODE SECTION 1793.2 10 25. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in the paragraphs 11 set forth above. 12 26. Defendant FMC and its representatives in this state have been unable to service 13 or repair the Vehicle to conform to the applicable express warranties after a reasonable 14 number of opportunities. Despite this fact, Defendant FMC failed to promptly replace the 15 Vehicle or make restitution to Plaintiffs as required by Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision 16 (d)and Civil Code section 1793.1, subdivision (a)(2). 17 27. Plaintiffs have been damaged by Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its 18 obligations pursuant to Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision (d)and Civil Code section 19 1793.1, subdivision (a)(2), and therefore brings this cause of action pursuant to Civil Code 20 section 1794. 21 28. Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its obligations under Civil Code 22 section 1793.2, subdivision (d) was willful, in that Defendant FMC and its representative were 23 aware that they were unable to service or repair the Vehicle to conform to the applicable 24 express warranties after a reasonable number of repair attempts, yet Defendant FMC failed 25 and refused to promptly replace the Vehicle or make restitution. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are 26 entitled to a civil penalty of two times Plaintiffs' actual damages pursuant to Civil Code 27 section 1794, subdivision (c). 28 4 COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 1 29. Defendant FMC does not maintain a qualified third-party dispute resolution 2 process which substantially complies with Civil Code section 1793.22. Accordingly, 3 Plaintiffs are entitled to a civil penalty of two times Plaintiffs' actual damages pursuant to 4 Civil Code section 1794, subdivision (e). 5 30. Plaintiffs seek civil penalties pursuant to section 1794, subdivisions (c), and (e) 6 in the alternative and does not seek to cumulate civil penalties, as provided in Civil Code 7 section 1794, subdivision (1). 8 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 9 BY PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT FMC 10 VIOLATION OF SUBDIVISION(B)OF CIVIL CODE SECTION 1793.2 11 31. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in the paragraphs 12 set forth above. 13 32. Although Plaintiffs presented the Vehicle to Defendant FMC's representative in 14 this state, Defendant FMC and its representative failed to commence the service or repairs 15 within a reasonable time and failed to service or repair the Vehicle so as to conform to the 16 applicable warranties within 30 days, in violation of Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision 17 (b). Plaintiffs did not extend the time for completion of repairs beyond the 30-day 18 requirement. 19 33. Plaintiffs have been damaged by Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its 20 obligations pursuant to Civil Code section 1793.2(b), and therefore brings this Cause of 21 Action pursuant to Civil Code section 1794. 22 34. Plaintiffs have rightfully rejected and/or justifiably revoked acceptance of the 23 Vehicle, and has exercised a right to cancel the purchase. By serving this Complaint, 24 Plaintiffs do so again. Accordingly, Plaintiffs seek the remedies provided in California Civil 25 Code section 1794(b)(1), including the entire contract price. In the alternative, Plaintiffs seek 26 the remedies set forth in California Civil Code section 1794(b)(2), including the diminution in 27 value of the Vehicle resulting from its defects. Plaintiffs believe that, at the present time, the 28 Vehicle's value is de minimis. 5 COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 1 35. Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its obligations under Civil Code 2 section 1793.2(b) was willful, in that Defendant FMC and its representative were aware that 3 they were obligated to service or repair the Vehicle to conform to the applicable express 4 warranties within 30 days, yet they failed to do so. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to a 5 civil penalty of two times Plaintiffs' actual damages pursuant to Civil Code section 1794(c). 6 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 7 BY PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT FMC 8 VIOLATION OF SUBDIVISION (A)(3) OF CIVIL CODE SECTION 1793.2 9 36. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs set 10 forth above. 11 37. In violation of Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision (a)(3), Defendant FMC 12 failed to make available to its authorized service and repair facilities sufficient service 13 literature and replacement parts to effect repairs during the express warranty period. Plaintiffs 14 have been damaged by Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its obligations pursuant to 15 Civil Code section 1793.2(a)(3), and therefore brings this Cause of Action pursuant to Civil 16 Code section 1794. 17 38. Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its obligations under Civil Code 18 section 1793.2, subdivision (a)(3) was wilful, in that Defendant FMC knew of its obligation to 19 provide literature and replacement parts sufficient to allow its repair facilities to effect repairs 20 during the warranty period, yet Defendant FMC failed to take any action to correct its failure 21 to comply with the law. