Cutright -v - GENERAL MOTORS, LLC. et al

Plaintiff alleges as follows:

1. As used in this Complaint, the word "Plaintiff" shall refer to Plaintiff TERRY CUTRIGHT.

2. Plaintiff is a resident of San Bernardino County, California.

3. As used in this Complaint, the word "Defendants" shall refer to all Defendants named in this Complaint.

4. Defendant GENERAL MOTORS, LLC.; ("Defendant GM") is a corporation organized and in existence under the laws of the State of Delaware and registered with the California Department of Corporations to conduct business in California. At all times relevant herein, Defendant was engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing, constructing, assembling, marketing, distributing, and selling automobiles and other motor vehicles and motor vehicle components in San Bernardino County, California.

5. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of the Defendants sued under the fictitious names DOES 1 to 10. They are sued pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 474. When Plaintiff becomes aware of the true names and capacities of the Defendants sued as DOES 1 to 10, Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to state their true names and capacities.

6. On or about November 2, 2019 , Plaintiff entered into a warranty contract with Defendant regarding a 2020 Chevrolet Colorado, vehicle identification number 1GCGTCEN1L (hereafter "Vehicle"), which was manufactured and/or distributed by Defendant GM.

7. The warranty contract contained various warranties, including but not limited to the bumper-bumper warranty, powertrain warranty, emission warranty, etc. A true and correct copy of the warranty contract is attached hereto as Exhibit A. The terms of the express warranty are described in Exhibit A and are incorporated herein.

8. Pursuant to the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (the "Act") Civil Code sections 1790 et seq. the Subject Vehicle constitutes "consumer goods" used primarily for

family or household purposes, and Plaintiff has used the vehicle primarily for those purposes. Plaintiff is a "buyer" of consumer goods under the Act. Defendant GM is a "manufacturer" and/or "distributor" under the Act.

9. Plaintiff justifiably revokes acceptance of the Subject Vehicle under Civil Code, section 1794 , et seq. by filing this Complaint and/or did so prior to filing the instant Complaint.

10. These causes of action arise out of the warranty obligations of GM in connection with a motor vehicle for which GM issued a written warranty.

11. Defects and nonconformities to warranty manifested themselves within the applicable express warranty period, including but not limited to transmission defects, engine defects, electrical defects; among other defects and non-conformities.

12. Said defects/nonconformities substantially impair the use, value, or safety of the Vehicle.

13. The value of the Subject Vehicle is worthless and /or de minimis.

14. Under the Song-Beverly Act, Defendant GM had an affirmative duty to promptly offer to repurchase or replace the Subject Vehicle at the time if failed to conform the Subject Vehicle to the terms of the express warranty after a reasonable number of repair attempts.¹

15. Defendant GM has failed to either promptly replace the Subject Vehicle or to promptly make restitution in accordance with the Song-Beverly Act.

16. Under the Act, Plaintiff is entitled to reimbursement of the price paid for the vehicle less that amount directly attributable to use by the Plaintiff prior to the first presentation to an authorized repair facility for a nonconformity.