Hillyer purchased a new truck. About two years later he asserted claims against the selling dealership for breach of contract, breach of warranty, fraud and violations of the Consumer Protection Act. Hillyer did not initially name the manufacturer in the action because he had initiated his dispute against the manufacturer but lost in the arbitration proceeding conducted by the Better Business Bureau (called Auto Line). The fundamental claim was that the vehicles frame was bent upon purchase and delivery. The selling dealership defending arguing that it was not responsible for any manufacturing defects and that it had properly disclaimed any express or implied warranties at the time of sale. The trial court granted summary judgment to the selling dealer. On appeal the Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling and opined that the selling dealership had properly disclaimed warranties under KRS 355.2-316 and that there were no cognizable claims against the selling dealer under the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act 15 USC 2301 or for fraud under KRS 190.071.
New vehicle sale/warranty disclaimer/Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act/KRS 190.071/KRS 355.2-316/Better Business Bureau
