The plaintiff had purchased a used vehicle from the defendant (dealer) for a little over $2000. At the time of sale, it had not yet been revealed that the defendant did not legally own the vehicle as the rightful owner had not legally signed the title over to the defendant. To add to that, the defendant had advertised the vehicle as having a 90 day bumper to bumper warranty as well as warranty coverage as outlined in the Massachusetts Used Car Warranty Laws. After having possession of the car for less than 100 miles, the vehicle began manifesting a grinding noise when the clutch pedal was fully depressed. When the defendant was notified of the malfunction, the defendant claimed that there is no warranty because the full asking price had not been paid. Additionally, the defendant claims that there is no warranty because the vehicle has over 125,000 miles on the odometer. The plaintiff claims that the defendant unfairly and deceptively advertised, and then sold a warranty-covered vehicle and then failed to follow through with warranty coverage in Good Faith.
According to page 13 section III of 'A Dealer's Guide to The Massachusetts Used Vehicle Warranty Law', the defendant refused to honor the basic guarantee of the Implied Warranty of Merchantability "which applies to the sale of all consumer products, including automobiles even if they have 125,000 miles or more on the odometer. This law states that a purchased vehicle should function properly for a reasonable period of time. If the vehicle does not, the dealer must fix it at no charge."
As you can see, the Implied Warranty of Merchantability Law stated above contradicts what it says in the Lemon Law regarding the mileage.
Given the fact that the title had never been signed over to the dealer, does that nullify or compound all other infractions committed by the defendant?