Vehicle: 2018 Ford F-150
Issue: Undisclosed prior structural damage and alleged dealer misrepresentation of vehicle history at point of sale
Jurisdiction: Consumer arbitration, Missouri
A purchaser acquired a 2018 Ford F-150 from Excel Motors, LLC, doing business as ALM St. Louis. The dispute involved the vehicle’s prior damage history and whether that history had been adequately disclosed at the time of sale.
Vehicle history records reflected structural damage before the purchaser acquired the truck. CARFAX (look at the limitations of a Carfax report) reported that the vehicle had been sold in July 2020 with structural damage disclosed by the seller following a visual inspection. The report also noted that structural damage can affect vehicle safety and reliability.
The matter later proceeded to arbitration.
I was retained to review the available vehicle history and related documentation concerning the F-150.
The review included CARFAX and AutoCheck records, along with available information concerning the vehicle’s sales and service history. The purpose of the review was to compare the documented history of the vehicle with the condition and representations at issue in the dispute.
The records provided a timeline showing that structural damage had been documented before the purchaser’s transaction.
Prior Structural Damage
CARFAX reflected a July 2020 entry stating that structural damage had been disclosed by the seller based on a visual inspection. The report also included a general caution that structural damage may affect vehicle safety and reliability.
Damage History in AutoCheck
The AutoCheck report also identified structural damage in the vehicle’s history and characterized the reported damage as severe. Structural damage was also noted in the auction-related history.
Timing of the Damage
The available records indicated that the structural-damage history predated the purchaser’s acquisition of the vehicle.
Subsequent Dealer History
Shortly after the 2020 structural-damage entry, CARFAX showed the vehicle being offered for sale and serviced at ALM KIA South in Union City, Georgia. The significance of that history would depend on the complete transaction and dealership records available in the matter.
Safety Considerations
The documented structural damage was relevant to evaluating the vehicle’s condition and potential safety concerns. The available vehicle-history (how experts investigate alleged vehicle misrepresentation) records indicated that this type of damage may affect safety and reliability, depending on the nature and quality of any repairs.
The dispute proceeded to arbitration and resulted in an award in favor of the plaintiff.
The available materials do not provide the amount of the award or the arbitrator’s complete reasoning.
A related St. Louis County Circuit Court action was later dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. That procedural dismissal did not, by itself, provide additional findings regarding the underlying vehicle-condition dispute.
My role was to review the available vehicle-history and related documentation and identify information relevant to the F-150’s prior condition.
The review found that structural damage had been documented before the purchaser acquired the vehicle and that the history appeared in more than one vehicle-history source. I also considered the timing of those entries and their relevance to the vehicle’s later sale and reported safety concerns.
The conclusions were based on the records available for review and were considered within the broader context of the dispute and arbitration.
Get Vehicle Case ReviewCV Download
SSP provides objective mechanical evaluations, certified inspections, and court-admissible reports that help legal teams understand vehicle-related facts without bias.
