Posted on 08/01/2025 12:34:17 PM PDT by ShadowAce
A Kia dealership that got on the wrong side of an Ohio woman has approached the courts to regain its name after she snatched it. The dispute started with a repossessed car.
The dealership, formerly known as “Taylor Kia of Lima,” took back Tiah McCreary’s car in just one month. The dealer sold her a used Kia K5, but claimed in court documents that it was later determined that the McCreary did not provide sufficient information for loan approval.
McCreary found the perfect chance to pull off the automobile revenge of the century while considering her legal options. She discovered that the dealer had not renewed its company name with the Ohio Secretary of State and swooped in by registering it in her name. McCreary then slammed the dealer with a cease-and-desist letter asking them to stop trading with the name.
Faced with an impending identity crisis, the dealer enlisted the help of the courts to wrestle back the name. It argued that an arbitration clause in the purchase contract rendered McCreary’s demand invalid, to which a judge agreed. However, the Third District appeals court had a different view; the arbitration clause only applied to the repossession, and not the tussle over the “Taylor Kia of Lima” moniker.
According to the ruling, the “claim is a separate matter that could be pursued independently of the other claims in the complaint that address the consumer transaction at issue. Since this claim does not fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement, this claim should not have been dismissed and sent to arbitration.”
The parties are back in the lower courts for another round of legal sparring.
Why is it good for her? Sounds like her car was repossessed because she did not keep up her payments.
k, thanks
I think if I were the judge on a case like this, I would threaten both parties with a beating if they ever showed up in my court again.
😄
She’s a lawyer or a scammer.
Not a good look.
She’s got to be a lawyer or paralegal
Probably falsified a pay stub..
Lying on the credit application=repo.
Freegards Nick!
I appreciate your contribution here often. You’re a help!
The judge separated the two questions.
The fine print will give the car back to the dealership depending, as I have not read it.
The other question ought to go her way on the technicalities. It should be heard at a different time with different judge right?
The solution is to compromise.
Wonder how she will negotiate that.
BrianD
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.