Claim against a parallel vehicle importer and Champion Motors – demand for compensation

Our office filed a lawsuit against a parallel vehicle importer (private individual) and against Champion Motors Company After a client of our firm purchased a luxury vehicle to be imported to Israel through Parallel importAccording to our firm's client, the vehicle provided to him did not match what he was promised prior to purchase.

In addition, the vehicle suffered Air conditioner malfunction, which led to the vehicle being in the Champion Motors garage for a very long time. Before filing a report Lawsuit against a car importer Macbil and Champion Motors, a client of our firm, contacted us via Warning letter before filing a claim to both defendants, but both rejected his demands.

Under these circumstances, our firm's client submitted Claim Against a parallel car importer and against Champion Motors, demanding an injunction Canceling the vehicle purchase transaction, or, alternatively, Vehicle replacement under manufacturer's warranty, plus financial compensation and reimbursement Legal expenses (and other remedies).

These types of claims are complex and often last much longer than a year. If you have the opportunity to reach a reasonable settlement before taking legal action, it is always worth at least considering it.

On the other hand, if you have tried to reach a reasonable compromise and this was not possible due to a lack of cooperation on the part of the potential defendant, or for any other reason, there will be no escape from filing a lawsuit. A lawsuit against the vehicle importer In order to exercise all your rights.

In these cases, it is highly recommended to use the services of Car Claims Lawyer who is very experienced in this field, otherwise you may significantly reduce your chances of success in advance.

A lawsuit against a parallel car importer and Champion Motors

Regarding:

The plaintiff:

שם ושם משפחה, ת"ז: _______
________ Street, City ____ 
ע"י עו"ד אדי בליטשטיין (מ.ר. 60023)
13 HaHagana St., Rishon LeZion (Yaron Miller Tower, Office 501) 
Tel: 03-6427876; Fax: 077-4704697 

N G D 
Defendants:

1. צ'מפיון מוטורס בע"מ, H.P. 513973255 
   רח' לח"י 7, בני ברק 5120012
2. שם פרטי ושם משפחה, ת"ז: ________

Claim

Essence of the claim:  Supplier – customer, other financial. 
Requested remedies: Canceling a vehicle purchase transaction, לחלופין, החלפת רכב בחדש, פיצוי כספי בגובה _____ ש"ח.
amount Court fee: _____ ש"ח (_______ ש"ח במועד זה לפי תקנה 6(א) ופרט 1 לתקנות בתי המשפט (אגרות), תשס"ז -2007).
The existence of an additional procedure: There is no further proceeding between the plaintiff and the defendants dealing with the matters detailed in this lawsuit.

Summons

Since the plaintiff has filed this lawsuit against you, you are invited to file Statement of defense within sixty days From the date this invitation was presented to you.

Please note, if you do not submit Defense אזי לפי תקנה 130 לתקנות סדר הדין האזרחי, התשע"ט-2018, תהיה לתובע הזכות לקבל A verdict not before you.

The emphasis in the statement of claim is not in the original unless otherwise noted.

A concise description of the litigants

1. The plaintiff is a private individual who chose to purchase a luxury Audi vehicle from defendant 2, Which for over a year has been located almost continuously in the garages of the 1st defendant ((Except for a few times when the vehicle was released to the plaintiff's possession, sometimes not working properly because the replacement part had not yet arrived, and was returned to the garage after a few days). The vehicle has been continuously at Defendant 1's garages since the month of _____.
2. הנתבע 2 הוא סוחר רכבים אשר עוסק בייבוא מקביל של רכבי יוקרה, והוא פועל תחת המותג _______, אשר מפרסם באמצעים שונים ורבים במרשתת. הנתבע 2 הוא יבואן עקיף ו/או יבואן מסחרי, בהתאם להוראות חוק רישוי שירותים ומקצועות בענף הרכב, תשע"ו – 2016 (להלן: "Services Licensing Law").
3. Defendant 1 is a direct importer and/or commercial importer in accordance with the definitions in the Services Licensing Law, and it is the one that provides manufacturer's warranty in Israel for Audi vehicles, even if these were purchased through parallel import. Defendant 1 also markets ______ in Israel, as clearly advertised on its website (the model name appears explicitly in the URL specified in the footnote, on the website belonging to Defendant 1).

