A small claims case involving the sale of a used vehicle has been dismissed with prejudice, leaving the plaintiff without recourse. Brendan Moore filed a complaint in the Circuit Court of Cook County on May 13, 2022, against Niko Pendavinji and Nitro Detergent Specialists, alleging fraudulent misrepresentation and concealment related to his purchase of a used van.
The dispute began when Moore purchased a 2016 Ford Transit cargo van from Nitro Detergent Specialists for $28,500 on February 4, 2022. He later discovered that the van had been in an accident requiring substantial repairs. Moore alleged that Pendavinji falsely claimed there was no rust or damage to the van and provided misleading photographs during their negotiations. The plaintiff contended that these misrepresentations led him to buy the vehicle under false pretenses. However, attached documents included a bill of sale indicating an "as is" purchase agreement with no warranties or guarantees.
Moore's second amended complaint, filed on December 8, 2022, accused Pendavinji and Nitro Detergent Specialists of knowingly engaging in fraudulent activities by concealing the van's accident history and providing altered photographs. Despite these allegations, the defendants argued that no false representations were made and emphasized that Moore bought the vehicle "as is," accepting all liabilities at the time of sale. They also highlighted Moore's failure to inspect the van thoroughly before purchasing it.
On June 27, 2023, after reviewing both parties' arguments and affidavits, Judge James L. Allegretti dismissed Moore's complaint with prejudice. The court found that Moore failed to establish a cause of action for fraud as he did not demonstrate any specific false statements made by Pendavinji or prove any duty to disclose information about prior accidents. Furthermore, it was noted that Moore had ample opportunity to inspect the vehicle or have it inspected by a mechanic but chose not to do so.
In his appeal, Moore argued that an "as is" clause does not shield sellers from liability for fraud under Illinois law and criticized the trial court for making credibility determinations inappropriate at this stage. Nevertheless, Justices Cobbs, Fitzgerald Smith, and Lavin upheld the dismissal on September 30, 2024. They concluded that Moore’s claims lacked sufficient factual basis to proceed under fraudulent misrepresentation or concealment theories.
The legal representation for Brendan Moore was not specified in this document; however, Judge James L. Allegretti presided over this case identified as No. 1-23-1305.