September 10, 2011

Self-Help Repossession Wrongful Repossession

Self-Help Repossession

Usually, the agreement will permit the finance company or bank to take the vehicle by self-help repossession without any further definition. The Uniform Commercial Code also permits a secured party to take a piece of collateral or the vehicle by self-help repossession. Again, self-help repossession is not specifically defined, however, must be deemed obvious in light of the relationship between the parties.

Self-help repossession is where the finance company ‘helps themselves’ to take the vehicle back.
One common question is whether or not there needs to be a notice to the owner of the vehicle prior to the ‘self-help repossession’. There is no requirement under the Uniform Commercial Code and there is usually no requirement under the written agreement between the parties. However, if the written agreement between the parties indicates there must be a type of pre-repossession notice, they must conduct same. If there are various calls between the parties with regard to late payments, this is not deemed and cannot be deemed a requirement but rather an attempt by the finance company to have the lessee or driver of the vehicle make payments.


Repossession law in the State of New Jersey

January 15, 2011

The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act to be Watered Down and SIGNIFICANTLY Helps Car Dealerships


The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act is to be Watered Down, significantly.

New Jersey has one of the strongest Consumer Fraud Acts in the United States.

There is pending legislation to change the Consumer Fraud Act and make it easier to avoid civil penalties for fraud.

The changes include provisions to exempt "out of state transactions" from the protections of the act.

The changes include the limitation on attorney fees.

The changes include the requirement for detrimental reliance AND makes treble or triple damages optional.

There are no real disincentives to discourage fraud. This bill encourages bad business practices.

THE TRUE COST OF FRAUD IS TREMENDOUS

CARTON AND RUDNICK

January 11, 2011

Anti Consumer Bill: New Jersey to Welcome Corrupt Businesses

Anti Consumer Bill: New Jersey to Welcome Corrupt Businesses

Amy Handlin
and John McKeon are sponsoring an anti consumer bill that would change the business landscape in New Jersey.

A key provision of the new New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act would exempt out of state transactions. This means the following. If a someone in New Jersey commits consumer fraud upon a non resident (living in NY, PA or CT) there are no consequences.

"a. apply only to transactions that take place in the State"

The Consumer Fraud Act would encourage businesses to travel to New Jersey to deceive people in other states on the internet or otherwise.

This bill makes consumer fraud easier and will encourage corrupt businesses and individuals to come to New Jersey where they will be protested. Amy Handlin is the co sponsor.

January 10, 2011

Car Salesman and Dealserships to be Protected with Proposed Changes in Consumer Fraud Act

Car Salesman and Dealerships to be Protected with Proposed Changes in Consumer Fraud Act.

Amy Handlin and Jack McKeon have sponsored and introduced ANTI CONSUMER legislation to reduce consumer rights and protect car dealerships.

The changes in the Consumer Fraud Act would exempt or limit liability against businesses that are already regulated such as car dealership. It would also limit liability for consumers who consummate out of state transactions. This arguably contradicts other legislation that has been introduced to increase liability for those committing consumer fraud

CRACKDOWN ON INTERNET FRAUDS


The combination of these two laws would probably create conflicts and a haven in New Jersey for fraudsters.

January 3, 2011

Car Salesman Protected in Proposed New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act Changes

CHANGES IN THE NEW JERSEY CONSUMER FRAUD ACT TO PROTECT CAR SALESMAN

Amy Handlin is the co-sponsor on this bill to protect car salesman

John McKeon is the primary Sponsor on this bill to protect car salesman

There is a bill pending in the Assembly which significantly and permanently change the way that businesses transact business in the State of New Jersey and the rights afforded to consumers. The bill is labeled [A3333] and if passed by the legislature and signed by the governor that would forever and permanently damage the rights of New Jersey consumers. There are various and daunting adoption in consumer rights in this bill. Unfortunately, this bill is sponsored by a democrat and a republican.

Initially, the substance of this bill would reduce consumers’ rights to proceed on claims against car dealerships.


A nickname for this bill should be the Car Dealership Protection Act. A major portion of the exemptions written to this bill would exempt businesses who were regulated by other agencies and/or authorities. This means that a car dealership who would be regulated by the Banking and Insurance and the Division of Motor Vehicles would likely be exempt from the protections that consumers have under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.

Hypothetically, if a car dealership were to have to a new car on their lot, crash it and sell this vehicle which was damaged, the plaintiff would be without rights under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. This would mean that an individual could not sue the direct car dealership for consumer fraud and seek attorney’s fees and triple damages. The car dealerships would gain significant protection if this bill were passed. This bill is definitely and certainly anti-consumer in every way, shape and form. This bill would protect businesses that engaged in fraudulent acts to the detriment of consumers.

