Allen v. Rouse Toyota Jeep, Inc.

WELLS, Judge.

Plaintiff has assigned error to the trial court’s conclusions that the value of the automobile was not substantially impaired and that it was not substantially impaired for its intended use. She also assigns error to the court’s conclusion that there was a substantial change in the vehicle not due to any defect before the attempted revocation. We reverse and remand.

North Carolina General Statute § 25-2-608 provides in pertinent part:(1) The buyer may revoke his acceptance of a . . . commercial unit whose nonconformity substantially impairs its value to him. . . .(2) Revocation of…