2011 QCCQ 11169, 2011 QCCQ 11169

Mello c. Lasalle Suzuki 2011 QCCQ 11169 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL TOWN OF MONTREAL Civil Division No: 500-32-122896-105 DATE: August 30, 2011 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE SUZANNE HANDMAN, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ JOAQUIM MELLO […], LaSalle, Qc. […] Plaintiff v. LASALLE SUZUKI 5532, Clarendon, Laval, Qc.

H7W 5B1 Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] Joaquim Mello is suing LaSalle Suzuki (“Suzuki”) for $617.47, since the car he bought from Suzuki could not be driven two days after he purchased it. Suzuki denies the claim. The evidence: [ 2 ] On December 22, 2009, Mr. Mello went to Suzuki to purchase a car after seeing it announced on Internet for $3,290. He bought the car for $3,100.

He was told by the salesperson that the car was fine and had not been in any accidents. [ 3 ] Two days after this purchase, Mr. Mello found the rear suspension so damaged that the car swerved to one side and could not be driven. [ 4 ] Mr. Mello obtained an estimate for its repair. Suzuki refused to fix the problem, explaining there was no guarantee for the vehicle. After sending Suzuki a demand letter, Mr. Mello had the car repaired for $598.23.

He claims Suzuki never warned him that the car had a problem. [ 5 ] Suzuki’s representative claimed Suzuki had carried out a safety inspection before the sale and had repaired small glitches. It also claimed it had reduced the price by over $1,000 to deal with the bushings that were squeaking. Furthermore, Suzuki stated that Mr. Mello had signed a document, which indicates that the car is not subject to a guarantee or to the terms of articles 37 and 38 of the Consumer Protection Ac t [1] . [ 6 ] Mr.

Mello denied any price reduction, testifying that the requisite sticker could not be seen on the windshield because of snow and that the price on the sticker was changed only after he had accepted to buy the car for $3,100. Analysis: [ 7 ] Mr. Mello is claiming the cost of his car repair. The vehicle he had bought from Suzuki was defective. Within two days of his purchase, the car was not roadworthy.

[ 8 ] Articles 37 and 38 of the Consumer Protection Act read as follows: 37. Goods forming the object of a contract must be fit for the purposes for which goods of that kind are ordinarily used. 38. Goods forming the object of a contract must be durable in normal use for a reasonable length time, having regard to their price, the term of the contract and the condition of their use. [ 9 ] According to these provisions, goods, which are the object of a contract must last for a reasonable period. Although Mr.

Mello bought a second hand car, it could not be used for a reasonable period of time, contrary to the Consumer Protection Act . [ 10 ] Suzuki claims Mr. Mello had waived his right to the provisions of the Act by signing a form provided by Suzuki which stipulates that articles 37 and 38 of the Consumer Protection Act do not apply: “Pas de garantie sujet à: 37, 38 L.P.C” [ 11 ] However, the Consumer Protection Act is a law of public order and it is not possible to renounce to its application. [ 12 ] In light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that Suzuki is responsible for the cost of Mr.

Mello's repair as well as for his registered letters, for a total of $617.47. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: GRANTS Plaintiff's action; CONDEMNS Defendant, LaSalle Suzuki, to pay Plaintiff, Joaquim Mello, the sum of $617.47 plus interest at the legal rate and the additional indemnity foreseen by

section 1619 of the Civil code of Quebec since April 12, 2010, plus the judicial fees of $70. __________________________________ SUZANNE HANDMAN, J.C.Q. Date of hearing: July 5, 2011