sample car dealer fraud & elder abuse complaint california

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY FEDERAL COPYRIGHT LAW. ALL RIGHTS ARE RESERVED. IF YOU WANT TO LICENSE A COPY OF THIS CAR DEALER FRAUD ELDER ABUSE LETTER PLEASE CONTACT US AT ATTORNEYSTEVEMEDIA.COM OR CALL US AT (877) 276- 5084. ANY UNATHORIZED USE OF THIS DOCUMENT WILL BE DEEMED A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL COPYRIGHT LAW AND PURSUED ACCORDINGLY.

CONSUMER LAW [email protected] Elder Abuse Attorney (SBN 000000)620 Newport Center Drive, Suite 1100Newport Beach, CA 92660Phone: (888) 000-8888 x1234Fax: (888) 999-8888 x9876

ATTORNEY(S) FOR PLAINTIFF: California Elder Citizen over 65

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

DEFRAUDED CAR BUYER, an Individual

Plaintiff,

vs.

HIGH PRESSURE CAR DEALERSHIP, a

business organization, form unknown ELDER

ABUSE AUTO GROUP, a business

organization, form unknown; and DOES 1

through 25, inclusive,

Defendant(s)

))))))))))))))))

Case No.:

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT FOR:

1. Financial elder abuse.2. Intentional (actual) fraud.3. Fraudulent inducement to enter into

contract.4. Unfair business practices (Cal. B&P

17200).5. Intentional infliction of emotional

distress.6. Truth in Lending violation (“TILA”)7. Equal Credit Opportunity Act

(“ECOA”)

JURY TRIAL REQUESTED

COMES NOW ELDERLY CAR BUYER (“PLAINTIFF” AND/OR “BUYER”)

ALLEGING AS FOLLOWS:

mailto:[email protected]

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

I.GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

1. This is an unfortunate story of greed, fraud, and financial elder abuse committed by

sophisticated auto dealers and their agents, at FRAUDULENT CAR DEALERSHIP (“CAR

BRAND” and/or “DEFENDANT”) against a Plaintiff, a 74 year-old man (a protected class of

“elders” / “seniors”) In California. Plaintiff was present at Defendant’s car dealership on or

around 10/3/14 (it being noted that some of the Documents were signed on 10/2/14 and some on

10/3/14). Plaintiff had been seeking to a quote to get his vehicle (a 2006 ______) repaired.

Plaintiff was informed there was no possible way the vehicle could be fixed, even though he was

at a __________ approved service station. Instead, Plaintiff was informed that he would need to

buy a new car, and was thereafter lead around the lot by an overly aggressive salesperson (in

information and belief “FRAUDULENT SALESPERSON”) and thereafter pressured and

coerced into purchasing a new car from the dealership.

2. Based on Plaintiff reasonably believing, based on Defendant’s representations, that

there were no other options (i.e. being under duress, alone and scared), and, and that the vehicle

could not be fixed, which Plaintiff alleges is false, deceptive, malicious and known to be false

when the statement was made (by the sales representative who Plaintiff alleges was authorized to

speak on behalf of the dealership), Plaintiff thereinafter was induced, under false pretenses, to

enter into a sales contract with Defendant’s automotive Dealership.

3. This alone, makes Defendant’s conduct unconscionable, intentional, malicious, and

fraudulent and warrants punitive damages being imposed.

4. Attached as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference is a true and correct

copy of an alleged repair review that was allegedly undertaken in regard to the condition of the

vehicle. The report states that the vehicle “would not start” and there was an issue with the

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

“alternator.” The report states that Defendant’s “perform complimentary multi-point inspection”

(allegedly for no charge) and performed a “tire air pressure check” (as if tire pressure was for

some reason an important issue).” This was apparently the extent of the INSPECTION before

advising Plaintiff that his car could not be fixed, and that he needed to purchase a new car if he

wanted to get back home.

5. Again, there was no charge for the alleged tire pressure check, although a $108 charge

was noted on the report. The report (Page 1 of 1) makes no reference to any need for a new

radiator, or fuel pump, timing wheel, new tires, brakes, and other items Defendant’s counsel has

subsequently informed Plaintiff’s counsel was checked. This is disputed as wholly false and

fraudulent. Plaintiff disputes that the brakes, or timing wheel were checked when the car was not

alleged to be in running condition.