The reliefs requested in brief

• The Honorable Court is hereby requested to grant the plaintiff the following reliefs:
• A declaratory order stating that the plaintiff canceled the transaction with the 2nd defendant lawfully even before the filing of the statement of claim and/or a declaratory order stating that the transaction between the parties is canceled.
• צו המורה לנתבע 2 להשיב לתובע סך של ______ ש"ח, ולאחר קבלת התשלום בפועל התובע ישיב לנתבע 2 את הרכב (מ.ר. _____). לסכום זה מבוקש לצרף ריבית והצמדה מיום התשלום לנתבע 2 ועד לתשלום בפועל.
• מטעמי זהירות בלבד, ובמידה ובית המשפט הנכבד לא יורה על ביטול העסקה, מבוקש צו המורה לנתבעת 1 ו/או לנתבע 2 להחליף את הרכב ברכב אחר מאותו דגם או מדגם אחר באותו שווי ו/או בעל אותן תכונות ו/או בעל אותם מאפיינים כמו הרכב של התובע (ושיאושר על ידי התובע). עניין זה אפשרי, בין היתר, לאור הגדרת "אחריות" הקבועה בחוק רישוי שירותים.
• For further reasons of caution, should the Honorable Court not order the cancellation of the transaction or the replacement of the vehicle, it is requested to issue a declaratory order stating that the plaintiff's vehicle is entitled to a manufacturer's warranty for three years from the date of its receipt by the plaintiff on ______. Should Defendant 1 fail to provide the warranty, it is requested to determine that Defendant 2 will bear all the expenses of repairs to the vehicle until ______.
• חיוב הנתבעים ביחד ו/או לחוד בפיצוי בסך ____ אלף ש"ח בגין עוגמת הנפש והאכזבה האדירה שנגרמה לתובע ו/או בגין אובדן הנאה עקב אי שימוש ברכב יוקרתי שהתובע רכש, הטרדה ואובדן זמנו של התובע, לנוכח העובדה שנמכר לו רכב פגום ו/או הלוקה באי התאמה, Has been in the garage and has not been repaired for over a year.
• Charging defendant 2 with financial compensation in the amount of ____ thousand NIS for breach of contract between the parties.
• חיוב הנתבעים, ביחד ו/או לחוד, בהחזר שכר טרחת עורך דין בסך ______ ש"ח שנאלץ התובע לשלם לצורך ניהול הליך זה, וכן, כל הוצאה שנאלץ התובע לשלם לצורך ניהול הליך זה (כגון, אך לא רק, אגרת בית משפט).
• לחייב את הנתבעים, ביחד ו/או לחוד, בהוצאות שוטפות שהתובע נאלץ לשלם בגין הרכב, כגון ביטוחים ו/או מבחן רישוי שנתי, בשעה שהוא כלל לא יכול היה להשתמש ברכב – בסך _____ ש"ח.
• It is requested that interest and linkage be added to all payments made by the plaintiff for the purpose of conducting this proceeding.

Summary of the facts necessary to establish the cause of action and when it arose

• In the month of _____ or very close to this date, the plaintiff noticed the advertisements of the defendant 2 on the website for the purchase of a new vehicle. The defendant 2 advertises his vehicles under the brand _____, which does not constitute a legal entity.
• The plaintiff contacted the 2nd defendant by telephone, who offered to purchase a vehicle. new מדגם אודי ______. הנתבע 2 הדגיש בפני התובע שהוא ירשם ברישיון כבעלים "00", כלומר יד ראשונה. משמע מדובר ברכב חדש. In addition, Defendant 2 stated that the vehicle was manufactured in _____ (see memorandum below), but in fact the vehicle was manufactured in ______.
• The plaintiff paid defendant 2 ______ thousand shekels for the vehicle and actually received the vehicle on _____. The plaintiff did not receive a warranty certificate or an instruction manual for using the vehicle and/or dates for performing routine maintenance.
• על פי רישיון הרכב שסופק לתובע הוא אכן הבעלים הראשון של הרכב, שכן, ברישיון הרכב מופיע הסימון "00" בסעיף הבעלים הקודמים, המעיד כי לרכב לא היו בעלים קודמים.
• Defendant 2 assured the plaintiff before the sale that even though it was a vehicle imported from Germany, he (the plaintiff) He would be entitled to a 3-year manufacturer's warranty in Israel, which turned out to be untrue.
• On ______, the plaintiff informed defendant 2 that the air conditioning in the vehicle was not working and that from his inspection at defendant 2, the warranty on the vehicle was for two years from the date the vehicle left the factory, and not even from the date the plaintiff actually received it.
• There were many conversations and correspondences between the plaintiff and the defendant regarding both the vehicle malfunctions and the liability issue. Each time, defendant 2 provided a different excuse, among other things, to gain time.
• Defendant 2 was sent two warning letters, which also required, among other things, cancellation of the transaction, but the demands in both letters were rejected by Defendant 2's attorney.
• The plaintiff was forced to take the vehicle to the 1st defendant's garage. The plaintiff was surprised to discover that the 1st defendant's garages had passed the vehicle from one to another, claiming that each was an expert in the field of vehicles, but The bottom line is that the plaintiff's vehicle has not been repaired for over a year. (Many different spare parts were replaced but to no avail), And it has actually been in the possession of Defendant 1's garages and not with the plaintiff continuously since March 2024.
• רכבו של התובע לא תוקן במועדים הקבועים בסעיף 48 לחוק רישוי שירותים (מועדים קשיחים שאינם ניתנים לשינוי על ידי הנתבעים). הנתבעים אף לא טרחו להחליף את הרכב מכוח הגדרת "אחריות" בחוק רישוי שירותים.

