Dealer liable for car that could not pass a safety inspection

Best Auto of Manassas is an independent car dealer. In February, 2023, it bought a 2004 Toyota 4 Runner. Under Virginia law, a car dealer has to take any car it acquires in for a state Safety Inspection. If it cannot pass a safety inspection, the dealer has to tell any purchaser why it cannot pass. Best Auto took the car in for a safety inspection, and it failed due to frame issues. Three days later, Best Auto took the car back in again to the same inspection station, and got a “passed” sticker placed on the car. They then advertised the car for sale.

Mr. M lives in New York. He was shopping for a car. He saw the car listed, and contacted Best Auto. He specifically asked about the condition of the car, and asked for pictures of the undercarriage before he drove down to buy the car. Best Auto sent photos which they said showed the condition of the vehicle. These photos did not show any problem with the frame. When Mr. M got to the dealership, he saw the car, saw the “passed” inspection sticker, and believed it was safe to drive. He bought the car for $13,000, and took it home. A few days later, he took it in for routine maintenance. His mechanic in New York told him the car should not be on the road – the frame was so rusted that it had visible holes rusted through it. Mr. M had the car towed back to Virginia for the Virginia State Police to inspect it. The Virginia State Police
determined that it should not have passed a safety inspection because of the rust holes in the frame. The cost to repair the vehicle would have been 3 times as much as Mr. M had purchased it for.

Mr. M filed suit against the dealer and the inspection station. After settling with the inspection station, Mr. M took the case to a jury against the dealer. The jury found that the dealer had breached its warranty to Mr. M – even though they had sold the car AS IS, that did not affect their express warranty that the vehicle was capable of passing a safety inspection, and that the pictures of the car were accurately showing the condition of the frame. The jury gave Mr. M all of his money he had spent on the car (including purchase price, tow bills, insurance, taxes, and similar costs), for a total of $20,000. The Court also required the dealer to pay Mr. M’s attorney fees and costs in excess of $36,000.