Example of a lawsuit against a car importer – how to draft it correctly to win?

The purpose of a sample lawsuit against a car importer is to show you how a lawsuit should be worded correctly. However, it is very important to understand that the sample cannot be relied upon in every case, because you need to understand the individual circumstances of the case relevant to you in order to formulate it correctly. Claim That will help solve the problem you encountered.

In the example of a lawsuit against a car importer presented here, there is no reference to an expert opinion because the case did not require one. Expert opinion, but there may be other cases where the vehicle has a controversial technical fault. In such a case, it would be wise to obtain an expert opinion, because in these cases, victory in the dispute Lawsuits against car importers Without an expert opinion, it may be a very difficult, if not impossible, task.

In addition to an expert opinion, it is also a good idea to have appropriate evidence that can help you increase your chances of success with the car importer. For example: recordings of calls, WhatsApp messages, a copy of the maintenance history, photos, and any other document or data that can help you support your claims.

Keep in mind that lawsuits against vehicle importers take a very long time, often more than a year, and in many other cases even more than two years. Anyone who is not willing to conduct a lengthy procedure should carefully consider whether it is worth filing such a lawsuit in the first place.

It is very important to use the services of Automotive Lawyer who is very experienced in these claims. These procedures require specific expertise and knowledge in automotive legislation and case law. Not every lawyer is familiar with the laws relevant to the automotive field, and those who are not familiar simply will not be able to help you maximize your chances of success (and in many other cases will simply cause you to lose the claim).

Example of a lawsuit against a car importer

Regarding:

The plaintiff: שם ושם משפחה, ת"ז: ____________
_______ Street 
Tel: _________ 
על ידי עוה"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

Defendant: צ'מפיון מוטורס בע"מ, H.P. 513973255 
1 Hamada St., Rishon LeZion

Claim

Essence of the claim:  Property damage – vehicle
Requested remedies: ביטול עסקה לרכישת רכב, לחלופין, החלפת רכב בחדש, פיצוי כספי בגובה 358,188 ש"ח. Court fee amount: 8954.7 ש"ח (4477.35 ש"ח במועד זה לפי תקנה 6(א) ופרט 1 לתקנות בתי המשפט (אגרות), תשס"ז -2007).
The existence of an additional procedure: קיים הליך נוסף שבו מתבררת תקלה דומה מאוד עד כדי זהה – ת"א ________ (המתנהלת בבית משפט זה).

Summons

Since the plaintiff filed this statement of claim against you, you are invited to file a statement of defense within sixty days of the date this summons was served on you.

לתשומת לבכם, אם לא תגישו כתב הגנה אזי לפי תקנה 130 לתקנות סדר הדין האזרחי, התשע"ט-2018, תהיה לתובעת הזכות לקבל פסק דין שלא בפניכם.

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 ________________
2. The defendant is one of the largest car importers in Israel, and is an importer of ____ vehicles in Israel.

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 lawfully canceled the transaction even before the lawsuit was filed and/or an order ordering the cancellation of the transaction.
• Alternatively, and for reasons of caution, insofar as the Honorable Court does not order the cancellation of the transaction, it is hereby requested to order the defendant to replace the vehicle subject to the lawsuit with a new vehicle of the same model.
• To order the defendant to refund to the plaintiff the amount paid for the vehicle, in the amount of _____ NIS, plus interest and linkage from the date the claim was filed until the date of actual payment.
• To order the defendant to compensate the plaintiff in the amount of NIS 50,000 for her non-pecuniary damages.
• להורות לנתבעת להשיב לתובעת את התשלום ששולם לבא כוחה בסך _____ ש"ח.

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

• On ______, the plaintiff purchased a vehicle from the defendant. electric A luxurious model ________. As far as the plaintiff knows, this is the most luxurious and sophisticated vehicle sold by the defendant of the brand ______. The vehicle was delivered to the plaintiff on _______.
• On the ______th day, the vehicle broke down and had to be towed to the garage.
• On ______, the vehicle broke down again and had to be towed to the garage.
• On __________ the problem recurred for the third time and the vehicle again arrived at the garage on a tow truck.
• This time, the plaintiff's son was told that in order to repair the vehicle, a version update was necessary, but the defendant does not know how long it will take for the manufacturer to provide such a version update.
• At this point, at the plaintiff's request, the plaintiff's son notified the defendant's representatives of the cancellation of the transaction. The defendant's representatives refused to cancel the transaction.
• The plaintiff's attorney also contacted the court once again with a notice of cancellation of the transaction. The notice was not answered.
• At the time the lawsuit was filed, the vehicle was still in the defendant's garage, and it is not known at all when it will be repaired (but as mentioned, at this stage the plaintiff is demanding the cancellation of the transaction).
• Hence the lawsuit.

