>

Deceptive Trade Practices

Takata Airbag Recall Lawsuits

Takata Corporation knowingly concealed that the airbags they supplied most of the automobile industry were defective and potentially deadly, which has already claimed numerous lives, and resulted in countless other injuries and disfigurements. To settle their case, Takata has agreed to pay criminal fines, compensate victims of the exploding airbags, and help pay automakers to facilitate the largest recall in U.S. History.

California Lemon Law & Buying “As-Is” Vehicles

Many consumers opt to purchase less expensive used vehicles, and sometimes those vehicles are sold with an “as-is” disclaimer. These “as-is” disclaimers are meant to inform consumers that the vehicle may come with defects or flaws that are the sole responsibility of the buyer.

10 Day Right to Cancel, Canceled Car Sales, & Auto Fraud

California law allows dealers a 10-day right to cancel window in which they can revoke the sale of a vehicle. This can be frustrating for vehicle buyers who have gone through the long and stressful process of buying a car, truck, motorcycle, or other vehicle. Even though a dealer has a right to that limited window in which they can cancel a sale, they must follow strict regulations so that they are operating in accordance with the law.

Rewritten Contract Backdating Fraud

Rewritten Contract Backdated

Rewritten contract or backdating fraud happens when a dealership has you sign a new contract for the purchase or lease of a vehicle, and then backdates the newer contract to the date of the first contract.

Applies to:

Lemon Law Burbank Mercedes SL550

Burbank
2007
Mercedes-Benz
SL550
Type of Complaint: 
Lemon Law
Vehicle Repurchased
Case Summary: 

The car owner began experiencing problems with her vehicle after the presumption period, which in California is within the 18 month or 18,000 miles from when the vehicle was first purchased. The owner contacted the Mercedes-Benz Customer Assistance Center and was erroneously told by a representative of the manufacturer that her vehicle would not qualify to be repurchased or replaced under the California lemon law because it was outside the presumption period.

Several times the owner took her Mercedes SL550 in to the dealership for transmission and electrical issues only to be told that no fault could be found. On one occasion, the owner brought her vehicle to a dealership because the vehicle intermittently would not start. After keeping the SL550 for several days, a service writer told the owner that the service department could not duplicate her issues and asked her to pick up her vehicle. When she went in to pick up the SL550, the vehicle did not start in the service drive. Still, the owner was told that her vehicle did not qualify under the California Lemon Law.

The owner was worried for her safety and decided to retain a California lemon law lawyer for help in returning her defective Mercedes SL550. While the vehicle's defects and nonconformities continued, her case was again rejected for being outside the presumption period.

Finally, the SL550 owner contacted the Law Offices of Robert B. Mobasseri and within 30 days of the manufacturer receiving a demand, and without any admission of liability or conceding the merit of any of the consumer's claims, the manufacturer offered to repurchase the owner's vehicle and waive any mileage offset that the manufacturer was entitled to by law.

Date Settled: 
June, 2009

Dealer Fraud, Malibu, Mercedes-Benz S550

Malibu
2009
Mercedes-Benz
S550
Type of Complaint: 
Dealer Fraud
Vehicle Repurchased
Case Summary: 

Car buyer went into a dealership to purchase a new car and was asked to sign a blank credit application to have his "credit checked". The buyer purchased a 2008 Mercedes-Benz CLS63.

Almost immediately after purchasing the vehicle, the buyer discovered that the vehicle had damage and that some of the items listed on the vehicle's window sticker as included were missing. The dealership told the buyer that he would need to purchase the missing items. The buyer expressed dissatisfaction and requested that the dealership take back the Mercedes CLS63. The dealership refused to take back the vehicle, but offered to sell the buyer a different vehicle instead. Reluctantly the buyer purchased a 2009 S550 and the dealer used the 2 day old CLS63 as a trade-in with negative equity against the new car.

The buyer complained several times of the vehicle's cost as well as to the additional services that the finance manager insisted were required to make the exchange, but that were listed on the paperwork as an option. The buyer felt pressured into purchasing the $102,630.00 Mercedes-Benz S550.

On both sales, the loan application for the cars were not filled out by the buyer, but instead were filled out by one or more employees of the dealership in different handwriting. In filling out the credit applications, the dealership misspelled the buyer's name and address; the dealership grossly inflated buyer's income much higher than what he informed the dealership that he made; the dealership fictitiously added rental income that the buyer did not have; the dealership fictitiously added a $400,000 investment portfolio to the credit application that did not exist; the dealership self-appraised and/or exaggerated the value of two properties owned by the buyer; the dealership grossly exaggerated the buyer's length of employment and fictitiously stated that the buyer was retired.

The buyer tried several times to return vehicle to dealership and asked for copies of his loan and credit applications. The dealership refused to give the buyer copies of his credit applications and instead responded by the General Manager of the dealership calling to threaten the filing of a malicious lawsuit against the buyer.

The buyer retained the Law Offices of Robert B. Mobasseri to request an immediate repurchase and/or rescission of his vehicle and be reimbursed for all related expenses to both vehicles. In return, the buyer would not pursue charges of fraud against the dealership in court.

The dealership, without any admission of liability or conceding the merit of any of the consumer's claim, offered within 30 days of receiving the demand by the Law Offices of Robert. B Mobasseri, to rescind the buyer's vehicle contract and reimburse the buyer for all expenses related to the purchase of both vehicles.

Date Settled: 
November, 2009

Your Auto Repair Rights

  • You have the right to service your vehicle at any authorized repair facility.
  • You have the right to take your business elsewhere if you dislike the estimate that a repair facility gives you, or don't feel comfortable with the service they are providing you with. You may, however, still be charged a reasonable amount of money for the time spent preparing the estimate.
  • You have the right to a written Work Order or Repair Order with a specified dollar amount. You are only required to pay up to the amount written on that Work Order or Repair Order.
Applies to:

Odometer Fraud / Odometer Rollback Fraud

Odometer Fraud

Odometer Fraud may be the largest act of fraud committed against the American consumer today. Under the Department of Transportation, The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has estimated that close to half a million vehicles are sold each year that involve some form of odometer fraud. The collective cost paid by the American consumer in inflated car prices for these vehicles is estimated over one billion dollars.

Automobile Sales Finance Act

TITLE 14. LIEN
CHAPTER 2b. AUTOMOBILE SALES FINANCE ACT
California Civil Code Section 2981-2984.4

2981.As used in this chapter,unless the context otherwise requires:

  • (a) "Conditional sale contract" means:

Applies to:
Syndicate content

Free Consultation • Se Habla Español

Lemon Law Auto Fraud serves the following California counties: Inyo, Imperial, Kern, Los Angeles, Mono, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Tulare, and Ventura.

All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
See If Your Vehicle Qualifies Under The Lemon Law
2008 Continental GTC $95,000.00
2009 S550 $11,658.56
2006 SL65 $124,000.00
2007 SL550 $15,105.95
VEHICLE FRAUD DEALER FRAUD REPAIR FRAUD
Have You Been a
Victim of Fraud?
Disclaimer: The following Lemon Law and Auto Fraud information has been compiled from various public sources. It is presented online for informational use only, and without warranty as to its accuracy, timeliness, or completeness. This site does not replace any official versions of the information presented, nor does use of this information constitute an attorney-client relationship. It is always recommended that you do not make any decisions about any legal matter without first consulting an attorney to ensure that all of your rights are protected, as well as to find out if your vehicle meets the established Lemon Law or Auto Fraud Criteria for your state.