504-2005 Appeal Court of Appeals of Santiago
antiago , 14 November, two thousand five .
Vistos: Case is played Nov. 16, two thousand four, written in page 41, with the exception of paragraphs 5, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th, all of which is eliminated. And there is also this: 1 .- What should determine the sequence of events on trial, as follows: a) on 05 January 2004, as recorded in the packing list on pages 5, the claimant purchased the vehicle in question, b) on 13 that month and year, the buyer took the car where the seller and he noticed the alarm, which was very sensitive (folio 7 and 24), c) on February 11 had to limpiársele front brake pads, they made noise, while other operations he performed were not detailed (folio 9, 25 and 26), d) on 23 this month changed the handbrake lever, while the brakes are regulated according to realize the pieces on pages 27 and 28, e) on March 12, switched to auto your dashboard, it regulated the shifter , he noticed the markers and revised some noises (folio 8, 29 and 30), f) on 02 June that year it was repaired NDOS noise at the rear and right front door, which was forced closing; while the rear was lubricated and adjusted the upper end of the buffers (folios 10, 31 and 32), g) on \u200b\u200bJune 14 changed the oil and filter (folio 33), h) on 17 June after the complaint was made before the Service Consumer National (folio 4), 2 .- That the above, the court follows, appreciated the awareness test, the Renault Megane car of the year 2004 was sold by Derco SA Car Carmen Gloria Bravo Bar, with defects in brake, shifter, suspension, instrument panel and right front door; 3 .- That the court can not pretend that a movable thing from the hand of man, such as a motor vehicle is perfect, and is aware that this is not due to the supplier. However, notice that when someone buys a brand new car, ie outbound from the factory, the firm that represents formally the respective brand, so, in large part by the assurances given by the fact that protection the species is covered by the brand, assuming that the controls of production and the shipment from the factory to the distribution site, have been effective enough so that buyers do not have to return again and again for adjustments and / or repairs; 4 .- That, on the other hand, it appears that each of the arrangements that the car had to undergo was solved by the vendor reported, that under factory warranty expense $ 300,750. Therefore, in the absence of other evidence, these judges are not convinced that how avatars that surrounded the acquisition by Ms. Bravo of the species in question, have generated, directly and immediately, a damages equal to $ 6,392,300; 5 .- That, however, impossible to ignore the wear it has meant to the complainant having to batírselas to Derco SA for seven times between January and June 2004 to take forward their investment, which has had bartered in anguish and uncertainty, finding that he acquired the securities themselves of the new, crumbling in repairs inherent to use. That is constitutive of moral injury that the Court of Justice believes recognize. For these reasons: A. Revokes the said failure to participate in hosting the demand for damages (decision b). Consequently, ceases to have effect the decision marked d). B. He confirms, moreover, with a statement that the fine is reduced to the equivalent of four monthly tax units (UTM). Sign up and be refunded. Editorial Minister Carlos Cerda Fernandez. No. 504-2005 .- Delivered by the Seventh Division of the Court of Appeals, presided by Minister Carlos Cerda Fernandez and made by the minister and Mr Jorge Dahm Oyarzún Float fiscal Mario Espinoza.
0 comments:
Post a Comment