6. In short, Defendants are seeking to cover their tracks and Plaintiff alleges they had no

intent to inspect, or review the vehicle, and on information and belief alleges the vehicle was not

properly inspected, although incurring a $108.00 charge. Plaintiff alleges this amount was

demanded in bad faith.

7. Defendant’s thereafter, knowing Plaintiff was “retired” and on a limited budget,

steered Plaintiff to, and pressured him into purchasing a brand new 2015 _________ using high

pressure sales tactics aimed at coercing a sale.

8. Plaintiff was informed that ___________offered “0% financing” programs and that

if Plaintiff’s credit was good enough, he could potentially qualify for such programs.

9. Based on these representations, which Plaintiff alleges were false when made, and

reasonably relied on by Plaintiff, he entered the showroom and was taken to a closing desk.

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

10. Plaintiff alleges his credit was run (although at this stage of the litigation Plaintiff

denies signing and agreeing to the pulling of his credit, as all pages of the Credit application have

not been provided by Defendant’s counsel).

11. Plaintiff alleges his credit score was 833 (excellent credit qualifying Plaintiff for the

best interest rates including 0% financing alleged to be available).

12. Despite this near perfect credit, Plaintiff was informed that he did not qualify for 0%

financing (his credit scores were not shown to Plaintiff) and instead, he was informed the interest

rate would be 4.89% for 72 months financing (resulting in a finance charge of $5,172.77).

Plaintiff alleges this amount was taken and appropriated in bad faith.

13. Attached as Exhibit “B” is a true and correct copy of a “Federal Truth in Lending

Disclosures” statement indicating Plaintiff’s monthly payment would be $526.01 (note that this

is in excess of the $524.09 set forth in Exhibit “C”). This amount is alleged to be confusing, in

violation of TILA, misleading to the ordinary consumer, and predatory as not a financing

arrangement made in good faith with a fair conscience toward the ability to repay based on

Plaintiff’s retired status, and based upon his living on a fixed income.

14. Plaintiff alleges he was not instructed to or pressured to buy any lesser priced vehicle

that perhaps he could afford on his limited fixed income, and instead was steered to as much car

as Plaintiff’s could try to hope to get away with.

15. Plaintiff also alleges that although Defendant’s website indicated prices of

_________ are in the $22,000 range, the final sales price to Defendant on the TIL statement was

indicated to be $24,190. Plaintiff alleges that he is being discriminated against, in regard to

pricing and mere $200 trade in value (discussed below), because of his age in violation of the

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

Equal Credit Opportunity Act). See Exhibit “F” which is attached and incorporated herein by

reference and represents a true and correct printout of Defendant’s website.

16. Plaintiff was given a mere $200 for his vehicle (which he was all that it was worth,

and falsely informed could not be fixed at any price as set forth above), although Plaintiff is now

being informed, through Defense counsel, that the car COULD be fixed, albeit for $2,100 which

Plaintiff alleges to be false, and part of a cover-up designed to aid, abet, and assist perpetrating

financial elder abuse. Plaintiff was never provided with any itemized amount to fix his car, and

no estimates, and to suggest otherwise is to assist in acts of financial elder abuse.

17. Plaintiff estimates the value of his vehicle to be approximately no less than $3,072 at

the time the dealership took possession of the vehicle under false pretenses (Exhibit “E”).

18. In addition, Plaintiff was pressured, using high-pressure car salesman tactics, to

purchase additional unnecessary items (on information and belief, because the dealership had

“legs” built into the transaction so that forcing products upon Plaintiff became a required act

from a financing perspective).

19. Such items are referenced in the attached Exhibit “C” which is incorporated herein

by reference and represents a true and correct copy of a “Optional Products and Services

Disclosure” which indicates the items Plaintiff was informed “he needed” in order to purchase

the vehicle from the dealership.

20. Plaintiff alleges he was pressured and coerced, under duress to purchase these items

one of which being a $1,495.00 “exterior paint” product, which product, like all the other

products, were not properly explained to Plaintiff and which he was pressured into accepting.

