Complaint,Petition: YOON HO CHA VS. GENERAL MOTORS LLC

On January 11, 2023 a Complaint,Petition was filed involving a dispute between Yoon Ho Cha, and General Motors Llc, for BREACH OF CONTRACT/WARRANTY in the District Court of Orange County.

Preview
Electronically Filed by Superior Court of California, County of Orange, 01/11/2023 01:17:00 PM.
30-2023-01301534-CU-BC-CJC - ROA # 2 - DAVID H. YAMASAKI, Clerk of the Court By K. Trent, Deputy Clerk.

1 Sina Rez Law
Sina Rezvanpour (SBN: 274769)
2 sina.rez@sinarezlaw.com
401 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor
3 Santa Monica, CA 90401
Telephone: 818.784.0100
4 Facsimile: 818.574.4049
5 Attorneys for Plaintiffs,
Yoon Ho Cha and Heewon Kim Cha
6

7 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

8 COUNTY OF ORANGE
YOON HO CHA; and HEEWON KIM CHA,
9
Plaintiffs,
CASE NO.:

a l
10

11
v.
rt
COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF

o
STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS

12
GENERAL MOTORS LLC; and DOES 1-100,
inclusive,
s P
UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

13 Defendants.

e s
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
14

15
c c
16

a A Assigned for All Purposes

d i
18

19
M e
20

PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT 1
1 Plaintiffs allege as follows:

2 PARTIES

3 1. As used in this Complaint, the word “Plaintiffs” shall refer collectively to Plaintiff

4 YOON HO CHA and Plaintiff HEEWON KIM CHA.

5 2. Plaintiff YOON HO CHA is now, and at all times mentioned in this Complaint

6 was, an individual adult resident of Irvine, California.

7 3. Plaintiff HEEWON KIM CHA is now, and at all times mentioned in this Complaint

8 was, an individual adult resident of Diamond Bar, California.

9 4.
l
As used in this Complaint, the word “Defendant” shall refer to all Defendants

a
10

11
named in this Complaint.

5.
o rt
Defendant GENERAL MOTORS LLC, is a limited liability company organized and

s P
in existence under the laws of the State of Delaware and registered with the California

e s
Department of Corporations to conduct business in California. At all times relevant

herein, Defendant was engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing,
14

15
c c
constructing, assembling, marketing, distributing, and selling automobiles and other

a A
motor vehicles and motor vehicle components in Orange County.

17 6.
i
The true names and capacities of defendants sued as DOES 1-100, inclusive, are

d
18

19
M e
presently unknown to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and based upon

such information and belief thereon allege that each such defendant is in some way

20 responsible and liable for the events or happenings alleged in this Complaint. Plaintiffs

21 will amend this Complaint to allege their true names and capacities when ascertained.

23 Plaintiffs are informed and believe and based upon such information and belief thereon

24 allege that at all times material herein each fictitiously named defendant, was either the

25 true defendant or the agent and employee of each other defendant and in doing the

26 things alleged herein, was acting within the scope and purpose of such agency and

27 with the permission and consent of, and their actions were ratified by, the other

28 defendants.

7. All acts of corporate employees as alleged were authorized or ratified by an
PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT 2
1 officer, director or managing agent of the corporate employer.

2 8. Venue is proper in the current court given that the alleged breach occurred in Orange

3 County and the damages sustained by Plaintiffs are within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court

4 of the State of California.

5 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

6 VIOLATION OF SUBDIVISION (D) OF CIVIL CODE SECTION 1793.2

7 (By Plaintiffs Against all Defendants)

8 9. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference every allegation contained in

9 this Complaint as though fully set forth in this paragraph.

a l
10

11
10.

o rt
On or around December 09, 2020, Plaintiffs leased a 2020 Chevrolet Bolt EV,

bearing vehicle identification number 1G1FY6S06L4146301, (the “Vehicle”) which was

s P
manufactured and or distributed by Defendant. The Vehicle was leased or used

e s
primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. Plaintiffs leased the Vehicle from

a person or entity engaged in the business of manufacturing, distributing, or selling
14