It would force the conduct of businesses to be reduced to the lowest common denominator. In effect, the businesses that were acting honestly and within the law would be encouraged and forced to act in the manner inconsistent with the law as a result of the competition with the illegal or improper businesses. This is anti-competitive and will cost New Jersey consumers a significant amount of money. There would be almost no consequences for violating the law.

October 4, 2009

Consumer Fraud and the Uniform Arbitration Act

Consumer Fraud and the Uniform Arbitration Act

As previously stated in many of these posts, the dealers frequently use arbitration agreements as a method by which they bypass the court system. There are numerous organizations including JAMS, NAF and American Arbitration Association. All of these organizations ordinarily have consumer due process protocols for these arbitrations. The question is what happens when you win an arbitration and the dealership refuses to pay the arbitration award. Unfortunately, this is not an easy process but there is a provision in the Uniform Arbitration Act for the Superior Court to confirm an arbitration award entered by an arbitrator. Basically, the petitioner must file an order to show cause (fancy words for a court action) to confirm the arbitration award so as it can be entered into the docket system and be docketed against the dealer’s property. There is an entire provision under the court rules for a filing of an order to show cause and is relatively complicated. Nonetheless, the Court is permitted to confirm this arbitration award so long as there is not a basis to vacate the arbitration award filed by the loser of the arbitration. Once the arbitration award is confirmed by the Superior Court, it becomes a judgment docketed and the petitioner or plaintiff may use this docketed judgment or award as any other docketed judgment or award. Moreover, the Uniform Arbitration Act provides for the payment of counsel fees and costs associated with domesticating or confirming an arbitration award. The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act also provides for the payment of counsel fees with the collection of a consumer fraud judgment. This was decided in the case of Tankersley wherein the Appellate Division held that an attorney who was attempting to collect judgment on a consumer fraud award would be entitled to counsel fees and costs. The Tankersley case involved the collection of a judgment against a car dealership.

September 23, 2009

Consumer Fraud and Car Dealerships

Car Dealer Tricks – Etch Products

It is a common practice for car dealerships in the State of New Jersey to sell a product known as etch. Frequently, this product is preprinted on a buyer’s order or a standard form used by the dealership as part of selling a new or used vehicle. Although the dealership might frequently claim that the purchase of this item is optional, it appears as though it is not optional because it is preprinted on a buyer’s order and it is applied to all the vehicles prior to the time of sale. As a practical matter, I have litigated numerous cases where the allegation was that a representative of the dealership explained to the customer that the purchase of this product was mandatory or part of the transaction. Frequently, this is contradicted by written statements contained in the various documentation prepared by the dealership and signed by the consumer so they feel they are “protected”.
Quite simply, the purchase of etch is neither required nor usually a good idea. The basic concept behind this etch product is that it somehow deters thieves from stealing a car once this particular identification is etched on the windshield. I have yet to see some type of study that etchings on the vehicle reduce the theft rate on the vehicle. Nonetheless, the benefit paid by the etch is not sufficient to support the amount of money or the price of the product. Usually, this product costs consumers from $200 to $500 and must be compared against the deductible of auto insurance. As an example, if you have a deductible with a $500 or on an auto and the vehicle is stolen or totaled, it is likely that this could be the maximum amount which would be received by consumer. So in essence, the consumer is paying $200 to $500 for a $500 benefit. The risk does not justify the price paid for the product. It is not uncommon that the etch product is sold in conjunction with a gap product which must be compared with the policy of automobile insurance sold with the vehicle. Nonetheless, it is overpriced for the risk assumed. Moreover, the requirements to apply for this benefit are overwhelming. There are numerous requirements including supplying of police report, notification within 30 days, and documentation from the insurance company and all sorts of other extras they are required to process this claim.

August 8, 2009

WAIVER OF CONSUMER FRAUD CLAIMS AND CONSUMER ARBITRATION

WAIVER OF CONSUME FRAUD CLAIMS AND CONSUMER FRAUD

The litigation in this case arises out of the plaintiff’s allegations that the defendant committed fraud and consumer fraud with regard to the performance of a home improvement contract. See Cox v. Sears, 92 N.J. 1 (1994). The defendant now relies upon arbitration clause and move to have the case dismissed. The arbitration clause provides the following:
Any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this contract at the option of Care Temp may be submitted to binding arbitration with the American Arbitration Association and judgment on award may be entered in any amount entered in any court or company jurisdiction
The arbitration clause as written is unenforceable under New Jersey law as promulgated by the New Jersey Supreme Court. In Garfinkel v. Morristown Obstetrics and Gynecology Associates, 168 N.J. 124 (2001), the court refused to enforce an arbitration agreement because the arbitration agreement failed to specifically include a waiver of statutory rights. The Supreme Court held that without the specific waiver of statutory rights, the agreement could not be said to encompass those statutory rights in the context of an arbitration clause. In Garfinkel, the court refused to force the plaintiff to arbitrate their statutory law against discrimination claims because the arbitration agreement specifically failed to include a waiver of statutory rights.