21. Plaintiff alleges it is unconscionable to charge $7,763.00 for these additional

products (which appear to add up to $6,868.00 on the TILA statement) making this document

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

false and misleading to the ordinary consumer. The final TIL statement indicates an absence of

the “Tire and Wheel” product (which covered only 60 months, although the terms of the

financing were 72 months), which Exhibit “C” claims Plaintiff was to receive.

21. The “Due Bill” (Exhibit “D”) indicates that Defendants were to “Apply _______

Paint and Fab PR”, Plaintiff alleges he was never informed of what this product is, nor has he

ever received such a product.

22. Plaintiff alleges that the foregoing is malicious and oppressive and intended to, and

is in fact causing severe mental and emotional distress.

23. Plaintiff alleges that the conduct of Defendants, as alleged herein, is shocking,

extreme, outrageous and unconscionable resulting in a VOID transaction.

24. WHERFORE, Plaintiff prays as follows:

II.THE PARTIES

25. Plaintiff CALIFORNIA ELDER ABUSE CITIZEN OVER 65 YEARS OF AGE

(“Plaintiff” and/or “BUYER”) is an elder California citizen, over the age of 65 at the time of the

transaction in question.

26. Defendant. RV DEALERSHIP, is a California business organization, form unknown.

27. Defendant BOAT, CAR AND TRUCK AUTO GROUP, is a California business

organization, form unknown.

28. Collectively the above named parties may be referred to herein as “Defendant”

and/or “Defendants”.

29. Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendants sued herein as

Does 1-25, inclusive and therefore sue these Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will

amend this complaint to allege their true names and capacities when they have been ascertained.

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

Plaintiffs are informed and believe that each of said fictitiously named Defendants are

responsible in some manner for the occurrences herein alleged, and that Plaintiffs’ injuries as

herein alleged were proximately caused by the acts and/or omissions of each.

30. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges on information and belief that

Defendants, and each of them, were the agents, servants, employees, co-conspirators, joint

venture partners, contractors and alter egos of each of the other Defendants, and at all times

mentioned herein, each were acting within the knowledge and direction of each other and within

the purpose, scope and course of their agency, service, employment, joint venture and with the

express and/or implied knowledge, permission, consent and ratification of the remaining

Defendants and each thereby has conspired, approved, aided, abetted, encouraged, incentivized

and ratified the acts of the other Defendants.

III.JURISDICTION

31. Jurisdiction over this action and its claims is provided by Cal. Code of Civil Proc. §

88. The violations of law set forth herein occurred in this County.

32. Venue is proper pursuant to Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 392(a)(1).

33. Plaintiff hereby asserts their demand for a jury trial and an expedited trial under

California elder abuse statutes.

IV.CAUSES OF ACTION

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Financial Elder Abuse

(Against all Defendants)

34. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations of Paragraphs 1 through 33 of this Complaint as

though fully set forth herein.

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

35. Plaintiff is an “elder” under California law (Welfare & Institutions Code) and was over

65 years of age during all acts, events, and omissions giving rise to this lawsuit.

36. Plaintiff alleges that each of the Defendant conspired and aided, abetted and assisted each

other in the various acts that constitute financial elder abuse under California law.

37. Plaintiff alleges Defendants wrongfully took, secreted, appropriated, retained and

converted Plaintiff’s property (money and his car) in bad faith (and each assisted the

other defendants in doing the same) by committing the following intentional acts and

omissions:

38. Representing a charge of $108.00 was owed for an inspection Plaintiff alleges never

happened;

39. By representing that if Plaintiff’s credit was good enough he might qualify for 0%

financing (and despite a 833 FICO score, obtained a 72 month loan at 4.895 interest

resulting in wrongfully taking $5,172.77 in bad faith).

40. By violating the ECOA and taking more from Plaintiff, and engaging in price

discrimination (in regard to the sales price of the vehicle) charging Plaintiff more than

advertised on their website for the subject vehicle, and based on Plaintiff’s age and

vulnerabilities.

