DeNike

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

We refer to the facts and procedural background set forth in detail in this court’s published opinion, filed concurrently. (DeNike, supra, __ Cal.App.5th __.)3 We discuss here only those facts and background relevant to the specific issues in this appeal. In 2014, DeNike purchased a new Jeep Wrangler, with a hardtop, from SCJ. DeNike believed, and SCJ led him to believe, that the hardtop had been installed at the factory. When DeNike subsequently learned that the vehicle was in fact manufactured with a soft top and the hardtop had been installed afterwards, he sought to return it. DeNike filed a complaint against SCJ alleging violations of the CLRA, fraud by intentional misrepresentation and/or concealment, and violations of the Song-Beverly Act. DeNike also sent SCJ a CLRA demand letter. In response, SCJ offered to rescind the contract, take back the vehicle, pay off the financing, refund any payments made by DeNike, and pay his incidental and consequential damages, as well as attorney fees and costs. Unable to reach an agreement, principally on the issue of attorney fees, the matter went to trial. The trial court ruled that DeNike’s…