New Jersey Lemon Law Lawyer Blog
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This case arises out of the plaintiff’s purchase of the 2005 Pontiac Bonneville from the defendants on or about July 1, 2014. At the time the purchase the vehicle had 78,811 miles. The purchase price of the automobile was $9,995. The finance charges over the life of the contract were $4,712. The plaintiff was obligated to make monthly payments on the first of the month beginning August 1, 2014 in the amount of $340.00.
The plaintiff continued to the payments from August until October however a dispute arose when the plaintiff wanted the defendant to pay for broken motor mounts for $222.00. The plaintiff signed retail installment sales contract evidencing the nature and extent of the payments however he was not provided with a copy of the contract. The plaintiff also signed a buyer’s order indicating that there was a documentary service fee of $295.
The plaintiff refused to pay for the broken motor mounts demanding that the dealership pay. The plaintiff fell behind on payments and the vehicle was repossessed on or about November 9, 2014. The car was supposedly resold about six months later. Post repossession and sale were allegedly sent to the plaintiff. However the defendant dealership sent them to the wrong address. After the vehicle was sold, more than 6 months later, another letter was sent to the plaintiff providing a breakdown of the sale however it was sent to the wrong address.
The notices sent to the plaintiff demanded a gate fee of $65 for the plaintiff to access his vehicle in order to obtain his belongings. The defendant dealership completed various documents with the Division of Motor Vehicles to obtain title to the automobile. Their certification was falsified in obtaining the documentation to get the title to resell the vehicle.
The plaintiff is obtained from the DMV a record of the vehicles which were purchased and sold by the defendant dealership which also indicates the time of the purchase and the resale. (Highlighted VINS)(1-16, 81-82 OPRA DEMAND) It appears as though the defendant engaged in a pattern of practice of selling vehicles repossessed in the maintaining them for a significant period of time probably on their lot.
CLAIMS AND DAMAGES
Failure to provide a copy of the retail contract: NJSA 56:8-2.22-Consumer Fraud Act.
Failure to itemize documentary service fee: NJAC 13:45A-26B.3, Bosland v. Warnock Dodge, Inc., 197 N.J. 543, 964 A.2d 741 (2009), NJSA 56:12-14 – Consumer Fraud Act
No post repossession or post sale notices sent to the plaintiff: NJSA 12A:9-611, 616.
Post repo and post sales notices deficient for requiring gate fee of $65 to access goods in the vehicle. NJSA 12A:9-611, 616. Also Consumer Fraud See Jefferson Loan v. Sessions 397 N.J.Super 520 (App.Div. 2008)
Not reselling vehicle in reasonable time period in this case and as a matter of course in all transactions. NJSA 12A:9-610. Also Consumer Fraud See Jefferson Loan v. Sessions 397 N.J.Super 520 (App.Div. 2008)
UCC Damages
UCC Damages are finance charges plus ten percent of purchase price. $4,712 plus $995. Notice issues. Keeping car to long before selling. Noncommercial dispossession. Gate fee.
CONSUMER FRAUD DAMAGES PLUS COUNSEL FEES
$295 x 3 for improper documentary service fee
$1,220 (payments made) x 3 for not providing of contract to the plaintiff.
$9,995 x 3 for converting vehicle – taking car, charging gate fee, lying to DMV on repossession dates, and a demonstrated practice of selling cars, repossessing car, and keeping them or long periods of time. See Jefferson Loan v. Sessions 397 N.J.Super 520 (App.Div. 2008). Consumer fraud for illegal and deceptive repossession practices by finance company. Smallest loss is payments x 3 for loss of investment in the car.
Save
Save
Save
Save