41. By giving Plaintiff $200 for his trade-in (making false representations of material fact

that his car was not fixable), and that it was worth no more than $200, when Plaintiff

alleges the vehicle was worth no less than $3,072 (a $2,872.00 difference). As such,

Plaintiff was required to make a $1,700 down payment in order to purchase the vehicle,

such down payment, including a required $500 from Plaintiff was money (personal

property) taken in bad faith and converted to a wrongful use.

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

42. As a result of these intentional acts and material omissions, which Plaintiff alleges were

each part of an intentional plan, design, and scheme with other Defendants to take, secret,

appropriate, obtain, and retain Plaintiff’s property in bad faith. Plaintiff has suffered and

Defendants have placed Plaintiff in serious risk of financial harm and caused financial

losses to Defendant in the amounts stated above, but not limited to amounts provable at

trial.

43. Defendants have also caused other serious mental, emotional, trauma, pain, suffering,

humiliation, embarrassment and depression.

44. WHEREFORE, given the above, Plaintiff seeks against each Defendant actual damages

in an amount no less than the jurisdictional limits of this Court and including punitive

damages, costs, attorney fees, disgorgement of fees wrongfully obtained, rescission of the

transaction (declaring such VOID), pain and suffering and other just and equitable relief.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Intentional Fraud

(Against Defendants)



46. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants, and each of them, on the date referenced above, made

false statements of material fact, which were known to be false when made (particularly

of the salesman “GREEDY AND UNETHICAL SALESMAN”) who stated if Plaintiff

had excellent credit he would qualify for a 0% financing.

47. Such false statements were relied upon Plaintiff to his detriment, causing the herein

referenced damages, and other damages to be proven at trial.

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

48. Additional fraudulent false statements of fact were made by unknown management

members (names of same within the exclusive control of Defendants), regarding

Plaintiff’s vehicle being beyond repair, and that he would need to purchase a new 2015

vehicle if Plaintiff.

49. These false statements of fact, and fraudulent inducements to enter into a sales contract,

were reasonably relied upon by the Elder Plaintiff and his reasonable reliance resulted in

causing Plaintiff severe and significant financial, mental, and emotional damages.

50. WHEREFORE, given the above, and given the abusive process undertaken, Plaintiff

seeks against each Defendant actual damages in an amount no less than the jurisdictional

limits of this Court, and punitive damages, designed to punish and deter Defendants from

engaging in future conduct of this nature and other just and equitable relief.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Fraudulent Inducement to Enter into Contract




52. Plaintiff’s alleges Defendant’s used lies, trickery, deceit, and false pretenses as set forth

above, in an effort to force Plaintiff into a position where he was forced to purchase a

brand new vehicle from Defendants.

53. Plaintiff, an elder, was under Duress, and coerced through high-pressure sales tactics to

purchase the vehicle.

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

54. Under the guise of these false promises, coercion, and distress, Defendant’s fraudulently

induced Plaintiff to enter into a 72-month sales contract, forcing Plaintiff into a situation

where his good credit score is now at risk.

55. As such, Plaintiff alleges all transactions with Defendants are VOID as against public

policy, and given it is a product of fraud and the “fruit of the poisonous tree” to borrower

a legal term.

56. As such, each Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for actual damages in an amount no less

than the jurisdictional limits of this Court, punitive damages in an amount sufficient to

punish and deter, and to have the contract declared VOID and unenforceable due to the

extreme and outrageous, unconscionable conduct of Defendants, and other just and

equitable relief.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Unfair and Deceptive Business Practices – Cal. B&P 17200




58. Plaintiff alleges the above acts and omissions and false statements to Plaintiff were

designed to induce Plaintiff to enter into a purchase and sales agreement and to thereby

seek to obtain additional costs, fees, commissions, bonuses and secret profits to the

detriment of Plaintiff.

59. Plaintiff alleges Defendants had no belief in the truth of their statements to Plaintiff and

third parties when made and that Plaintiff justifiably relied on Defendants affirmative

representations and relied on their position of trust and authority.

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

60. Plaintiffs have suffered damages as a result of this intentional fraud by Defendants, which

is deemed a “fraudulent” act under B&P 17200.