The facts that give the court jurisdiction

1. לבית המשפט הנכבד הסמכות העניינית והמקומית לדון בתביעה זו לאור סכום התביעה ומקום עסקם של הנתבעים, בהתאם לתקנה 7(א) תקנות סדר הדין האזרחי, תשע"ט – 2018.

Details of the allegations

Purchase of the vehicle from Defendant 2

1. In the month of _____, the plaintiff noticed advertisements for the brand ______ on the Internet. This brand has a presence on almost every possible platform: Facebook, TikTok, Instagram, a dedicated website. The advertisements include the phone number of defendant 2 – _______.
2. It is very apparent that Defendant 2 is engaged in the import and/or sale of numerous new luxury vehicles. Therefore, it is clear that Defendant 2 is an indirect importer and/or commercial importer, as defined in the Services Licensing Law.
3. All publications of Defendant 2 We deal in new and luxurious models from most leading car manufacturers., and in all of them the vehicles are displayed without a license plate, which reinforces the impression that this is a new vehicle that has not yet been registered in Israel.

Appendix 1: Screenshots from Facebook, TikTok, Instagram and the dedicated website of Defendant 2.

1. The plaintiff contacted the 2nd defendant by telephone, who offered to purchase a vehicle. new מדגם אודי _______. הנתבע 2 הדגיש בפני התובע שהוא ירשם ברישיון כבעלים "00", כלומר יד ראשונה. משמע מדובר ברכב חדש. נתבע 2 אף הדגיש שמדובר ברכב משנת ייצור _______, כפי שגם נרשם בזיכרון הדברים. נתבע 2 אף העביר לתובע לאחר הרכישה מסמכים המהווים מעין תעודת זהות של הרכב ששם מופיעים פרטים כגון תאריך ייצור In ______These documents were provided to the plaintiff to show him what charger he needed to charge the vehicle.
2. During the conversation, the plaintiff was told that this was a new vehicle that came with a 3-year warranty (the plaintiff was not aware of a used vehicle that received a three-year warranty, which was another indication that he was being offered a new vehicle). Defendant 2 emphasized that this was the same warranty period as provided for a new _____ vehicle (of the same model) purchased from Defendant 1, which is considered the official importer of _____ vehicles in Israel, and sells the same model in Israel.

Appendix 2: Screenshots from Defendant 1's website showing an advertisement for the same model that Plaintiff purchased from Defendant 2.

• On _____, the plaintiff, the plaintiff's friend, and defendant 2 met to pay for and receive the vehicle.
• A memorandum of understanding was signed between the plaintiff and defendant 2 in which nothing was mentioned regarding the fact that the vehicle may not be suitable for the climate in Israel and/or that there is some defect and/or that it is not a new vehicle. Year of manufacture _____ was specified..
• At that time, the plaintiff made four bank transfers to defendant 2 for a total amount of _______ thousand shekels.

Appendix 3: Memorandum of Understanding between Plaintiff and Defendant 2 and confirmation for the transfer of _____ thousand shekels in 4 bank transfers.