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to a civil penalty of two times 22 Plaintiffs' actual damages, pursuant to Civil Code section 1794(c). 23 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 24 BY PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT FMC 25 BREACH OF THE IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY 26 (CIV. CODE,§ 1791.1; § 1794; § 1795.5) 27 39. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in the paragraphs 28 set forth above. 6 COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 1 40. Pursuant to Civil Code section 1792, the sale of the Vehicle was accompanied 2 by Defendant FMC's implied warranty of merchantability. Pursuant to Civil Code section 3 1791.1, the duration of the implied warranty is coextensive in duration with the duration of the 4 express written warranty provided by Defendant FMC,except that the duration is not to 5 exceed one-year. 6 41. Pursuant to Civil Code section 1791.1 (a), the implied warranty of 7 merchantability means and includes that the Vehicle will comply with each of the following 8 requirements: (1) The Vehicle will pass without objection in the trade under the contract 9 description;(2) The Vehicle is fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used;(3) 10 The Vehicle is adequately contained, packaged, and labelled;(4) The Vehicle will conform to 11 the promises or affirmations of fact made on the container or label. 12 42. At the time of sale, the subject vehicle contained one or more latent defect(s) 13 set forth above. The existence of the said defect(s)constitutes a breach of the implied warranty 14 because the Vehicle (1)does not pass without objection in the trade under the contract 15 description,(2) is not fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are used,(3)is not 16 adequately contained, packaged, and labelled, and (4) does not conform to the promises or 17 affirmations of fact made on the container or label. 18 43. Plaintiffs have been damaged by Defendant FMC's failure to comply with its 19 obligations under the implied warranty, and therefore brings this Cause of Action pursuant to 20 Civil Code section 1794. 21 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 22 BY PLAINTIFFS AGAINST DEFENDANT JBF 23 NEGLIGENT REPAIR 24 44. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in the paragraphs 25 set forth above. 26 45. Plaintiffs delivered the Subject Vehicle to Defendant JBF for substantial repair 27 on at least one occasion. 28 7 COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 1 46. Defendant JBF owed a duty to Plaintiffs to use ordinary care and skill in 2 storage, preparation and repair ofthe Subject Vehicle in accordance with industry standards. 3 47. Defendant JBF breached its duty to Plaintiffs to use ordinary care and skill by 4 failing to properly store, prepare and repair the Subject Vehicle in accordance with industry 5 standards. 6 48. Defendant JBF's negligent breach of its duties owed to Plaintiffs were a 7 proximate cause of Plaintiffs' damages. 8 PRAYER 9 PLAINTIFFS PRAY for judgment against Defendants as follows: 10 a. For general, special and actual damages according to proof; 11 b. For restitution; 12 c. For any consequential and incidental damages; 13 d. For reimbursement and/or restitution of all monies expended; 14 e. For diminution in value; 15 f. For a civil penalty in the amount of two times Plaintiffs' actual damages 16 pursuant to Civil Code section 1794, subdivision (c) or (e); 17 a For prejudgment interest at the legal rate; 18 h. For costs of the suit and Plaintiffs' reasonable attorneys' fees pursuant 19 to Civil Code section 1794, subdivision (d); and 20 i. For such other relief as the Court may deem proper. 21 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 22 Plaintiffs hereby demand a jury trial on all causes of action asserted herein. 23 Dated: June 21, 2022 STRATEGIC LEGAL PRACTICES, APC 24 BY: 25 Tionna Dolin 26 Attorney for Plaintiffs KARINA VARGAS, GONZALO VARGAS,and LIVIER 27 VARGAS 28 8 COMPLAINT;JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Exhibit A 2017 Model Year Ford Warranty Guide (Except F-650/750, Hybrid and Electric Vehicles) owner.ford.com ford.ca June 2016 Second Printing Warranty Guide Litho in U.S.A. FSC MIX Paw R30 C107271) HW7119T201 BA Your satisfaction is our #1 goal. If you have any questions or concerns, or are unsatisfied with the service you are receiving, follow these steps: 1. Contact your Sales Representative or Service Advisor at your selling/servicing dealership. 2. If your inquiry or concern remains unresolved, contact the Sales Manager, Service Manager or Customer Relations Manager. 