This is an example of a portion of a class action complaint under the consumer fraud act
CARTON & RUDNICK 262 HWY 35 RED BANK, NEW JERSEY 07701 (732) 842-2070 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS OUR FILE NO. 10035
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated,
XXXXX FORD, XXXXXXXX GROUP,
Defendant. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION: XXXXXXXX COUNTY
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY
Plaintiff XXXXXX by way of complaint against the defendant says:
UNDERLYING FACTS 1. At all times hereinafter, the defendants, , were corporations licensed to do business in the State of New Jersey.
2. On or about March 31, 2008, the plaintiff entered into a retail installment sales contract and a buyer’s order for the purpose and intent of purchasing the subject automobile, from the defendants.
3. The plaintiff signed a retail order and a buyer’s order with the intention of buying the subject automobile.
4. The purpose of the buyer’s order was to memorialize the terms of the transaction with the exception of the interest rate.
5. The purpose of signing the retail installment sales contract was to comply with the Truth in Lending Act in addition to confirming the financial details of the transaction pertaining to the interest rate and the lending institution.
6. The buyer’s order specifically delineates a documentary fee of $389. This consists of a data processing fee of $190, an administrative fee of $199. for a total “documentary fee” was $389. The documentary fee specifically makes reference to paragraph 16 on the rear of the buyer’s order which says “documentary fee: is a fee charged by the dealer in an amount that covers costs and reflects the value of the benefits provided by the service. In some cases, the fee includes some services that may be optional or may be performed by the customer.”
7. The buyer’s order specifically indicates that the plaintiff will be charged additional fees of $28 for a credit bureau inquiry fee and $8.30 for an online registration fee. These fees are charged in addition to the “documentary fee”.
8. The plaintiff asserts that the defendants by charging the credit bureau inquiry fee, an online registration fee or fees in addition to the documentary fee which they have already collected $389 on the plaintiff’s behalf to perform services violated the Consumer Fraud Act 9. The plaintiff asserts that the credit bureau inquiry fee is a data processing fee and/or administrative fee.
10. The plaintiff alleges that the online registration fee constitutes data processing and/or administration fee for which the plaintiff already paid a documentary fee of $389.
11. The defendants by “double charging” have committed violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act resulting in an ascertainable loss to the plaintiff equal to the amount of the $28.00 and $8.30 for these violation of the Consumer Fraud Act.
12. The ascertainable loss to the plaintiff would be $28 for the credit bureau inquiry fee and $8.30 for the online registration fee since these services were already provided in the documentary fee and the plaintiff should not have been charged.
13. As part of the transaction, the plaintiff was charged a destination and delivery fee of $389 and a used vehicle preparation fee of $179.
14. The used vehicle preparation fee is specifically for exterior cleaning, $30 lube, oil and filter, $25 in fuel and interior detail.
15. The plaintiff alleges that the dealerships charging a destination and delivery fee on a used vehicle already in their inventory is a deceptive business practice and in violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. The plaintiff asserts that the destination and delivery fee is contemplated and part of the used vehicle preparation fee. The plaintiff paid $179 for the used vehicle preparation.
16. The buyer’s order contains an arbitration clause which prohibits the plaintiff’s right to file a class action.
17. The plaintiff asserts that the buyer’s order and/or the retail installment sales contract which also contains the arbitration clause inappropriately and in violation of New Jersey Law under the Consumer Fraud Act forfeits the plaintiff’s right to file a class action.
18. The plaintiff asserts that the placement of the “class action waiver” constitutes a violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and the Truth in Contract and Warranty Act which provides for statutory damages of $100 per violation in addition to attorney’s fees and costs.
19. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant’s placement of arbitration clauses which prohibit the plaintiff’s right to file a class action violates the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.