Articles Posted in Consumer Lawyer

|

In this case an arbitration was filed against the dealer because it was alleged that they refused to return the deposit after the plaintiff returned the car. No return of deposit.

CONSUMER FRAUD

The petitioner was forced to enter the transaction when she was told that her first transaction was not approved for financing. They told her that she would not receive the deposit of $2,000 returned but they told her that she would receive credit towards the next transaction. She did receive that credit on the next transaction, although she did not purchase the vehicle or have any dealings with the defendant, but had no choice. The failure to return the money after the cancellation of the contact by the respondent constitutes unconscionable conduct, if not outright conversion. The representation that she would not receive her money when the transaction was cancelled by the dealer constitutes an affirmative representation. Then, when petitioner defaults on the payments, the car is repossessed and no post-repossession notice is provided and there is no post-sale accounting. It is unknown what occurred to the car, whether the defendants used it for personal purposes or profit. Without proof we must make such assumptions.

Continue reading ›

|

COUNT V Unconscionability of Arbitration Clause 1. The plaintiff reasserts the previous facts as if set forth at length herein.

2. All times hereinafter, the plaintiff signed at least two separate agreements with regard to the purchase of the vehicle. The first agreement, which was signed by the plaintiff, was a buyer’s order containing the arbitration clause. The second and final agreement signed by the plaintiff was considered a retail installment sales contract and contained the interest rate of the subject transaction. The retail installment sales contract specifically says that this is the entire agreement between us. There is no such arbitration clause in the retail installment sales contract and the buyer’s order was superseded by the retail installment sales contract, including all of the relevant terms. Thus, the terms and conditions contained in the buyer’s order constitutes parole evidence and is not admissible as to the terms of the transaction.

3. In addition, the application of the American Arbitration Association rules and procedures would void the plaintiff from effectively litigating her claim. Specifically, the plaintiff acquired a vehicle for in excess of $46,000. New Jersey Law permits punitive damages equal to five times compensatory damages or $350,000, whichever is greater. Based on the defendants’ conduct and the purchase price of the vehicle, the plaintiff would be seeking the maximum amount allowable under New Jersey Law, which should be up to $350,000. In this specific case, the plaintiff makes very strong allegations of fraud and consumer fraud against the selling dealership as well as the manufacturer, permitting the plaintiff to recover three times the purchase price of the vehicle, which would be in excess of $135,000. The plaintiff would also be entitled to costs of the suit plus punitive damages. The costs associated with filing an arbitration which seeks in excess of $200,000 to $300,000 in damages would be in excess of $15,000 to $20,000, based on the American Arbitration Association commercial rules.

Continue reading ›

|

EXPRESS WARRANTY–DEFINITION

An express warranty is a representation, statement, promise or description made in writing, orally or by any other means, by a manufacturer or seller that its product has certain characteristics or will meet certain standards.

A manufacturer or seller can create an express warranty without intending to make a warranty, or without using words such as “warranty” or “guarantee.”

Continue reading ›

|

Toyota Recall

The law firm of The Law Office of Jonathan Rudnick is investigating claims that individuals and/or entities have against Toyota Motor Sales for allegations that the vehicle is working improperly. As it has been reported recently, there is a significant recall underway with regard to problems which are currently widely known with various models distributed by Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A.

There is breaking news that there has been political implications for this issue.

Continue reading ›
Contact Information
788 Shrewsbury Ave
Building 2, #204
Tinton Falls, NJ 07724
Phone: (732) 709-7277Fax: (732) 879-0213

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2024, The Law Office of Jonathan Rudnick
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design