15 consumer goods at retail.
c c
16 11.
A
In connection with the lease agreement, Plaintiffs received an express written

a
17

d i
warranty in which Defendant undertook to preserve or maintain the utility or

19
M e
performance of the Vehicle or to provide compensation if there is a failure in utility or

performance for a specified period of time. The warranty provided, in relevant part, that

20 in the event a defect developed with the Vehicle during the warranty period, Plaintiffs

21 could deliver the Vehicle for repair services to Defendant's representative and the

23 Vehicle would be repaired.

24 12. During the warranty period, the Vehicle contained or developed the following

25 defects: defective high voltage battery; and additional defects Plaintiffs reported to

26 Defendant and its agents and/or included in the Vehicle’s repair records. Said defects

27 substantially impair the use, value, or safety of the Vehicle.

28 13. Defendant and its representatives in this state have been unable to service or

repair the Vehicle to conform to the applicable express warranties after a reasonable
PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT 3
1 number of opportunities. Despite this fact, Defendant failed to promptly replace the

2 Vehicle or make restitution to Plaintiffs as required by Civil Code section 1793.2,

3 subdivision (d) and Civil Code section 1793.1, subdivision (a)(2).

4 14. Plaintiffs have been damaged by Defendant's failure to comply with its

5 obligations pursuant to Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision (d) and Civil Code section

6 1793.1, subdivision (a)(2), and therefore bring this cause of action pursuant to Civil

7 Code section 1794.

8 15. Plaintiffs suffered damages in a sum to be proven at trial but not less than

9 $25,000.00.

a l
10

11
16.

o rt
Defendant's failure to comply with its obligations under Civil Code section

1793.2, subdivision (d) was willful, in that Defendant and its representative were aware

s P
that they were unable to service or repair the Vehicle to conform to the applicable

e s
express warranties after a reasonable number of repair attempts, yet Defendant failed

and refused to promptly replace the Vehicle or make restitution. Accordingly, Plaintiffs
14

15
c c
are entitled to a civil penalty of two times Plaintiffs’ actual damages pursuant to Civil

a A
Code section 1794, subdivision (c).

17 17.
i
Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon alleges that Defendant does not

d
18

19
M e
maintain a qualified third-party dispute resolution process which substantially complies

with Civil Code section 1793.22. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to a civil penalty of

20 two times Plaintiffs’ actual damages pursuant to Civil Code section 1794, subdivision

21 (e).

23 18. Plaintiffs seek civil penalties pursuant to section 1794, subdivisions (c), and (e) in

24 the alternative and does not seek to cumulate civil penalties, as provided in Civil Code

25 section 1794, subdivision (f).

26 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

27 VIOLATION OF SUBDIVISION (B) OF CIVIL CODE SECTION 1793.2

28 (By Plaintiffs Against all Defendants)

19. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference every allegation contained in
PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT 4
1 this Complaint as though fully set forth in this paragraph.

2 20. Although Plaintiffs presented the Vehicle to Defendant's representative in this

3 state, Defendant and its representative failed to commence the service or repairs within

4 a reasonable time and failed to service or repair the Vehicle so as to conform to the

5 applicable warranties within 30 days, in violation of Civil Code section 1793.2,

6 subdivision (b). Plaintiffs did not extend the time for completion of repairs beyond the

7 30-day requirement.

8 21. Plaintiffs have been damaged by Defendant's failure to comply with its

a l
obligations pursuant to Civil Code section 1793.2(b), and therefore bring this Cause of

11
Action pursuant to Civil Code section 1794.

22.
o rt
Plaintiffs have rightfully rejected and/or justifiably revoked acceptance of the

s P
Vehicle, and has exercised a right to cancel the purchase. By serving this Complaint,

e s
Plaintiffs do so again. Accordingly, Plaintiffs seek the remedies provided in California

Civil Code section 1794(b)(1), including the entire contract price. In the alternative,
14

15
c c
Plaintiffs seek the remedies set forth in California Civil Code section 1794(b)(2),

a A
including the diminution in value of the Vehicle resulting from its defects. Plaintiffs

d i
believe that, at the present time, the Vehicle’s value is de minimis.

19
M e THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

VIOLATION OF SUBDIVISION (A)(3) OF CIVIL CODE SECTION 1793.2

20 (By Plaintiffs Against all Defendants)

21 23. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference every allegation contained in

23 this Complaint as though fully set forth in this paragraph.

