Ortiz Lopez, Ivelisse v. Jamalo Auto, Corp.
KLRA202300561
Tribunal De Apelaciones De Pue...Mar 15, 2024Background
- Ivelisse Ortiz López purchased a used 2017 Hyundai Santa Fe from Jamalo Auto Corp. (The Collection Auto) for $24,995 plus financing costs, financed by Caribe Federal Credit Union (CFCU).
- Ortiz López claimed she bought the car under the understanding it was in new condition with no corrosion or prior damage, and was told it came with a three-month warranty, but did not receive warranty documentation.
- Shortly after the purchase, Ortiz López experienced issues with the vehicle, notably corrosion and worn brake parts. Multiple inspections confirmed significant corrosion, which was not disclosed at sale.
- Ortiz López filed a complaint with DACo (Department of Consumer Affairs) requesting nullification of the sale and contract, return of all payments, and damages.
- DACo found in favor of Ortiz López, nullifying the sale and contract, ordering return of all payments, and holding Jamalo and CFCU solidarily liable. CFCU appealed, challenging joint liability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CFCU is solidarily liable for seller's actions | Ortiz: Both parties liable for refund | CFCU: Only seller liable, no solidarity agreed | Court held CFCU not solidarily liable; reversed DACo on this point |
| Validity of the sales contract due to non-disclosure | Ortiz: Material facts undisclosed, so void | Jamalo: Offered repairs or exchange; buyer refused | Contract null; sale void due to material non-disclosure |
| Right to return all payments with interest | Ortiz: Entitled to full refund+interest | CFCU/Jamalo: Buyer not entitled; not at fault | Court confirmed buyer's entitlement to refund (but only from seller) |
| Duty to disclose material vehicle history (rental, corrosion) | Ortiz: Seller hid vital info | Jamalo: Insisted readiness to resolve issues | Seller's non-disclosure was wrongful; justified contract nullity |
Key Cases Cited
- García Reyes v. Cruz Auto Corp., 173 DPR 870 (P.R. 2008) (addressing presumption of validity and the burden required to overturn agency findings)
- Otero v. Toyota, 163 DPR 716 (P.R. 2005) (explains evidentiary standards for upholding administrative decisions)
- Rolón Martínez v. Caldero López, 201 DPR 26 (P.R. 2018) (scope and deference of judicial review of administrative decisions)
- Fraguada Bonilla v. Auxilio Mutuo, 186 DPR 365 (P.R. 2012) (doctrine that solidarity in obligations requires explicit agreement or legal provision)