A Maryland plaintiff sued an Illinois classic car dealership for nearly $97,000. The buyer claimed their 1969 Chevrolet Camaro was undrivable and misrepresented.
The plaintiff alleged the engine wasn’t the advertised 540 cubic inch big block. Instead, they claimed it was a mislabeled 454 block.
The buyer also complained about the carburetor, fuel system, frame, paint, and tires.
The defense hired Steven Paul to evaluate the claims. Steven Paul is a Certified Vehicle Appraiser who specializes in classic and performance cars.
Mr. Paul reviewed all available evidence. This included pre-sale videos, website descriptions, and third-party inspection reports.
He also examined deposition testimony, post-sale repair records, and purchase documents.
The plaintiff made extensive post-sale modifications. These changes prevented a physical inspection.
Mr. Paul relied on documentation from the time of sale.
Mr. Paul confirmed the engine was a 454 big block. These engines can be bored and stroked to 540 cubic inches.
This is a common performance modification.
The plaintiff performed no testing to disprove the claimed engine size.
Video evidence showed the car was operational.
Two drivers operated the vehicle. One was the seller. The other was an inspector the plaintiff hired.
Both drove it under normal and highway conditions.
The fuel system met industry standards for track-oriented builds. The 650 CFM carburetor was appropriate.
The headers also met standards for this type of high-performance Camaro.
Mr. Paul found the configuration appropriate.
Mr. Paul reviewed pre-sale materials and inspection reports. The vehicle’s paint, tires, and frame matched descriptions.
Claims of damage or misrepresentation were unfounded.
The Court ruled in favor of the defense on all counts.
The plaintiff failed to prove misrepresentation. The plaintiff did not disprove the engine size claim.
The vehicle matched its advertised condition and performance capabilities.
The plaintiff made substantial modifications after purchase. The UCC expects buyers to preserve goods in original condition.
This applies when buyers seek to revoke acceptance.
The Court found the plaintiff’s expert testimony unreliable. It lacked testing and firsthand knowledge. It relied on unsupported assumptions.
Steven Paul’s testimony clarified the technical feasibility of engine modifications.
He explained industry restoration standards. He distinguished between drivability issues and driver inexperience.
His analysis helped the Court understand the vehicle matched its representation. It was also mechanically sound.
The defense received a verdict with no damages awarded.
The Court confirmed the vehicle’s value at $100,000–$120,000.
Steven Paul is a Certified Vehicle Appraiser. He has over 25 years of automotive experience.
He has completed more than 5,000 inspections.
He specializes in classic, collector, and high-performance vehicles.
He provides expert witness services in disputes. These involve valuation, misrepresentation, drivability, mechanical failure, and restoration quality.
Get Vehicle Case ReviewCV DownloadSSP provides objective mechanical evaluations, certified inspections, and court-admissible reports that help legal teams understand vehicle-related facts without bias. Call 618.960.4696 or fill out form.