24 24. In violation of Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision (a)(3), Defendant failed to

25 make available to its authorized service and repair facilities sufficient service literature

26 and replacement parts to effect repairs during the express warranty period. Plaintiffs

27 have been damaged by Defendant's failure to comply with its obligations pursuant to

28 Civil Code section 1793.2(a)(3), and therefore bring this Cause of Action pursuant to

Civil Code section 1794.
PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT 5
1 25. Defendant's failure to comply with its obligations under Civil Code section

2 1793.2, subdivision (a)(3) was willful, in that Defendant knew of its obligation to provide

3 literature and replacement parts sufficient to allow its repair facilities to effect repairs

4 during the warranty period, yet Defendant failed to take any action to correct its failure

5 to comply with the law. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to a civil penalty of two times

6 Plaintiffs’ actual damages; pursuant to Civil Code section 1794(c).

7 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

8 BREACH OF EXPRESS WRITTEN WARRANTY

9 (CIV. CODE, § 1791.2, SUBD. (a); § 1794)

a l
10

11 26.
(By Plaintiffs Against all Defendants)

o rt
Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference every allegation contained in

12 this Complaint as though fully set forth in this paragraph.

s P
13 27.

e s
In accordance with Defendant's warranty, Plaintiffs delivered the Vehicle to

Defendant's representative in this state to perform warranty repairs. Plaintiffs did so
14

15
c c
within a reasonable time. Each time Plaintiffs delivered the Vehicle, Plaintiffs notified

a A
Defendant and its representative of the characteristics of the Defects. However, the

d i
representative failed to properly and completely repair the Vehicle, breaching the terms

19 28.
M e
of the written warranty on each occasion.

Plaintiffs have been damaged by Defendant's failure to comply with its

20 obligations under the express warranty, and therefore bring this Cause of Action

21 pursuant to Civil Code section 1794.

23 29. Defendant's failure to comply with its obligations under the express warranty

24 was willful, in that Defendant and its authorized representative were aware that they

25 were obligated to repair the Defects, but they intentionally refused to do so.

26 Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to a civil penalty of two times Plaintiffs’ actual

27 damages; pursuant to Civil Code section 1794(c).

28 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY
PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT 6
1 (CIV. CODE, § 1791.1; § 1794)

2 (By Plaintiffs Against all Defendants)

3 30. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference every allegation contained in

4 this Complaint as though fully set forth in this paragraph.

5 31. Pursuant to Civil Code section 1792, the sale of the Vehicle was accompanied by

6 Defendant's implied warranty of merchantability. Pursuant to Civil Code section 1791.1,

7 the duration of the implied warranty is coextensive in duration with the duration of the

8 express written warranty provided by Defendant, except that the duration is not to

9 exceed one-year.

a l
10

11
32.

o rt
Pursuant to Civil Code section 1791.1 (a), the implied warranty of merchantability

means and includes that the Vehicle will comply with each of the following

s P
requirements: (1) The Vehicle will pass without objection in the trade under the contract

e s
description; (2) The Vehicle is fit for the ordinary purposes for which such goods are

used; (3) The Vehicle is adequately contained, packaged, and labelled; (4) The Vehicle
14

15
c c
will conform to the promises or affirmations of fact made on the container or label.

16 33.
A
At the time of purchase, or within one-year thereafter, the Vehicle contained or

a
17

d i
developed the defects set forth above. The existence of each of these defects

19
M e
constitutes a breach of the implied warranty because the Vehicle (1) does not pass

without objection in the trade under the contract description, (2) is not fit for the

20 ordinary purposes for which such goods are used, (3) is not adequately contained,

21 packaged, and labelled, and (4) does not conform to the promises or affirmations of

23 fact made on the container or label.

24 34. Plaintiffs have been damaged by Defendant's failure to comply with its

25 obligations under the implied warranty, and therefore bring this Cause of Action

26 pursuant to Civil Code section 1794.

27 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

28 VIOLATION OF TANNER CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT

(CIV. CODE § 1793.22 ET. SEQ.)
PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT 7
1 (By Plaintiffs Against all Defendants)

2 35. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference every allegation contained in

3 this Complaint as though fully set forth in this paragraph.

