Fraud claim against Williams Chevrolet is reinstated

Fred Williams sued the Traverse City dealership after his used car died on the 80 mile drive home from the dealership.  He claimed that the car had numerous mechanical problems that could not have been overlooked if the dealership had conducted the basic safety inspection that it claimed to have performed.  The dealership pointed to the "as is, no warranty" language in the sales agreement and prevented Plaintiff Williams (apparently no relation) from relying on the oral representations that he argued the salesman had made.  Based on the "as is" language, the Court dismissed all counts of Plaintiff Williams' complaint and Williams appealed.  On appeal, the Court of Appeals unanimously reinstated two of the Plaintiff's claims.  It held that the language of the sales agreement was not inconsistent with a fraud or Michigan Consumer Protection Act claim.  It noted that the claim of a lie about inspection was not inconsistent with the "as is" clause, and that a jury could reasonably find from the facts alleged that the dealership fraudulently informed Williams that the vehicle had been  found to have no deficiencies or mechanical problems on inspection."