A MAN spent 1.11 million yuan (US$166,406) on a brand new imported Maserati V6 last June. But it turned out that the car’s left headlight had been replaced, and there were scratches on the electroplated edging of the left front door window. The luxury car had actually been recalled twice by the manufacturer, the Southern Metropolis Daily reported Wednesday.

According to the first instance at Longgang District People’s Court, the car was confirmed to have defects before the sale, so the seller was guilty of fraud for not informing the consumer. The seller was ordered to offer a car return, a refund and compensation of 400,000 yuan.

The man, surnamed Chen, runs a company in Shenzhen. He had a Mercedes Benz S-Class sedan, but was often mistaken for a chauffeur, so he wanted to get a sedan that caters to young people. He favored Maserati.

In June, he and his friend attended an auto show and settled on a Maserati. He heard that big discounts were offered and bought the car at the auto store a few days later. He paid a down payment of 200,000 yuan and signed the contract. Two weeks later, he paid 477,300 yuan and arranged a car installment mortgage of 500,000 yuan at the bank. “When I came to the store to take the car, I was asked to have a quick look at it and sign the remaining documents because the staff would be off duty soon,” Chen said. The garage was dark without much light, he said. He looked at the car for no more than two minutes before being called to sign the documents.

It all became clear when he drove his new car to a repair shop and was told that the car’s left headlight had been replaced, and that there were scratches on the front bumper and electroplated edging of the left front door window.

Chen negotiated with the auto store many times, and the store finally admitted that the headlight had been replaced, but insisted that it was an imported original part and the technician was qualified to repair vehicles like Maserati.

Chen added that the luxury car he bought had been recalled by the manufacturer twice, but the auto store never informed him. He filed a lawsuit against the auto store for deliberately concealing that the car had defects and for false propaganda. He required a car return, a refund and compensation.

For a year, the luxury car remained untouched in an underground garage and was covered with dust. Chen said that he had to pay 15,000 yuan each month for the mortgage loan.

The auto store explained that the car had never been repaired due to an accident. The scratches were made during the shipment from Italy to China. So at the request of the manufacturer, the left front headlight was replaced, which was normal for a pre-delivery warranty.

At present, both sides have appealed to the court. The case is being heard by Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court for the second instance. (Zhang Yu)