• After receiving the vehicle, the plaintiff was astonished to discover that the vehicle had actually been driven over _____ thousand kilometers and that it was not a new vehicle. The plaintiff contacted defendant 2, who claimed that the vehicle needed to be run-in and that the vehicle also needed to travel through Germany for transportation to Israel. The plaintiff really liked the vehicle and was willing to accept this. Without derogating from the above, if the plaintiff had known that this was not a new vehicle, he would not have contacted Defendant 2 and/or negotiated to purchase the vehicle.
• דא עקא, מכיוון שנמכר לתובע בפועל רכב שאינו חדש, היה על נתבע 2 לספק לתובע, ולהחתים אותו, על טופס גילוי נאות (בנוסף להסכם התקשרות), מכוח חוק מכירת רכב משומש (זכאות למידע וגילוי נאות), תשס"ח-2008. בטופס זה היה על הנתבע 2 לציין, בין היתר, את מספר הקילומטרים שהרכב עבר, פרטיו המלאים של המוכר, מספר הבעלים הקודמים, פגמים ברכב עד למועד מסירת טופס גילוי הנאות. All this will not be done.
• יודגש, כאשר התובע קיבל את רישיון הרכב, לאחר ביצוע העברת הבעלות, הוא נרשם כבעלים "00" (יד ראשונה), דבר שחיזק את הרושם שלכאורה נמסר לו רכב חדש, שזכאי, בין היתר, לאחריות יצרן בת 3 שנים, כפי שהבטיח הנתבע 2.

Appendix 4: The vehicle license that the plaintiff received after the transfer of ownership was completed.

• At the beginning of the month _____ (One of the hottest months of the year in our country), less than two months after receiving the vehicle, a malfunction appeared in the air conditioner and the air conditioner stopped working completely. The plaintiff first contacted one of the 2nd defendant's garages to repair the malfunction, and at this point a saga began that had not ended even at the time of filing this lawsuit (after over a year).

Appendix 5: The faults that appeared on the vehicle's dashboard.

• First, the plaintiff was told that the manufacturer's warranty in his case was not for three years but for two years. From the moment his vehicle left the factory on _____That is, when the plaintiff actually received the vehicle, on ________, the vehicle had only about a year's warranty left.
• Second, the plaintiff was told that the vehicle needed certain maintenance that was not performed, and that this may have been the cause of the malfunction (ultimately, the representatives of Defendant 1 withdrew this argument, as they continued to repair the vehicle for over a year).
• Third, the plaintiff was told by representatives of Defendant 1 that the vehicle actually supplied to him was not suitable for the Israeli climate (this argument by the representatives of Defendant 1 is unclear in light of the fact that Defendant 1 sells the exact same model in Israel), and this was the cause of the malfunction. In order to address the malfunction, it was explained to the plaintiff that many spare parts in the vehicle had to be repaired and/or replaced (see maintenance history attached below), and also that special gas (CO gas) had to be filled.
• Needless to say, all three of these material issues were not communicated to the plaintiff by defendant 2, either orally or in writing. If this information had been provided to the plaintiff in advance, he would not have considered purchasing the vehicle at all, even at a much lower price.
• From the above, it is clear that Defendant 2 violated numerous legal provisions, such as (but not limited to) the Contracts Law, the Sales Law, the Consumer Protection Law, the Used Vehicle Sales Law, and misled the Plaintiff. At the very least, from the Plaintiff's perspective, the vehicle was purchased by mistake.
• The plaintiff corresponded with defendant 2 and spoke with him by telephone. As part of his telephone conversations, the plaintiff also demanded the return of the vehicle, but the defendant did not agree. All of this happened very shortly after the discovery of the air conditioner malfunction and the inconsistency in terms of the warranty period.
• Within the framework of the WhatsApp correspondence between the parties, it clearly appears that the defendant tried to deny his promise of a 3-year warranty period, claiming that the warranty is for two years and that the plaintiff can extend the warranty for another year, but on _____, defendant 2 sent a very short voice message in his own voice, in which he said the following:

"היי אחי, מה נשמע? ניסיתי לתפוס אותך אתה לא עונה לי, אנחנו פשוט עדיין לא חזרנו, אני פה בגרמניה ויש לי עומס מטורף של עבודה. שמע אחי, לגבי הרכב רכב שאנחנו מכרנו לך הוא היה עם 14 אלף ק"מ, With a three-year warranty, the vehicle is under warranty.. טיפולים לרכב אני לא יכול לעשות לכל הלקוחות שלי, אחי, טיפולים ולשלם להם את כל ההוצאות של הרכב. זה דברים שהלקוח צריך לקחת על עצמו."

