This case was last updated from PACER on 09/16/2021 at 05:46:50 (UTC).

Lavender v. Thor Motor Coach Inc. et al

Case Summary

On September 15, 2021, Timothy Lavender (“Plaintiff”), represented by Richard Collins Dalton of Richard C. Dalton, L.L.C., filed a contract lawsuit against Thor Motor Coach Inc., (“Thor”), Ford Motor Company, ("Ford"), Giant Inland Empire RV Center, Inc., (“Giant RV”), and Bank of America, N.A., (“Bank of America, N.A.”), (collectively, the “Defendants”), seeking monetary damages and rescission of sale, together with prejudgment and post-judgment interest, civil penalties, attorney fees, and costs of suit for Defendants’ alleged failure to repair the nonconformities after a reasonable number of attempts and, as such, the failure to comply with and having breached all applicable warranty requirements. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of California with Judges Roger T. Benitez and William V. Gallo presiding. 

 

In the complaint, Plaintiff alleged that, “On or about March 15, 2021, Plaintiff purchased a new 2021 THOR CHALLENGER 37FH bearing VIN: 1F66F5DN7L0A14089, hereinafter "CHALLENGER," from GIANT RV. The "CHALLENGER" was purchased primarily for Plaintiff’s personal use. The sales contract was presented to Plaintiff at the dealership and was executed at the dealership.”

 

Plaintiff further alleged that, “Since purchase, Plaintiff has returned his CHALLENGER to the Defendants and its authorized warranty service dealers for repairs on numerous occasions. Despite this prolonged period during which Defendants were given the opportunity to repair the CHALLENGER, the more significant and dangerous defects were not repaired. Defendants failed to repair the subject vehicle so as to bring it into conformity with the warranties set forth herein. From the date of its purchase, the CHALLENGER continues to this day to exhibit some or all of the non-conformities and/or defects described herein.”

 

Plaintiff also alleged that, “Plaintiff directly notified the Defendants of the defective conditions of the CHALLENGER on numerous occasions. Plaintiff notified Defendants, THOR and GIANT RV, that they wanted a rescission of the sale of the CHALLENGER but the Defendants have failed and refused to buy back Plaintiff’s defective CHALLENGER.”

 

Plaintiff lists out eight claims for relief. The first claim is for violations of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, Civil Code Section 1790 et seq. The second claim is for violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. The third claim is for lender liability. The fourth claim is for breach of express warranties. The fifth claim is for breach of implied warranties. The sixth claim is for negligence and negligent misrepresentation. The seventh claim is for breach of contract, and the eighth claim is for negligent repair.

 

In the prayer for relief, Plaintiff requested the court for a judgment against Defendants for general, special, and actual damages; incidental and consequential damages; out of pocket damages for expenditures related to any cost of repairs; deductibles, and towing charges. Further, Plaintiff requested the court for a judgment for rescinding the sale and returning to Plaintiff the purchase price including all collateral costs at the time of the sale, any and all finance charges, insurance premiums, maintenance costs, repair costs, and damages, and any diminution in value of the CHALLENGER, attributable to the defects. Lastly, Plaintiff requested the court for a judgment for past and future economic losses, prejudgment and post-judgment interest, damages for loss of use of vehicle, civil penalties and/or punitive damages, damages for mental anguish together with costs of litigation. 

 

This case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the status of this case. Sign up to view the latest case updates and court documents.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    3:21-CV-01618

  • Filing Date:

    09/15/2021

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

Roger T. Benitez

Referral Judge

William V. Gallo

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

Timothy Lavender

Defendants

Thor Motor Coach Inc.

Ford Motor Company

Giant Inland Empire RV Center, Inc.

Bank of America, N.A.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

Richard Collins Dalton

Attorney at Richard C. Dalton, L.L.C.

P.O. Box 358

Carencro, LA 70520-0358

 

Court Documents

#3

(#3) Summons Issued. Counsel receiving this notice electronically should print this summons and serve it in accordance with Rule 4, Fed.R.Civ.P and LR 4.1. (fth) (Entered: 09/15/2021)

#2

(#2) NOTICE of Party With Financial Interest by Timothy Lavender. No Parties With Financial Interest. (fth) (Entered: 09/15/2021)

1 #1

Civil Cover Sheet

1 #1

Main Document

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/15/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#3) Summons Issued. Counsel receiving this notice electronically should print this summons and serve it in accordance with Rule 4, Fed.R.Civ.P and LR 4.1. (fth) (Entered: 09/15/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#2) NOTICE of Party With Financial Interest by Timothy Lavender. No Parties With Financial Interest. (fth) (Entered: 09/15/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#1) COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ACASDC-16134307.), filed by Timothy Lavender. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)The new case number is 3:21-cv-1618-BEN-WVG. Judge Roger T. Benitez and Magistrate Judge William V. Gallo are assigned to the case. (Dalton, Richard) (fth) (Entered: 09/15/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where GIANT INLAND EMPIRE RV CENTER INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION DBA GIANT RV DOWNEY is a litigant

Latest cases where Thor Motor Coach, Inc. is a litigant

Latest cases where Bank of America is a litigant

Latest cases where Ford Motor Company is a litigant