Anthony M. Frazier v. Castle Ford, Ltd., f/k/a ... - Maryland Courts

Background
Class Action Complaint
Petitioner Anthony Frazier commenced this action by filing a complaint in the Circuit
Court for Montgomery County on July 27, 2007, naming Respondent Crystal Ford Isuzu,
Ltd. (“Crystal Ford”) as defendant. 1 The complaint alleged that Crystal Ford sold Mr. Frazier
an extended warranty for his 2003 Ford Explorer on or about December 23, 2004. According
to the complaint, the salesperson told Mr. Frazier that the extended warranty would last for
48 months from the date of purchase or 100,000 miles, whichever occurred first. In fact, the
duration of the type of extended warranty sold to Mr. Frazier was calculated from the “build
date” of the automobile. 2 As a result, the extended warranty actually expired on October 30,
2006, more than 2 years earlier than Mr. Frazier had been led to believe.
The complaint alleged that, because the warranty expired earlier than promised, Mr.
Frazier incurred unanticipated repair expenses when he had his car serviced within the fouryear
period following purchase of the warranty. According to the complaint, when Mr.
Frazier complained to Crystal Ford, the salesperson advised that there was nothing she could
do, as the actual terms of the warranty contract measured the four years from the “build date”
1 Subsequent to the events that led to this litigation, Crystal Ford operated under the
name “Castle Ford Ltd.” For the sake of simplicity, we adopt the same convention as the
parties and will refer to the Respondent as “Crystal Ford.”
2 Crystal Ford concedes that it erred in explaining the warranty to Mr. Frazier.
According to Crystal Ford, due to the number of miles recorded on his car’s odometer, Mr.
Frazier received a new car warranty that ran from the “in-service” date of the vehicle rather
than a used car warranty that would have run from the date of purchase of the warranty.
2