• This voice message clearly shows that Defendant 2 promised the Plaintiff Three-year warranty. In addition, Defendant 2 did not provide the plaintiff with a vehicle warranty certificate and/or a maintenance book, and did not inform him when and what maintenance should be performed on the vehicle. As mentioned, if the plaintiff had known that he was purchasing a vehicle in which no treatment had been performed that could have caused any malfunction, he would not have purchased the vehicle in the first place.
• After this voice message, the plaintiff and the defendant continued to correspond on WhatsApp, and also to talk on the phone, both regarding the malfunction in the air conditioner and regarding the warranty period, but to no avail. On _____, the plaintiff was forced to hire the services of his then attorney to send a warning letter to the 2nd defendant. As part of this warning letter, it was required again Cancel the transaction and compensate the plaintiff for his damages.
• בתאריך _____ התקבל מענה מטעם ב"כ נתבע 2, אשר דחה את טענות התובע.
• בתאריך ___ נשלח מכתב נוסף מטעם ב"כ התובע דאז, בו נכתב כי התובע מוכן להעביר לנתבע 2 את כל האסמכתאות שהוא מבקש לקבל, אם הדבר יוביל לביטול העסקה, ככל שטענות התובע יתבררו כנכונות.
• בתאריך _____ התקבל מענה שני מטעם ב"כ הנתבע 2, אשר הפנה את התובע להגשת תביעה.

Appendix 6: התכתבויות בין ב"כ התובע דאז לבא כוח הנתבע.

• It should be emphasized at this stage that air conditioning malfunctions, in a hot country like ours, have been recognized in case law as a fundamental defect that justifies the cancellation of the transaction or the replacement of the vehicle with another vehicle. כך נקבע לדוגמה במסגרת ת"א 57388/05 ליסקאר אור נ' חברת מכשירי תנועה בע"מ (פורסם בנבו, 26.12.2007) (להלן: "Liscar affair 1"):

"הנתבעת צירפה כחמישה כרטיסי עבודה/הזמנת תיקון בהן מצוין באופן מפורש, כי Claiming a defect in the air conditioning systemIt is apparent that the plaintiff's inquiries regarding the problem with the air conditioning system began as early as 30.06.03, About a month and a half after purchasing the vehicleIt also appears from the work/repair order cards that no solution was found for this problem and the plaintiff did indeed find herself repeatedly contacting the garage requesting repairs, when it is undisputed that the garage Authorized In Eilat, he was unable to find a solution for about a year and a half.

…

The plaintiff informed the defendant, about a month and a half after receiving the vehicle, that there was a problem with the air conditioning system and that she was not satisfied with the vehicle. It is evident that a vehicle in which such a fundamental defect was discovered immediately after its purchase, It would be appropriate for the defendant to consider replacing him immediately.. Contacting the defendant after about a month and a half and being notified that the product she provided was defective is a very reasonable time.Moreover, it appears that when attempts were made to repair the defect in the new vehicle to no avail, The defendant had to replace the vehicle with another vehicle in good condition..

The defendant's offer to purchase the vehicle at today's market price cannot be accepted, as there is no doubt that the plaintiff purchased a new vehicle with the best of her money and did not receive a working vehicle, but was given a damaged vehicle.

A damaged vehicle constitutes a lack of conformity under the Sales Law. This is not a negligible or minor discrepancy, as determined by the court's expert. And in accordance with common sense. It is not possible and unlikely that a citizen (Eilat) would purchase a luxury Jeep and there would be an unsolvable problem with the vehicle's air conditioning system.. אי ההתאמה, שלא תוקנה במשך כשנתיים, מהווה הפרה יסודית של הסכם הרכישה והתובעת זכאית לתרופות העומדות לרשותה בחוק החוזים (תרופות בשל הפרת חוזה), תשל"א – 1970, לרבות אכיפת החוזה.

…

Using a vehicle without air conditioning in a hot country like ours, and in an especially hot city like Eilat, impairs the degree of enjoyment, well-being, and comfort.

…

The defendant will provide the plaintiff with a new and working vehicle of the type of vehicle that is the subject of the claim. If this is not possible, since the vehicle is from 2003, the defendant will refund the plaintiff the full amount paid by her., בתוספת הפרשי הצמדה וריבית כדין החל מיום 5.5.03 ועד לתשלום בפועל. מנגד, תשיב התובעת את הרכב לידי הנתבעת כפי שהוא. התשלום והשבת הרכב יעשו עד ליום 1.02.2008. "

• מפסיקה זו עולה בבירור שהתובע פעל כדין כאשר פנה לנתבע 2 והודיע לו על התקלה במזגן. הנתבע 2 (וגם לא הנתבעת 1 מכוח "אחריות" בחוק רישוי שירותים) לא החליף את הרכב ולא הסכים לבטל את העסקה.
• This stop also clearly indicates that there is a fault in the air conditioner, Especially in a hot country like the State of Israel, is a malfunction that must be resolved as soon as possible, otherwise it will impair the enjoyment, well-being and comfort of the vehicle owner.
• Finally, from this ruling we learn that if the defendants did not replace the plaintiff's vehicle, and did not repair it, the plaintiff is entitled to cancel the transaction and receive back the all The amount paid to defendant 2.
• In the Liscar 1 case, the defendant did not accept the verdict and filed an appeal (below: "עניין ליסקאר 2"). The appeal to the District Court was also dismissed, with the District Court accepting the conclusions of the lower court:

" השימוש שעשתה המשיבה ברכב איננו שימוש רגיל שניתן להעריך אותו לפי הנוסחה שמציע ב"כ המערערת, שכן בית משפט קמא קבע בלשון שאיננה משתמעת לשתי פנים ושאיננה מצריכה פרשנות, Because the vehicle could not be used without repairing the fault in the air conditioning system..

