New Jersey Lemon Law Lawyer BlogThe state resolved a claim against Spectrum Home Furnishings Inc., Charles Serouya & Son Inc., also known as Gallery, CS&S Inc., Charles Serouya Inc., Spectrum Home Furnishings Inc., Charles Serouya & Son Inc, also known as Gallery. The state filed suit against these entities alleging violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, the Refund Policy Disclosure Act, the regulations governing disclosure of refund policy in retail establishments, accepted mail order practice and regulations, regulations governing delivering of household furniture and regulations governing general advertising. The entities who were subject to this lawsuit filed by the state entered into a consent order to resolve the matter. In essence, the defendants agreed not to violate any laws and to pay various fines.
Articles Posted in Consumer Lawyer
Demand for Arbitration
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.
Damage on Certified Used Cars Complaint
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.
How to Sue a Car Dealership and Discovery in These Cases
I have become faculty at lawline.com and have provided two separate courses in car dealership litigation with in-depth assistance in suing car dealerships.
How to sue a dealer
Toyota Lawsuits Merge – Breach of Warranty
A Federal Judge has set a hearing date on this issue. According to the internet news listing there is a hearing to make all the arrangements so this litigation can go forward.
Claims are for:
Express Warranty
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.”
WHAT DID TOYOTA KNOW ?
WHAT DID TOYOTA KNOW ?
The USA Today has an interesting report that NHTSA was notified by an insurance company, State Farm, of possible defects.
TOYOTA RECALL AND POSSIBLE LEGAL CLAIMS