In Oct 1997 I purchased a new 1998 Dodge Neon from Wayne Dodge, Inc in Wayne NJ. I also purchased an extended warranty. The provisions of this Warranty clearly state that I am to obtain service at the dealership that sold me the plan, to be fixed at their place of business with or without assistance if needed. At 29k miles, (Nov. 2000) the Head Gasket failed and I took it back to dealership to "diagnosis". They "supposededly" fixed the vehicle without contacting me prior to doing so in just a matter of hours.
I refused to pay deductible because I did not approve the work to be done - therefore Service Director Mr. Narchione clearly wrote on my invoice #DOCS25601 "No further Service to be performed" and at that point breached the Warranty I had purchased from the dealership.
The car continued to leak oil and in Jan. 2001 I brought the car back to the dealership at the General Manager's request. They told me it was "residue and they cleaned the motor". The vehicle continued to leak and I again contacted the dealership in March. I was told outright by General Manager "Wayne Dodge refuses to fix your car - file for arbitration".
Upon contacting Chrysler Customer Service I was told the dealership "can not refuse to fix your car". After waiting all day for a return call from the dealership, I went and checked the Internet for Lemon Law Atty's. The firm of Kimmel and Silverman came up - they have office location in Haddonfield and Ambler, Pa.
Upon speaking with them on March I was told I had an "excellent case" under the UCC codes and Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. Their service is totally free - they get their fee from the Manufacturer IN ADDITION to any settlement offered-clearly stated in their acceptance letter and on the website.
I sent in the information needed and NEVER signed a Written Retainer Agreement or Written Contingency Fee agreement/Schedule. The original attorney who had handled the case left the firm and it was assigned to Mr. Robert Rapkin in the firm. Mr. Rapkin was not a member of the NJ Bar - of which I did not know at the time and it was not disclosed to me, and had no jurisdiction to work on this case as per the rules of NJ Bar. This was clearly NJ law since the dealership as well as my residence is located in NJ.
After the District Manager of Chrysler inspected the car at the dealership, the General Manager of Wayne Dodge, Inc. Told me that Chrysler "issued the dealership a chargeback of $1,500.00". I was to take the car to another dealership to fix (there was a Tecnical Service Bulletin issued by Chrysler on this problem and correct procedures as to how to fix it - of which I have a copy) - the other dealership fixed the car in three days - sent the part to a machine shop and the car did not leak from that point on.
I was offered a "settlement" from Chrysler for "damages" and the firm of Kimmel & Silverman were to get half of it - I would have to sign a Release - of which I had no idea what it said. When I received the Release, the wording did not indicate the distribution of monies correctly. Further review of the Service Contract indicated that there was clearly a breach by the dealership and I was mis-represented by the law firm.
I refused to sign the Release and Mr. Rapkin filed a Default Judgment against me in the state of Pennsylvania - a state that has no jurisdiction over NJ law in the amount of $6,000.00 for "breach of contract" - a document I never signed with the firm. Docket # CV-000250-01 in District Court in Ambler, PA.
I filed a Grievance against Mr. Silverman with the NJ Bar, Office of Attorney Ethics, State of NJ. After being interviewed, the Ethics Committee filed a Motion in Supreme Court of NJ - docket # IV-01-085E, which is Public Record at this point, for several issues of Misconduct, including items 7,8, 9, and 10 refer to a "long-standing agreement - not in writing" "known as the Chrysler Agreement" between the firm and Chrysler.
One can not be represented in their best interests by a firm that is getting a flat fee from the company that their client is pursuing for "damages/breach of contract". I also have documentation from Mr. Silverman in which he states that they get the same fee regardless if the client gets 2,000 or 200,000. That sounds like an Agreement to me.
Although Mr. Silverman has contested the allegations brought upon him by the Ethics Committee, the outcome of the Grievance has nothing to do with the fact that I have a judgment against me by an atty that did not have the jurisdiction to do so, in a state that has no jurisdiction over the matter, for a document that I did not sign for, as well as misrepresentation from the firm.
The car is now LOSING 1.5 qts of oil every 2,000 miles, I have a extended warranty that is still in effect of which I have been refused service on and the car needs a new motor - not due to anything that I have done.
I have records of oil changes every 3,000 miles and have driven the car less than 1,200miles per year (46k miles on it now). I am forced to pay monthly on this vehicle even though the motor is not going to last until it is paid off.
I think this is a big scam and many people were "cheated" out of their rightful settlements by this law firm.
At this writing, I have been waiting for the Consumer Protection, Law Division to attempt to mediate this issue. I want to know why Wayne Dodge, Inc. Refused to fix a fixable vehicle, with or without assistance at their place of business - and since the Technical Service Bulletin gave them directions as to how to do so - there was no excuse not to.
The car also has squeaking brakes - another TSB issued on that - two defects and a breach of contract.
Chrysler "respectfully declines my request" to what abide by the law?
I apologize for the length of this report - but all information mentioned is of Public Record.
Linda
Wayne, New Jersey
0 comments