May 29, 2009

Lemon Law and Bankruptcy: Update

There is an internet news release indicating that Daimler will honor warranty claims and Lemon Law Claims.

Hopefully we will get some specifics and provide another update.

Carton and Rudnick

Continue reading "Lemon Law and Bankruptcy: Update" »

April 9, 2009

CAR DEALERSHIP SELLS CAR TO TWO BLIND PEOPLE.

CAR DEALERSHIP SELLS CAR TO TWO BLIND PEOPLE.

This is not a joke. It is true.

The names will withheld until suit is filed BUT today I saw, possibly, the worst case in the many years that I have been doing this type of work.

Both of my clients are legally blind. The primary obligor and the cosigner. They do not even have a driver’s license nor are the permitted to drive. The dealership even got the car registered and insured. The customer was at the dealership with his cane and his glasses. When they told me the story it was hard to believe. They are both legally blind.

To make matters even worse the car is a mess. It looks like it was in a prior accident with a different hood and various parts are melted on the interior of the car. They were told the car had only one prior owner when it had two.

The following are the causes of action (theories of liability) against the dealer and/or the lender.

• Consumer Fraud-deceptive conduct. Cox v. Sears.
• Fraud
• Breach of contract
• Breach of good faith and fair dealings. Wilson v. Hess
• Revocation. Cuesta v. Classic
• Negligence
• Discrimination against disabled persons, the blind. Law against discrimination.
• Declaratory relief that the contract is void ab initio (from the beginning)

Continue reading "CAR DEALERSHIP SELLS CAR TO TWO BLIND PEOPLE." »

February 22, 2009

What is UDAP? What is Consumer Fraud?

What is UDAP?

Unfair and deceptive Practices Acts. The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act would be considered a UDAP statute. The purpose is to assist consumers in battling fraud in the market place and provides several protections top consumers that are meant to encourage consumers to bring suit and attract competent lawyers to litigate the cases. The UDAP statutes include provisions for tripled damages, attorney fees and injunctive relief. The State AG's office is also permitted to bring suit under the Consumer Fraud Act.

The UDAP statutes vary significantly by State, with some providing more protection that others. There is a published report indicating the strength and weaknesses of all the statutes for all of the 50 states. The report indicates that Michigan and Rhode Island are the two weakest statutes because the courts have interpreted tham to cover almost no transactions.

Carton and Rudnick family law
Carton and Rudnick consumer law
Carton and Rudnick

Continue reading "What is UDAP? What is Consumer Fraud?" »

February 16, 2009

Consumer Fraud and Buying a Car

The fear of buying a car

Many people have a fear of having to go to a dealership and purchase or lease a car. There are so many pitfalls. How do you get answers to important questions? Where did the dealership get the car? What did they do to it to get it ready for sale? Did they really inspect the car and what did they find in that inspection? These are basic safety issues and concerns that need to be answered. It is very important to get accurate answers to these questions. There is almost no option except to trust the dealership. Remember that you are dealing with the salesman not the service department. Can you really get an accurate answer?

After these most basic questions are answered you still have to be concerned about the financing and the terms of the transaction for the purchase either lease or purchase. As an example what is the best interest rate available, what are the real terms of the financing? What are the products that are being packaged with the vehicle? What is GAP and what are the terms of the coverage? What is the real cost? You need to ask all of these questions and get answers in writing, if possible.

The best thing to do is get everything in writing and do you research as best you can. Do a CARFAX and also try to get you own financing? Ask a lot of questions to feel the salesman out and don’t get timid when you need a question answered or you are not sure.

There are many New Jersey cases that demonstrate examples of the type of conduct might be determined to be consumer fraud or auto fraud.(each case turns on its own set of facts)

Delany v. Garden State Auto Mall: The dealer sold products without full disclosure.

Romano v. Galaxy: Violation of Federal Odometer Law

Cuesta v. Classic: Odometer Roll Back

Sema v. Automall : Misrepresenting the vehicle as new when it was a demo


Carton and Rudnick family law
Carton and Rudnick consumer law
Carton and Rudnick


Continue reading "Consumer Fraud and Buying a Car" »

November 23, 2008

Ford and GM need help!

