Interpretation ID: nht73-2.15
DATE: 11/09/73
FROM: AUTHOR UNAVAILABLE; Lawrence R. Schneider; NHTSA
TO: Greg Beck
TITLE: FMVSR INTERPRETATION
TEXT: Your letter of October 18, 1973, asks what violations of the Federal odometer laws may have occurred in your purchase of a 1962 Tempest which was misrepresented as a 1964 model.
Misrepresentation of the model year, which appears to be your principal grievance, is not a violation of Federal law but could be a violation of local laws against fraudulent merchandising.
Bill Tillett's failure to give you a disclosure statement may be a violation of the Federal odometer disclosure regulation, a copy of which is enclosed. After March 1, 1973, the regulation requires each seller to make a signed, written disclosure of a vehicle's recorded mileage to his purchaser. If he knows the odometer reading is inaccurate, he must also state that the actual mileage is unknown. This statement must be made before the vehicle is sold.
If your seller violated these regulations with fraudulent intent, a civil remedy is available to you under @ 409 of the Act for $ 1,500 or treble damages, whichever is greater. To obtain your remedy, @ 409 provides that you may bring a private civil action in State or Federal court. You may wish to consult an attorney about the possibility of bringing an action in your case.
Sincerely,
Enclosure
October 18, 1973
Local Consumer Protection Commission and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Re: Used Car
Dear Sirs:
My wife and I purchased for her a used car in the beginning of August however the recent newspaper articles on used car dealings leads me to believe that I was swindled.
The car dealer, Bill Tillett of Lancaster Pennsylvania, promised delivery of a 1962 Corvair on August 2, 1973 so on the previous day I gave him a check for $ 156.50 (check #791) which included title, license, state tax, etc on the car which cost $ 125.00. In return I received only a receipt of the money stating said car would be ready the following day. This car was not ready for a week, and even then it was not able to pass inspection (one of my conditions) so being in immediate need of a car he said that he would give us a 1964 Pontiac Tempest 4 cylinder. This car was suited for our needs so we agreed. Then he said that since the Tempest was 2 years newer that it would cost us $ 40.00 more. This we paid reluctantly August 8 (check # 800). I had to return the Corvair's receipt and a new receipt with just Tempest written on it with the total cost of $ 196.50 at the bottom. The bill was not itemized. I received a small slip of paper containing the year (1964) and model # and number of cylidners to send to my insurance company. Mr. Tillett took care of the title and sent us to pick up the license. When I received the title two weeks ago I noticed that only the serial number and model - Tempest appeared on the title. This was ignored until yesterday when I saw a 1964 Tempest - it was not like my car in style. Further checking revealed that I purchased a 1962 Tempest.
1. I received no mileage disclosure statement as I now see was required by law.
2. I was told, as was my insurance company, that I purchased a 1964 Tempest and thus paid another $ 40 for this car over the 1962 Corvair's price. Recently Bill Tillett ran an ad for a 1963 Tempest for $ 95 while I paid $ 165 for a 1964 which was really a 1962.
I wish to press any charges which will enable me to get my money back.
Sincerely,
Greg and Sandra Beck
1715 Swarr Run Rd.
Lancaster, Penna. 17601
or
c/o Lancaster Theological Seminary
555 West James Street
Lancaster, Pa. 17604
cc: both addresses