Cases: No harm, no foul

A Mercedes buyer who claimed that the car’s “COMAND navigation system” was not as good as advertised saw his claim dismissed because he failed to show any damage.

Amiel Dabush and others in 1999 leased the newest model of Mercedes S-Class with a COMAND navigation system included.  The brochure for the system claimed, “If there’s a road that goes there, the S-Class can show you the way.”  When Dabush finally had call to use the system, he found that it worked, but was unimpressed by the fact that he had to talk to a customer service representative who guided him to where he needed to be.  He sued for breach of contract and fraud, saying that the brochures promised a much more high-tech system.

He was unable to show any loss, however, and the New Jersey court read the brochure as mere puffery.  In fact, the dealership had offered to buy back the car before the lease period ended and had given him an Dabush updated version of the COMAND system free of charge.  Thus, since Dabush failed to establish any ascertainable loss or detrimental reliance, summary judgment against him was affirmed.

Dabush v. Mercedes-Benz USA, Inc., 2005 WL 1240196 (N.J. Super. A.D., May 26, 2005).