…

The trial court added that this was not a minor malfunction, but a real malfunction that impaired the ability to use the vehicle, especially since this was a lawyer residing in Eilat, who also has an office in Tel Aviv. Therefore, there is no need to exaggerate the vital need for the air conditioning system on long trips., and according to the court: "שימוש ברכב ללא מיזוג אוויר במדינה חמה כמדינתנו ובעיר חמה במיוחד כבאילת, פוגם במידת ההנאה, הרווחה והנוחות".

See: ע"א 1082/08 מכשירי תנועה בע"מ נ' ליסקאר אור (Published in Nevo, January 3, 2010).

• It is clear that the District Court fully adopted the conclusions of the Magistrate's Court, and the plaintiff's demand to cancel the transaction or replace the vehicle is legally based.

Failure to repair the vehicle by Defendant 1's garages until the date the claim was filed

• First, it is important to understand the normative framework for the maximum period of time allocated to Defendant 1. For the purpose of supplying spare parts and actual vehicle repairThe matter is explicitly regulated in Section 48(c) of the Services Licensing Law, which states as follows:

"(ג) Direct importer and indirect importer Will provide a product of transgression of Car model they import, inside Seven working days from the date of receipt of the order; ואולם יבואן ישיר רשאי לספק מוצר תעבורה לרכב מדגם שהוא לא מייבא, בתוך 14 ימי עבודה מיום קבלת ההזמנה. "

• A transportation product is defined in the Services Licensing Law as follows:

"מוצר תעבורה" – אבזר, חלק, מערכת חלקים, מכשיר למעט מכשיר שהוא כלי עבודה המשמש מוסך או יצרן בלבד, מיתקן או חומר נוזלי, מוצק or gas המשמשים או המיועדים לשמש להרכבתו, לתחזוקתו או לפעולתו התקינה של רכב או להבטחת בטיחותו או להבטחת בטיחות המשתמש בו או לנוחיותו, וכן כל אחד מהם אם עליו להימצא ברכב על פי דין; "

• As stated above, Defendant 1 is a direct importer and Defendant 2 is an indirect importer and therefore Section 48 of the Services Licensing Law applies to both, and both are responsible for repairing the vehicle. It is not disputed that Defendant 1 imports and sells ______ vehicles of the model purchased by Plaintiff from Defendant 2. This is explicitly stated in Defendant 1's advertisements detailed above.
• A review of the history of the treatments that the plaintiff received from defendant 1 will reveal that the vehicle was first brought to one of its authorized garages ______ on _______.
• From the month of _____ to the month of ______, the plaintiff's vehicle was returned to him only a few times (to the best of the plaintiff's memory, no more than 5 times), each time for short periods of time. The vehicle was returned to the plaintiff improperly. That initially the 1st defendant refused to provide the plaintiff with a replacement vehicle (and the plaintiff needs a vehicle for daily use) and that the 1st defendant's representatives ordered spare parts for the repair that were supposed to arrive Within a few weeks (Contrary to Section 48 of the Services Licensing Law).
• במקרים בודדים אחרים הרכב הוחזר לתובע לאחר "תיקון", כאשר זמן קצר מאוד לאחר קבלת הרכב התברר כי התקלה במזגן לא תוקנה והרכב הוחזר למוסך, והמשיך לשהות בו.
• תיאור התקלה בהיסטוריית הטיפולים (המצורפת להלן) בתאריך _____ מופיע כ"מזגן לא מוציא קור", "רכב יבוא מקביל לא ניתן ליבדוק גז לא מתאים".
• בהסטוריית הטיפולים קיים תיעוד נוסף מיום ______ המתייחס ל"מזגן לא מקרר" וגם "שינוע הרכב _____ תיקון מזגן".
• That is, the vehicle was transferred to another authorized garage on behalf of Defendant 1 for repair. Moving a vehicle from one garage to another is a exceptional Which emphasizes the severity of the fault in the plaintiff's vehicle.
• עוד ניתן לראות באותו תאריך שבוצעו פעולות בעניין "מיזוג אוויר", "ריקון ומילוי גז + גז מזגנים מיוחד", החלפת מדחס מזגן, אטמים, מייבש, נוזל קירור, ועוד רשימה ארוכה של חלקי חילוף ופעולות.
• On ______, additional actions related to the air conditioner were performed. In the garage at ______: "מילוי ווקום גז למזגן", "ריקון ומילוי קרר". הרכב הוחזר לתובע ביום _______ וכבר למחרת, ב-______, התובע התכתב עם נציג המוסך בעניין הבעיה שלא נפתרה. באותו היום הרכב הוחזר למוסך וב-_____ נציג הנתבעת 1 כתב לתובע בוואטסאפ "יש נזילה יום ראשון יפרקו לראות מאיפה היום אין לי עובדים". ב-____ נציג נתבעת 1 כתב לתובע בוואטסאפ שיש נזילה "מהקולר" ושהוא הזמין את החלק מחו"ל כי אין במלאי בארץ.
• And so you can see more and more repairs related to the air conditioner on the dates: _______________________.
• Although this does not appear in the treatment history, the garage representatives informed the plaintiff that the vehicle was also treated at one of Defendant 1's garages _____________ (garage _______ – a reference appears in the documentation dated _________).

