MENU
SEARCHMENUSEARCH
Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey has filed a complaint against a used-car dealer who allegedly had customers fill out blank contracts and then charged them at least twice the agreed-upon price for defective cars.
Read More →Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange was granted a temporary restraining order against the owners of a used-car dealership, as well as permission to seize the dealer’s property.
Read More →Two used-car dealerships and their owner reached a settlement this month with the Department of Justice and the state attorney general. The settlement resolves a lawsuit that alleged the dealerships charged African American buyers more for loans and repossessed vehicles without reasonable notice.
Read More →The lawsuit, which charged the F&I product provider with violating three consumer-protection laws for the way it handled service-contract cancellations and refunds, was dismissed 90 days after it was filed.
Read More →Condor Capital must pay an estimated $8 million in restitution to harmed customers, a $3 million penalty and admit violations of the Dodd-Frank Act and New York state law. The lender will also surrender its licenses in all states.
Read More →An antitrust lawsuit against Carfax has reached nearly 900 dealer plaintiffs. The firm handling the case is looking to add another 300 in the next two months.
Read More →The Georgia Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a customer of Payless Auto Deals could proceed with his fraud claim against the dealership and one of its salespeople for selling him a damaged vehicle.
Read More →Evolution Auto Sales filed a lawsuit against a former employee who posted a review on a job search site accusing the dealership of illegal practices.
Read More →Sonic and Philpott Motors have filed a lawsuit against a former employee who left the dealership and hired seven other employees to come work for him.
Read More →A judge in Maryland dismissed a lawsuit against the Pohanka Auto Group. It alleged that the group’s GAP coverage was “phony” because it did not meet the definition of a debt-cancellation agreement under Maryland law.
Read More →