What is the status of the auto industry?

There are strong arguments on both sides for the failure of the GM or Ford. 239,000 people are directly employed by the big three. My only question is whether the problems experienced by the big three is the problem or a symptom of the overall ecopnomy?

Carton and Rudnick family law
Carton and Rudnick consumer law
Carton and Rudnick

November 14, 2008

Wachovia Corp Settlement

Wachovia Settlement

It appears that Wachovia Corp settled for up to $125 million for the following

The telemarketers then used that information to write checks to themselves, purportedly from the consumers they had called. These checks did not require a signature from the accountholder; instead, the signature block included text such as "authorized by your depositor, no signature required."

Carton and Rudnick family law
Carton and Rudnick consumer law
Carton and Rudnick

November 12, 2008

Hotel Charges that are Fraudulent

Hotel Charges that are Fraudulent. Many business such as hotels are looking for shortcuts by charging, without notice, for many supposed services.. The following are things that you should look for in any hotel stay.

Mandatory bellman charges:
Fees for cancellation
Fees for holding bags
Fees for early departure
Fees for energy surcharges
Fees for handling FEDEX packages
Fees for faxes
Fees for in room safes
Fees for the internet
Minibar fees for restocking
Amenity fees
Phone surcharges

Carton and Rudnick family law
Carton and Rudnick consumer law
Carton and Rudnick


Continue reading "Hotel Charges that are Fraudulent" »

November 9, 2008

New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs

New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs

The State has a great site dedicated to Lemon Law in the State of New Jersey.

There is a list of publications at the Division of Consumer Affairs site.

File a complaint

Licensing Board information.

Division of civil rights

Carton and Rudnick family law
Carton and Rudnick consumer law
Carton and Rudnick

November 6, 2008

New Jersey Lemon Law

New Jersey Lemon Law

Are there any specific requirements under the New Jersey Lemon Law to send a letter to a Manufacturer before you either file suit or request a hearing before an administrative Judge.

If you file a claim in Superior Court the answer is no, there is no requirement to send a letter to the manufacturer. But if you do send the letter there is a presumption that the vehicle is a lemon.

If you file a request for an administrative hearing you are REQUIRED to send the pre suit letter otherwise the court will not hear your claim.

Carton and Rudnick family law
Carton and Rudnick consumer law
Carton and Rudnick

November 3, 2008

Dealership Investigations

Gresham’s AutoLink faces investigation for consumer fraud
According to an internet source an Oregon dealership is being investigated for improper conduct. They have served search warrants after many many consumer complaints. Auto Link

This is what happens when there are too many consumer complaints against one dealer in a short period of time.

Carton and Rudnick family law
Carton and Rudnick consumer law
Carton and Rudnick

November 1, 2008

Selling Damaged Cars and Disclosure - Auto Fraud and Car Dealership Fraud

Selling Damaged Cars and Disclosure

I guess the initial question is why would a dealership sell damaged cars and not tell the consumer? The real answer is because they can. The dealership knows that if they tell the customer this material fact the prospect will never buy the damaged good, especially if they have a family. As an example if the dealership purchased the car at auction the seller is required to make material disclosures as to frame damage or other significant damage. There is an entire light system at many auctions - green - yellow - red - to advise as to the condition of the car. If the auction requires disclosure why doesn't the dealer provide the same courtesy to their customers. Because they can.

The law on selling damaged cars is straight forward, material facts are required for disclosure. The dealer is also responsible for any affirmative representations that they make on the sale of the car. If the dealer says that the car was not in an accident they better make sure that the car was not in an accident.

Salvage and flood title Cars

Carton and Rudnick family law
Carton and Rudnick consumer law
Carton and Rudnick

Continue reading "Selling Damaged Cars and Disclosure - Auto Fraud and Car Dealership Fraud" »

October 5, 2008

Car Repair Scams

Car repair scams. Car repair scams are everywhere.

How do you protect yourself from car repair scams. There is no easy answer because unless you a mechanic you are at the mercy of the mechanic. I would say the following are the most common types or areas where car repair scams proliferate.

Padding The Bill. Do we know what was actually completed?

Transmission Shops. What really is the condition of the car

Other charges. What are the minor charges that you do not recognize.

Cost What is the real cost of the repairs


In order to assist you I found a web site that addresses all of these issues ans would recommend a thorough reading.


What is the law on car repair and car repair scams.

Carton and Rudnick family law
Carton and Rudnick consumer law
Carton and Rudnick

Continue reading "Car Repair Scams" »