61. Plaintiff asserts that the above acts and omissions were also “unfair” as set forth under

B&P 17200 as serving no legitimate business purpose and to beyond the bounds of

conduct elders in the State of California should be expected to endure when they visit a

car dealership.

62. Plaintiff further alleges violations of statute, which support a B&P 17200 claim (ex.

Federal Truth in Lending Law, and Equal Credit Opportunity Act) as alleged below.

63. As such, each Defendants are liable to Plaintiff to return all sums collected, return

Plaintiff’s vehicle, to provide full restitution to Plaintiff, and for other just and equitable

relief.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress




65. Socking an elder away in a bad car deal is not good business, and is harmful to elders and

their families who must try to console them.

66. Plaintiff alleges Defendants have engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct in

committing the above referenced acts and omissions, and must be held liable for all

mental and emotional damages caused.

67. Plaintiff alleges he has suffered severe mental and emotional distress as a result of the

facts set forth and alleged in this Complaint.

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

68. As such, each Defendants are liable to Plaintiff for all actual damages suffered, and in an

amount no less than the jurisdictional limits of this Court, pain and suffering, punitive

damages, cancellation and voiding of the contract, and other just and equitable relief.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Violation of Truth in Lending (“TILA”)

(Against all Defendants)



70. Plaintiff was an “elder,” as defined under the California Welfare & Institutions Code, as

was over the age of 65 when entering into the sham purchase and sale agreement

referenced above. Plaintiff is 74 years of age and retired.

71. As such, each Defendant had a duty to treat Plaintiff with care, and to deal with him in

good faith and to ensure all TILA disclosures were clear and conspicuous and accurate.

72. Plaintiff alleges that he signed one document (Exhibit “C”), which indicated his monthly

payment would be $524.09, (Exhibit “B”) but the TILA disclosure represents a

HIGHER monthly payment figure of $526.01. This is false and deceptive, and

misleading and confusing to the average elderly consumer.

73. Plaintiff alleges this also indicates illegal “payment packing” and predatory lending

activity.

74. Plaintiff alleges these are material TILA violation, permitting rescission of the loan

agreement.

75. Plaintiff further argues a violation of “Reg. Z” in regard to failure to take into account the

ability to repay the car loan and for unfair, abusive, deceptive lending practices.

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

76. As such, each Defendants are liable to for statutory damages, attorney fees, and to

rescind the loan at issue, and is entitled to other just and equitable relief.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Violation of Equal Credit Opportunity Act – “ECOA”




78. Plaintiff alleges that given the foregoing, he has been discriminated against in regard to

being charged excessive amounts for the 2015 car, and excessive financing charges for

same, in excess of amounts charged to other Clients, based upon Plaintiff’s age.

79. Plaintiff alleges he was false induced to enter into a consumer credit transaction and that

Defendants are “Creditors” as they regularly extend credit and the loan was primarily for

family and household purposes.

80. Further, Plaintiff alleges that he was switched, intentionally and in reckless disregard of

his credit score, from a 0% loan, to a loan at 4.89% without receiving an “adverse action

letter” in violation of the ECOA.

81. Wherefore Plaintiff seeks actual and punitive damages, statutory damages, attorney fees,

and other just and equitable relief.

V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, given the foregoing, Plaintiff’s pray for relief as set forth above and as follows:

1. That the Court assume jurisdiction in this case and grant a jury trial and expedited trial

under California elder abuse statutes;

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1

2. That the Court award actual and compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at

trial, (but no less than the jurisdictional minimum of this Court);

3. That the Court award reasonable costs and attorney fees to Plaintiff under California’s

Elder abuse statute, TILA, ECOA, and California Civil Code 1021.5;

4. That the Court allow punitive damages designed to punish and deter Defendants from

engaging in similar future conduct;

5. That the Court award treble damages and that monetary penalties be assessed to each

Defendant;

6. That the Court order the sales transaction VOID and unenforceable and Order that all

secret profits and ill-gotten gains be disgorged;

7. That the Court award such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

Dated: April 19, 2023 AUTO FRAUD CONSUMER LAW CENTER CALIFORNIA

By ________________________________________________________________ INJURED AUTO BUYER

______________________________________________________________________________________COMPLAINT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Page

1