Subject of the claim:

Oblige the Defendant to replace the vehicle with a similar vehicle of the same brand.

The basis of the claim:

The Plaintiff purchased a car, after which it was handed over to an official dealer to eliminate the defect in the form of a malfunction of the all-wheel drive clutch. For a period of more than 60 days, the defect was not eliminated due to the lack of details due to the sanctions imposed. According to the Plaintiff, since the warranty repair period exceeded 45 days, that is, the defect could not be eliminated without a disproportionate amount of time, this defect is significant and its requirements are subject to satisfaction.

Subject of claim:

To recover from the Defendant the cost of repair of identified defects in the car purchased from the Defendant under the contract of sale.

Basis of claim:

In connection with the breakdown of the car, the Plaintiff turned to the official dealer, who indicated the reason for the request in the order: "Automatic transmission diagnostics + reset adaptations. Autorun does not work, no power increase." In addition, the dealer indicated the detection of partial destruction of the lower part of the upper catalytic converter. The alleged reason for the destruction of the lower part of the active mass is the introduction of changes in the design of the vehicle in the form of installation of gas equipment not certified by the manufacturer; malfunctions resulting from the use of non–original equipment and installed in an unauthorized service center are not covered by the manufacturer's warranty. The official dealer refused to repair the warranty.

Subject of claim:

Refusal to execute the contract of sale, the demand for a refund of the amount paid for the goods, the demand for compensation of the difference between the price of the goods established by the contract and the price of the corresponding goods at the time of satisfaction of such a claim.

Basis of claim:

The presence of vehicle malfunctions that were identified during the warranty period, in connection with which the Plaintiff was deprived of the opportunity to use the goods during each warranty period for a total of more than thirty days. The defendant acknowledged the presence of a malfunction, the car meets the manufacturer's requirements and has natural wear, which is allowed by the manufacturer.

Subject of claim:

Oblige the Defendant to transfer the car to the Plaintiff at the agreed price in accordance with the terms of the concluded Contract, in a complete set, taking into account the agreed additional equipment.

Basis of claim:

Non-fulfillment by the Defendant of obligations to transfer the car to the buyer in accordance with the terms of the Contract of Sale at the price specified in the commercial offer and agreed between the parties. The Defendant objected to the satisfaction of the claims, pointing out that the contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was terminated due to the Plaintiff's failure to fulfill obligations to pay for the car.

Subject of claim:

Admission to the workplace, non-imposition of obstacles in the exercise of labor activity.

Basis of claim:

According to the Plaintiff, he was forced to resign, in connection with which he suspended work and stated the relevant requirements for admission to the workplace.

Subject of claim:

Collect the cost of the car, oblige to accept a low-quality car as a refund.

Basis of claim:

During the operation of the disputed car, noise was detected in the engine compartment. During the examination by the Plaintiff's expert, it was concluded that the uncharacteristic sound of the internal combustion engine is a factory defect. The basis of the claim is the consumer's claims regarding the quality of the goods and the timing of the elimination of deficiencies.

Subject of claim:

Termination of the contract of sale, collection of funds, assignment of the obligation to accept the car purchased under the contract of sale.

Basis of claim:

A low-quality product was sold to the Plaintiff, in which, according to the Plaintiff, a significant defect was identified after the expiration of the warranty period for the goods.

Subject of claim:

Termination of the contract of purchase and sale of the vehicle and recovery of funds paid under the contract.

Basis of claim:

The presence of a defect in the form of gasoline entering the engine oil sump, the defendant's refusal to eliminate the specified defect within the framework of warranty repair, since it is not a disadvantage.

Subject of claim:

Refund of car purchase price

Basis of claim:

Repeated rectification of various defects which resulted in failure to use it within 30 days in the last year of the warranty period.

Subject of claim:

Refund of car purchase price

Basis of claim:

Substantial defect in the goods discovered after expiration of the car warranty.

Subject of claim:

Replacement of goods with similar ones.

Basis of claim:

Spontaneous combustion of a car, which, according to the Plaintiff¸ occurred as a result of defects.

Subject of claim:

Refund of car purchase price

Basis of claim:

Substantial engine defect

Subject of claim:

Importer is obliged to immediately remedy defect for free

Basis of claim:

Manufacturing defect of the goods.

Subject of claim:

Refund of car purchase price

Basis of claim:

Substantial defect in the goods, failure to use the goods for more than 30 days in each year of the warranty period, delay in the goods repair period

Subject of claim:

Refund of car purchase price

Basis of claim:

Material defect of the goods - repeated failure of electronic units.