A civil ruling forced a concessionaire and Fiat to return the money invested by a woman who bought a truck, plus the payment of moral and punitive damages, since it considered that she was not duly informed as a consumer that the purchased vehicle was not suitable for the urban use.
The plaintiff requested the termination of the sales contract, the reimbursement of the sums paid for administrative expenses, freight and patenting, in addition to damages.
As reported, the woman acquired a Fiat Toro Freedom 2.0 16v 4×4 model vehicle, for urban use. In the presentation, she detailed the technical drawbacks that the car presented when it was destined for such use, highlighting, as a relevant fact, that it was publicized for this purpose.
It considered that the legal obligations related to the duty to inform, consumer protection, dignified treatment and the efficiency of the technical service were breached. Later he denounced other events related to the malfunction of the car. As a result of these inconveniences, he had to use taxi services.
In its reply, Fiat questioned the consumer status of women. On the other hand, it said that it used the vehicle for commercial purposes and denied a contractual relationship, since it only manufactured vehicles and did not market them.
Basis of the ruling
In the first place, the judge said that it was a consumer relationship: “there is no element that allows excluding the operation that would unite the parts of the consumer’s statute since, as indicated, the plaintiff acquired, as final recipient, a product that the defendants produce and market ”.
On the merits, the designated expert explained that “the vehicle in question uses a gas recircularisation process”. At this point, the expert pointed out that both the passive and active regeneration system need a certain speed and minimum engine revolutions.
In this way, “the use of short trips at low speed means that the necessary conditions for regeneration are not reached, and the” DPF cleaning “warning light comes on on the driver’s dashboard, indicating to him to be careful to achieve the aforementioned conditions, higher speed at 60km per hour, engine over 2000 revolutions per minute for an estimated time between 10 and 20 minutes ”.
The ruling concludes that “what has been said so far shows, fully, that the vehicle sold is not suitable for urban use, since in a city, and Bariloche is no exception, it is impossible to maintain a minimum speed of 60 km / h during a lapse of 20 minutes each time the car is started ”.
At this point, who delivered it, “did not prove that he had informed the lady of the pertinent precautions to avoid the aforementioned inconvenience. In effect, the provision of the user manual does not replace the duty of information provided for in art. 4 of the Consumer Defense Law ”, says the judge.
He recalled that “according to the provisions of said standard, the supplier is obliged to supply the consumer in a certain, clear and detailed manner everything related to the essential characteristics of the goods it provides, and this must be provided with the necessary clarity that allows understanding. ”.
He added that “the user manual that was given to him at the time of removing the car does not say, in any of its chapters, in a clear, precise and punctual way the speed at which it must be driven, the number of revolutions per minute at the one that the engine must maintain, much less the time during which the driver must combine both variables indicated, as indicated by the acting expert ”.
Therefore, it ordered the termination of the contract, the return of the money plus interest, and compensation for moral and punitive damages.