The facts that give the court jurisdiction

1. The Honorable Court has the authority to hear the claim in light of its nature, the amount of the claim, and the defendant's place of residence, in accordance with Regulation 7(a) of the Civil Procedure Regulations.

Details of the allegations

1. On ______, the plaintiff purchased a vehicle from the defendant. electric A luxurious model _______, for the sum of _______ NIS. This is an electric vehicle and, as far as the plaintiff knows, it is the most luxurious and advanced vehicle of the _______ brand in Israel.

Appendix 1: Vehicle purchase agreement and vehicle license.

1. The vehicle was delivered to the plaintiff on _____.
2. The vehicle was purchased by the plaintiff for her use and for ________.

Appendix 2: Disabled parking badge ______.

1. The plaintiff agreed to purchase a luxury vehicle on the assumption that such a vehicle was of higher quality than a cheaper new vehicle, all with the aim of avoiding breakdowns and visits to garages, especially in the vehicle's first years. If the plaintiff had known that the luxury vehicle she purchased would suffer from a malfunction that would cause it to be completely paralyzed, she would not have purchased the vehicle from the defendant at all, even at a lower price.
2. As will be explained below, the defendant knew from the outset that she had sold the plaintiff a vehicle with defects, And at the time this lawsuit was filed, the manufacturer did not bother to provide a version update that was supposed to solve (according to the defendant's representatives) the problems in the plaintiff's vehicle. Under these circumstances, it is clear that the defendant misled the plaintiff, acted in bad faith towards her (both before and after the sale of the vehicle), the defendant violated the provisions of the Sales Law, the defendant enriched itself unlawfully at the plaintiff's expense, and was even negligent and violated statutory duties.
3. On ______, just two months after receiving the vehicle, the vehicle broke down for the first time. The plaintiff's son was forced to order a tow truck to tow the vehicle to the defendant's garage. On ______ the vehicle was released from the garage on the grounds that it had been repaired (after about two weeks). A replacement vehicle, model ______, was provided.
4. On _______ the exact same problem occurred again and the vehicle broke down again and had to be towed to the defendant's garage. This time too, the defendant's representatives assured the plaintiff's son that the vehicle had been repaired and was ready to drive, and the vehicle was released from the garage on ______ (almost a month later). A replacement vehicle, model ______, was provided.
5. On ______, a new malfunction appeared in which the vehicle's mirrors did not adjust when driving in reverse. This malfunction had not been resolved by the defendant by the date of filing the lawsuit.
6. On _______ the vehicle broke down again and had to be towed to the garage for the third time. At the time the lawsuit was filed, the vehicle was still in the defendant's garage, Without receiving an estimate for vehicle repair (At this point the defendant is in breach again The provisions of Section 48 of the Law on Licensing Services and Professions in the Automotive Industry, which stipulates Maximum time period for supplying spare parts and repairing the vehicle).
7. בנסיבות אלה היה על הנתבעת להחליף את הרכב בחדש מכוח הגדרת "אחריות" בחוק רישוי שירותים ומקצועות בענף הרכב.
8. The third time the vehicle arrived at the garage, the defendant initially wanted to provide a replacement vehicle, a _____ model minivan, but after much argument, a ______ was provided.
9. In all three cases, an inferior replacement vehicle was provided in terms of vehicle size, specifications, and vehicle quality, and, no less importantly, a gasoline vehicle was provided while the defendant's vehicle was a luxury electric vehicle. The defendant did not pay for the fuel. If the plaintiff had wanted to purchase a gasoline vehicle, she would have done so, but the plaintiff chose to purchase a electric Luxurious, among other things, to save on skyrocketing fuel costs.
10. בכל פעם שהרכב שבק חיים הופיעה על גבי לוח המחוונים השגיאה הבאה: "שגיאה: מערכת חשמל V12 ברכב. פנו למוסך.

Appendix 3: The vehicle's repair history and a picture of the error that appeared on the dashboard.

• It should be emphasized that the visit from _____ is not recorded in the maintenance history because the vehicle is still in the garage and the work card has not yet been closed.
• ביקורים רבים אלה במוסך, ופרקי הזמן הארוכים שנדרשו לצורך "התיקון" (which did not solve anything and the problem recurred) caused the plaintiff tremendous emotional distress and loss of enjoyment of the new vehicle.She found herself in a situation she tried to prevent from the beginning, and the luxurious vehicle she purchased in order to avoid breakdowns suffers from recurring breakdowns, especially a malfunction in the electrical system that completely disables it.
• Such a vehicle cannot be trusted, especially when the vehicle is intended to transport _______ from place to place.
• The plaintiff asked her son to notify the defendant of the cancellation of the transaction, and indeed the plaintiff's son sent a notice of cancellation of the transaction to various representatives of the defendant on her behalf.

Appendix 4: Notices regarding the cancellation of a transaction sent by the plaintiff's son to the defendant's representatives.

