New Jersey Lemon Law Lawyer BlogThe New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs, a subdivision of the Department of Law and Public Safety, provides an excellent website with links to all of the relevant New Jersey departments, links to all of the relevant inquiries pertaining to the Division of Consumer Affairs, and current headlines or investigations undergoing or undertaken by representatives of the Division of Consumer Affairs. As an example, there are headlines on the site and the current headlines as of the writing of this blog indicate that there are various ticket sellers which agree to stop speculative ticket sales, a Hudson County Senior Fraud Education and Protection Program, a notice on chimney repair scams and an announcement that the state, through Governor Corzine and Attorney General Milgram, are going to provide consumers with titles when the dealerships have gone out of business. The Division of Consumer Affairs also has links to the Division of Criminal Justice, Division of Civil Rights, Division of Gaming and Enforcement, Division of Highway Traffic Safety, Division of Law, Juvenile Justice Commission, New Jersey Racing Commission, State of Athletic Control Board, Division of State Police and Victims of Crime Compensation Office. There are also numerous consumer briefs, which are items of public information which is extensive, ranging from county office on aging to travel scams.
Articles Posted in Dealership Litigation
Can I sue if my car gets repossessed?
The previous blog posted explains the nature and extent of the claims under wrongful repossession. However, one of the common questions is that I know I was late on my loan, missed a few payments, and the vehicle was repossessed. The finance company contacted me and they demanded the entire company of the loan in order to obtain possession of my vehicle.
There is a basic theory under New Jersey law called good faith and fair dealings. One potential claim against the financing source under the circumstances would be that they are being commercially unreasonable under the Uniform Commercial Code. You could also assert that they are not complying with their obligation to act in good faith and deal fairly. Under New Jersey law, a lender in the context of a repossession and redemption need to be commercially reasonable. In addition, there is an obligation that they deal with a consumer or customer in good faith with regard to the contract which was in place between the parties. Both of these situations require the application of the good faith and commercially reasonable doctrines. If one were to argue that this would be an appropriate basis for liability, the damages section set forth in the prior blog pertaining to the wrongful repossession would apply.
Expedited Consumer Arbitration
Expedited Consumer Arbitration in the American Arbitration Association
It is well-known that a majority of dealerships, whether big or small, use standard arbitration agreements contained in all their contracts. Frequently, dealers who use arbitration agreements in various places and various documents such as a buyer’s order, a warranty, a retail installment sales contract or a generalized and completely separate consumer arbitration agreement.
Generally, the arbitration clauses permit a selection of various “neutral” entities to resolve the dispute. The three most frequently used arbitration forums are the National Arbitration Forum, American Arbitration Association and JAMS. It is now unlikely as a result of recent developments that anybody will be using the National Arbitration Forum to resolve these disputes. This will be subject to a later post. Both JAMS and the American Arbitration Association have specialized, expedited, consumer arbitrations for those who enter into a retail installment sales contract and wish to arbitrate a dispute against the dealer. Both the American Arbitration Association and JAMS have specific consumer due process protocols to assure that consumers get a “fair shot” in litigating their claims against the dealer.
Where Can you Sue a Car Dealership?
Under the relevant due process inquiry, the forum state’s exercise of jurisdiction must be reasonable, which is measured by the “minimal contacts” doctrine, a threshold requirement for specific personal jurisdiction. Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U.S. 235, 251, 78 S.Ct. 1228, 1238, 2 L.Ed.2d 1283, 1296 (1958); International Shoe v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945); Waste Management, supra, 138 N.J. at 119-20, 649 A.2d 379; Lebel, supra, 115 N.J. at 322, 558 A.2d 1252. Minimal contacts requires “that there be some act by which the defendant purposefully avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum State, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws.” Hanson, supra, 357 U.S. at 253, 78 S.Ct. at 1240, 2 L.Ed.2d at 1298. Under a specific jurisdiction analysis, the minimum contacts inquiry must focus on “the relationship among the defendant, the forum, and the litigation.” Shaffer v. Heitner, 433 U.S. 186, 204, 97 S.Ct. 2569, 2579, 53 L.Ed.2d 683, 698 (1977); Lebel, supra, 115 N.J. at 323, 558 A.2d 1252.
In applying the “minimum contacts” test, we focus on the relationship among the defendant, the forum, and the litigation. The “minimum contacts” requirement is satisfied so long as the contacts resulted from the defendant’s purposeful conduct and not the unilateral activities of the plaintiff. This “purposeful availment” requirement ensures that a defendant will not be hauled into a jurisdiction solely as a result of random, fortuitous, or attenuated contacts. The question is whether the defendant’s conduct and connection with the forum State are such that he should reasonably anticipate being hauled into court there. Lebel v. Everglades Marina, Inc., 115 N.J. 317, 323-24, 558 A.2d 1252 (1989)
Both the Appellate Division and the New Jersey Supreme Court have held that the seller of retail goods in another state is subject to the jurisdiction of the State of New Jersey. The Supreme Court specifically held in Lebel v. Everglades Marina, Inc., 115 N.J. 317 (1989) that, “In comparison, the marketer of a big ticket luxury item that accomplishes the sale by solicitation of out-of-state buyer in the buyer’s state can fairly be expected to contemplate that a breach of contract will expose it to a suit in the forum of the buyer. We thus find this does not offend our notions of substantial justice and fair play to ask the seller of this special order, Luxury Vessel, to account for its negotiations of the transaction in a New Jersey court.”
Cherry Hill Triplex
The Attorney General’s office has filed suit against Cherry Hill Triplex for violation for the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. Cherry Hill Triplex is contesting the charges and asserts their innocence. The State has the burden to prove the case and Cherry Hill is presumed innocent until such time that the State proves their case. The lawsuit asserts that Cherry Hill Triplex violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. A copy of the complaint can be obtained from the Attorney General’s Office.
Count I Violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act
a. Advertising a guaranteed and/or unconditional $8,000.00 trade-in allowance,
What is a Secret Warranty?
There was an article on the NY Times online that contained the following statement:
The article continued
Consumer Fraud. Let the seller beware!!!
There is a phrase in Latin that means let the buyer beware, Caveat Emptor. New Jersey has abandoned this principle as it pertains to the Consumer Fraud Act. New Jersey, through the Consumer Fraud Act, has adopted a more ethical approach to sales. It is now the law that a person has the right to rely on representations made by another when dealing with that other person. The Consumer Fraud Act jury instructions specifically hold this to be true. 4.43 Consumer Fraud Act
The seller now has the responsibility to make sure that the representations as to their product are accurate and if they are wrong it is the responsibility of the seller of the goods.
Damaged Cars and Suing the Lender
Damaged Cars and Suing the Lender.
You can collect from the lender for defective cars under the HOLDER RULE.
Since the contract that the lender is holding permits the buyer to sue the lender, the lender can be sued up to the amount paid on the contract. The lender is in the position to allocate the risk for such losses and defray the risk.
Consumer Fraud and Damaged Cars?
What happens if the dealer sells you a damaged car? Have they violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act?
AFFIRMATIVE MISREPRESENTATIONS VIOLATE THE CONSUMER FRAUD ACT
The law in New Jersey is no longer “buyer beware” and New Jersey has taken the more ethical approach to the sale of goods. The dealer is charged with knowing the goods that they sell, such as cars. If they make a promise that the car has not been in an accident they must make good on the affirmative representation. If their statements are false then the dealer can be sued for a violation of the Consumer Fraud Act, NJSA 56:8-2.