Appendix 7: The treatment history provided to the plaintiff by defendant 1's garages.

• The plaintiff spoke and corresponded extensively with the representatives of the 1st defendant's garages and literally begged them to give priority to his vehicle so that it could be repaired, but to no avail. The plaintiff was forced to devote a great deal of time to these correspondences and conversations, And sometimes, in light of the demands of the garage representatives, he had to actually go to the garages, which also caused him a lot of inconvenience.
• The plaintiff's vehicle Staying in a row In the defendant's garages from the month of ______ until the date of filing the lawsuit, And it is not at all clear when the plaintiff will get his vehicle repaired.
• For the sake of completeness, it should be clarified that Defendant 1 provided (through Shlomo Sixt) the Plaintiff with a replacement vehicle after repeated demands from the Plaintiff. This is a vehicle manufactured by _______ (which was subsequently replaced with a vehicle from another company, which is not electric, and after complaints from the Plaintiff, the _____ vehicle was returned). In the month of _____, and the plaintiff has been with him continuously since then.) which is very far from being a luxury vehicle like the plaintiff's ______ vehicle. If the plaintiff had wanted to drive a _____ vehicle, he would have purchased such a vehicle (which costs much less than his vehicle) and not a _____ vehicle.
• בתאריך _____ ב"כ התובע דאז פנה לנתבעת 1 במכתב התראה. בהעדר מענה נשלח מכתב תזכורת בתאריך ______ שגם בו צוין שהרכב עדיין במוסך. בתאריך ______ ב"כ הנתבעת 1 השיב על המכתב וטען כי הטענה שרכבו של התובע נמצא במוסכי הנתבעת במשך תקופה ארוכה אינה נכונה. יש להצטער על מענה זה לאור העובדה שבידי התובע תכתובות רבות עם עובדי המוסכים השונים של נתבעת 1, מהן עולה בבירור שרכבו של התובע שהה And still staying in the garage.
• יתרה מזאת, ב"כ הנתבעת הודה במכתב שסופק לתובע רכב חלופי. אילו אחרי כל תיקון רכבו של התובע היה מוחזר לו, לא היה צורך באספקת רכב חלופי.

Appendix 8: פניות ב"כ התובע דאז ותשובת ב"כ הנתבעת 1.

• Whether Defendant 1 was negligent, or violated the law by not repairing the vehicle within the time period specified in Section 48 of the Services Licensing Law, Defendant 1 (and thus Defendant 2 who did not replace the vehicle or cancel the transaction) Must pay very significant financial compensation to the plaintiffIt is inconceivable that a repair lasting over a year is a reasonable period of time.
• A person who purchases a new vehicle or a vehicle during its warranty period should not have to go to garages again and again, or in the case at hand, the plaintiff should not have been left for such a long period of time without the vehicle he chose to purchase.
• ניתן ללמוד על גובה הפיצוי הראוי במקרים אלה (לחובת שני הנתבעים) גם מפסיקות קודמות שניתנו לחובת הנתבעת 1 ויבואני רכב אחרים. לדוגמה ת"א 2449/07 שלמה אנג'ל נ' צ'מפיון מוטורס (ישראל) בע"מ (Published in Nevo, June 9, 2011):

"I believe that, in the circumstances of the case and based on the evidence presented to the court, the testimony of the plaintiff and his wife, the opinion on behalf of the defendant, and the defendant's books In which frequent and numerous repairs are documented relative to what is expected of a new vehicle, including unusual and unusual repairs, As well as the defendant's agreement to extend the warranty period on the vehicle - subsection (3) of section 11 of the Sales Law applies, namely: the vehicle does not have the quality or features necessary for the normal use of the property.