3. If you require assistance or clarification on Ford Motor Company policies or procedures, please contact the Ford Customer Relationship Center. I the UnIteck State's:, In Cariad'a: Ford Motor Company Customer Relationship Centre Customer Relationship Center Ford Motor Company P.O. Box 6248 of Canada, Limited Dearborn; MI 48121 P.O. Box 2000 1-800-392-3673 (FORD) Oakville, Ontario L6J 5E4 (TDD for the hearing impaired: 1-800-565-3673(FORD) 1-800-232-5952) wwwiord.ca www.customersaskford.com , In A,ia-rakitic•Rk:gioll, Silb,ba1i,ar:41:41* a ,„Iii,Piicri.0.11 —i.co: : • ii•S VI Oil IslaridCenOalr,Oiariii, th",• ' ..,,Cariihheinw,:and.:Israe) ,, •••• Ford Motor Company Ford International Ford Export Operations Business Development, Inc. Attention: Customer Relations P.O. Box 11957 1555 Fairlane Drive Caparra Heights Station Fairlane Business Park #3 San Juan, PR 00922-1957 Allen Park, MI 48101 Telephone: (800) 841-FORD (3673) Telephone: (313) 594-4857 Fax:(313) 390-0804 For customers in Guam, the Commonwealth of E-mail: prcac@ford.com the Northern Mariana Islands (CNIVII), America www.ford.com.pr Samoa, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, please feel free to call our Toll-Free Number: (800) 841-FORD (3673) Fax: (313) 390-0804 E-mail: expcac@ford.com Ford Middle East Customer Relationship Center P.O. Box 21470 Dubai, United Arab Emirates Telephone: 971-4-3326084 Toll-free Number for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: 800 8971409 Local Telephone Number for Kuwait: 24810575 Fax: 971-4-3327299 E-mail: menacac@ford.com www.me.ford.com 1. INTRODUCTION 2. IMPORTANT INFORMATION YOU SHOULD KNOW 2 If You Need Customer Assistance 2 Know When Your Warranty Begins 2 Check Your Vehicle 2 Maintain Your Vehicle Properly 2 Who Pays For Warranty Repairs? 3 Do Warranties Apply In Other Countries? 4 3. THE NEW VEHICLE LIMITED WARRANTY FOR YOUR 2017-MODEL VEHICLE 5 Limitations And Disclaimers 5 What Is Covered? 8 What Is Not Covered? 12 4. IN ADDITION ... 16 Roadside Service Assistance (United States, Puerto Rico, And U.S. Virgin Islands) 16 5. FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR EMISSIONS WARRANTIES 17 What Is Covered? 20 What Is Not Covered? 21 6. CALIFORNIA REQUIREMENTS FOR EMISSIONS WARRANTIES 22 What Is Covered? 26 What Is Not Covered? 29 7. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR EMISSIONS WARRANTY COVERAGE, UNDER FEDERAL AND CALIFORNIA REQUIREMENTS 30 8. NOISE EMISSIONS WARRANTY 32 9. FORD PROTECT EXTENDED SERVICE PLAN 33 10. BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU (BBB) AUTO LINE PROGRAM 34 11. STATE WARRANTY ENFORCEMENT LAWS 35 12. IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT AMBULANCE CONVERSIONS 36 Ford Motor Company arid your selling dealer thank you for selecting one of our quality products. Our commitment to you and your vehicle begins with quality protection and service. When you need warranty repairs, your selling dealer would like you to return to it for that service, but you may also take your vehicle to - another Ford Motor Company dealership authorized for warranty repairs. Certain warranty repairs require special training though, so not all dealers are authorized to perform all warranty repairs. That means that, depending on the warranty repair needed, the vehicle may need to be taken to another dealer. If a particular dealership cannot assist you, then contact the Customer Relationship Center at 1-800-392-3673. This booklet explains in detail the warranty coverages that apply to your 2017-model car or light truck. If you bought a previously owned 2017-model Vehicle, you are eligible for any remaining warranty coverages. Ford Motor Company provides the Emissions Defect Warranties and Emissions Performance Warranties which cover your emissions control systems, and Noise Emissions Warranty which applies only to medium/heavy duty trucks over 10,000 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (pages 17-32). 1 2. Important information you should know IF YOU NEED CUSTOMER ASSISTANCE Your Ford Motor Company dealer is available to assist you with all your automotive needs. Please follow the procedures outlined on the front page of this booklet. In addition, if you are an eligible U.S. owner, you may use - at no cost - the services of the BBB AUTO LINE program. For details, see Better Business Bureau (BBB) AUTO LINE program, page 34 or call 1-800-955-5100. KNOW WHEN YOUR WARRANTY BEGINS Your Warranty Start Date is the day you take delivery of your new vehicle or the day it is first put into service (for example, as a dealer demonstrator), whichever occurs first. CHECK YOUR VEHICLE We try to check vehicles carefully at the assembly plant and the dealership, and we usually correct any damage to paint, sheet metal, upholstery, or other appearance items. But occasionally something may slip past us, and a customer may find that a vehicle was damaged before he or she took delivery. If you see any damage when you receive your vehicle, notify your dealership within one week. MAINTAIN YOUR VEHICLE PROPERLY Your glove compartment contains an Owner's Manual which indicates the scheduled maintenance required for your vehicle. Proper maintenance guards against major repair expenses resulting from neglect or inadequate maintenance, may help increase the value you receive when you sell or trade your vehicle, and is important in allowing your vehicle to comply with applicable emissions standards. It is your responsibility to make sure that all of the scheduled maintenance is performed and that the materials used meet Ford engineering specifications. Failure to perform scheduled maintenance as specified in the Owner's Manual will invalidate warranty coverage on 2