4 36. Pursuant to the Tanner Consumer Protection Act, Civil Code sections 1793.22 et

5 seq., a reasonable number of attempts have been made to confirm the vehicle to the

6 applicable express warranties within 18 months from delivery to Plaintiffs.

7 37. Pursuant to the Tanner Consumer Protection Act, Civil Code sections 1793.22 et

8 seq., a reasonable number of attempts have been made to confirm the Vehicle to the

a l
applicable express warranties within 18,000 miles on the odometer of the vehicle.

11
38.

o rt
In the first 18 months/18,000 miles Plaintiffs have owned the vehicle Defendant

has been given sufficient repair opportunities under Civil Code section § 1793.22 (b)(1),

s P
(b)(2), and/or (b)(3); but failed to conform the vehicle to warranty. Plaintiffs hereby assert

e s
the presumption that Defendant has been given a reasonable number of repair attempts

and/or days to conform this Vehicle to the warranty under Civil Code section § 1793.22
14

15 (b)(1), (b)(2), and/or (b)(3).
c c
16 39.
A
Pursuant to the Tanner Consumer Protection Act, Civil Code sections 1793.22 et

a
17

d i
seq., the same nonconformity or nonconformities resulted in a condition or conditions

19
M e
likely to cause death or serious bodily injury if the Vehicle is driven and the

nonconformity has been subject to repair two or more times by the manufacturer its

20 agents.

21 40. Pursuant to the Tanner Consumer Protection Act, Civil Code sections 1793.22 et

23 seq., the Vehicle is out of service by reason of repair of nonconformities by the

24 manufacturer or its agents for a cumulative total of more than 30 calendar days since

25 delivery of the vehicle to Plaintiffs.

26 41. Defendant did not conform the Subject Vehicle to warranty within the paraments

27 set forth in 1793.22.

28 42. Plaintiffs are entitled to justifiably revoke acceptance of the subject vehicle under

Civil Code, section 1794, et seq.
PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT 8
1 43. Plaintiffs hereby revoke acceptance of the Vehicle.

2 44. Plaintiffs are entitled to replacement or reimbursement pursuant to Civil Code,

3 section 1794, et seq.

4 45. Plaintiffs are entitled to rescission of the contract pursuant to Civil Code section

5 1794, et seq. and Commercial Code, section 2711.

6 46. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover any “cover” damages under Commercial Code

7 sections 2711, 2712, and Civil Code, section 1794, et seq.

8 47. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover all incidental and consequential damages

a l
pursuant to 1794 et seq and Commercial Code sections, 2711, 2712, and 2713 et seq.

11
48.

o rt
Plaintiffs are entitled in addition to the amounts recovered, a civil penalty of up

to two times the amount of actual damages in that Defendant has willfully failed to

12 comply with its responsibilities under the Act.

s P
13
s
PRAYER FOR RELIEF

e
14

15
49.

A. c c
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants as follows:

For Plaintiffs’ actual damages in an amount according to proof;
16 B. A
For restitution;
a
17 C.
d i
For a civil penalty, pursuant to the provisions of Civil Code § 1794 (c) or
18

19 D.
M e(e), in a sum twice the amount of actual damages;

For any consequential and incidental damages;
20 E. For general damages in a sum according to proof;
21 F. For interest on all damages;
23 G. For reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs that Plaintiffs have been forced
24 to incur in filing and prosecuting this suit;
25 H. For prejudgment interest at the legal rate; and
26 I. For such other and further relief as the court may deem proper.
27 ///
28

///
PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT 9
1

2 ///

4 ///

6
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
7
50. Pursuant to the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of
8
America, Plaintiffs are entitled to, and demand, a trial by jury.
9

a l
10

11
Dated: January 11, 2023
o
SINA REZ LAW, rt
A Professional Corporation
12

s P
13
s
14

15
c ce BY: _______________________
Sina Rezvanpour

a A Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Yoon Ho Cha and Heewon Kim
17 Cha

d i
18

19
M e
20

PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT 10

Case Info

Judge

Derek W. Hunt Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

January 11, 2023

Case Filing Date

January 11, 2023

County

Parties

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Complaint,Petition: YOON HO CHA VS. GENERAL MOTORS LLC

Preview

Related Topics

Case Info

Parties