One of the goals of purchasing a new vehicle is to avoid frequent garage services, except as required by the manufacturer's instructions. This is a reasonable and legitimate expectation of a vehicle purchaser and deserves legal protection. (See also Cell (Y-M) 9670/00) מילר נ' יוניון מוטורוס בע"מ, [פורסם בנבו] כב' הש' ד"ר אגמון-גונן מיום 10/11/05).

…

A person who purchases a new vehicle does so, among other things, in order to drive safely without needing frequent visits to the garage for repairs, certainly in the first year of the vehicle's life.

…

...The plaintiff was indeed caused significant emotional distress and I set the compensation for emotional distress at a total of NIS 50,000 as of the date the claim was filed."

• ת"א 9670/00 יהודה יואל מילר נ' יוניון מוטורס בע"מ (Published in Nevo, 10.11.2005):

" בית המשפט רשאי לקבוע לתובע פיצויים בגין עוגמת נפש, אשר יקבעו בשיעור הנראה סביר בנסיבות העניין.

Among other things, the ruling emphasized the importance of the loss of pleasure and disappointment caused to the plaintiff, and for these, the court may also compensate the plaintiff as mental anguish. (ע"א 82/85 כהן נ' כורי פ"ד מא(2), 778; ע"א 430/79 בנישתי נ' ששון פ"ד לה (2), 400).
…
It should be noted that this is a new vehicle, and it is precisely this behavior, of frequent visits to the garage, that a person purchasing a new vehicle seeks to avoid. This legitimate hope and expectation did not succeed.
…
If Union Motors had taken responsibility for a new vehicle in which new serious faults were discovered frequently, and had replaced the vehicle for the plaintiff at the time, the whole matter would have been avoided.
…
In light of the above, I determine the amount of compensation for emotional distress, for which the defendant is liable to the plaintiff, at NIS 50,000. 

68. Examples of additional court rulings in which tens of thousands of shekels were awarded for Mental anguish and/or loss of pleasure and/or annoyance and/or loss of time: ת"א 20011-04-11 אפרת שהם דליות נ' צ'מפיון מוטורס בע"מ (פורסם בנבו, 25.10.2012); ת"א 3158/06 בסטוני חסאן נ' צ'מפיון מוטורס ישראל בע"מ (פורסם בנבו, 8.2.2010); ת"א 50525-11-12 חנה שנהב נ' צ'מפיון מוטורס בע"מ (פורסם בנבו, 11.5.2015); ת"א 10081/00 אברהמי עליזה נ' מכשירי תנועה בע"מ (Published in Nevo, May 19, 2002); ת"א 10514/04 קורפין השקעות בע"מ נ' דוד לובינסקי בע"מ (Published in Nevo, September 4, 2005); ת"א 59005/00 צהלה חסון נ' חברת המזרח לשיווק מכוניות (1994) בע"מ (פורסם בנבו, 11.12.2001); תא"מ 11127-08-18 אייל קראוס נ' צ'מפיון מוטורס בע"מ (Published in Nevo, 7.5.2019).
69. In our case, it is not just about repeated visits to the 1st defendant's garages, but Absolute negation of using the plaintiff's vehicle For a very long and clearly unreasonable period of timeThis must be reflected in a higher compensation amount, relative to the compensation amounts mentioned in the rulings above.
70. During this time, the plaintiff continued to pay payments for mandatory insurance, comprehensive insurance, and the annual license test, all for nothing since the vehicle was not with him at all (especially since the month of _____ - the vehicle has been continuously at Defendant 1's garages).

Appendix 9: A copy of compulsory and comprehensive insurance certificates, and a vehicle license indicating the annual payment.

In conclusion

• In light of all of the above, the Honorable Court is hereby requested to summon the defendants to a hearing before it and to rule as follows:
• the remedies detailed in this statement of claim.
• לחייב את הנתבעים בתשלום הוצאות משפט ושכר טרחת עו"ד בתוספת מע"מ.
• To grant any other relief that the Honorable Court deems appropriate in the circumstances of the case.

_______________
עו"ד אדי בליטשטיין
ב"כ התובע