• The plaintiff's son spoke with several representatives of the defendant who announced that the defendant had no intention of canceling the deal, but at the same time the defendant's representatives admitted that they did not know when the manufacturer would release a version update that would solve the problem. התנהלות שכזו מעידה על חוסר תום לב קיצוני. לא יעלה על הדעת שהנתבעת מודעת לתקלה חמורה שמשביתה את הרכב אך לא מבטלת את העסקה או מחליפה את הרכב בחדש מכוח הגדרת "אחריות" בחוק רישוי שירותים ומקצועות בענף הרכב.
• It should be emphasized that this is not the only proceeding being conducted against the defendant for a malfunction that disables a vehicle. electric יוקרתי באופן מלא, ותביעה נוספת שעוסקת בתקלה דומה מאוד עד כדי זהה מתבררת כנגדה גם במסגרת ת"א 66917-06-25 (שם מדובר ברכב אודי חשמלי יוקרתי).
• A conversation between the plaintiff's son and the defendant's representative who actually handled the plaintiff's vehicle revealed an amazing fact. The fault that the plaintiff's vehicle suffers from is known to the plaintiff, and vehicles of various models and manufacturers suffer from it. Even though it is In a serial faultThe defendant does not bother to disclose to the potential buyer that the defect exists, even before the purchase of the vehicle. This is a gross deception that justifies a ruling for damages at the high level, in addition to the remedy of canceling the transaction.
• On _______, the plaintiff's attorney sent a message Additional fee for canceling the transaction, and assigned the defendant 7 days to return the funds and compensate the plaintiff.

Appendix 5: Letter from the plaintiff's attorney dated ______.

• The time allotted in the letter passed and the defendant did not respond to the letter or return the money to the plaintiff (even though the plaintiff's vehicle was already in the garage, in the defendant's possession). Under these circumstances, there was no escape from filing this lawsuit.
• The plaintiff paid for her attorney's services a total of ______ NIS, which must be fully charged to the defendant.

Appendix 6: A copy of the tax invoices indicating payment of fees for handling the plaintiff's claim.

• Shortly before filing this lawsuit, a judgment was issued against the defendant in a proceeding that dealt with a very similar to identical matter, where it was determined, among other things, as follows:

"I believe that the vehicle's entry into the garage, A luxury electric vehicle, at the above frequency, and for extended periods while attempting to correct the alleged fault, Indicates a fundamental defect at the heart of the vehicle, and it was expected that the defendant, as the importer of the vehicle, would act with reasonable diligence to repair the defect in a shorter time, while involving the manufacturer, especially since it is a large automobile corporation.

I am willing to assume that the entry of the electric vehicle into the Israeli market was then in its infancy, as was the defendant's exposure to the variety of malfunctions and the accumulation of the knowledge required to repair them. However, precisely because it is a large automobile manufacturer that markets a luxury vehicle in the electric market segment, it is expected to invest enormous efforts to work to repair the fault quickly and efficiently in order to provide the plaintiff with the experience he expected when he chose to purchase an electric vehicle.

…

It is undeniable that a person who purchases a new vehicle, or unfortunately one that is still within its warranty period, And certainly a luxurious and technologically advanced vehicle, expect to enjoy the vehicle and avoid breakdowns."

ראו: ת"א 62381-08-23 ציון אטיאס נ' צ'מפיון מוטורס בע"מ (Published in Nevo, 5.7.2025)

• It should be emphasized that the ruling in the Zion Atias matter was given before the plaintiff's vehicle arrived at the garage for the third time, and Mr. Atias' lawsuit was filed long before the plaintiff purchased her vehicle. From the defendant's conduct, it can be seen that she has not internalized the complaints and claims of her customers, or the outcome of the ruling, and more importantly, has not internalized the court's rulings, and the defendant simply continues to harm the plaintiff.
• It should also be emphasized that in the ruling regarding Zion Atias, no remedy of cancellation of the transaction was required because Mr. Atias did not purchase the vehicle from the defendant (see sections 1, 16, 22 of the ruling), and therefore, the ruling focused solely on monetary compensation.
• The plaintiff believes that under these circumstances she is entitled to receive compensation for her non-pecuniary damages in the amount of at least NIS 50,000. It should be emphasized that this is not the first time that the court has ruled against the defendant (and other defendants) for such monetary compensation for non-pecuniary damages, under similar circumstances.
• 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."

• דוגמה נוספת: 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. 

43. 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).

In conclusion

• In light of all of the above, the Honorable Court is hereby requested to summon the defendant to a hearing before it and to rule as follows:
• the remedies detailed in this statement of claim.
• To grant any other relief that the Honorable Court deems appropriate in the circumstances of the case.

_______________
עו"ד אדי בליטשטיין
ב"כ התובעת