Dealer Nailed for Bait-and-Switch Advertising

Mr. S was looking for his dream car – a 2019 Ford Mustang GT. He had just gotten some bad medical news – he was in heart failure at the young age of 22 – and decided the splurge, since he did not know what the future would bring. So he found his dream car advertised online by All in One Auto Group, for only $31,995. He knew he could get $10,000 – his life savings – to put as a down payment, and could afford to finance the rest. He calculated his budget for the car payment, his rent, life preserving medical bills and food, and knew he had some buffer, but it was workable. So he went to All in One Auto, and told them he was there to buy the car. They agreed that they would sell it to him for the advertised price of $31,995, and finance the rest.

When they showed him the Buyer’s Order, it showed the purchase price was $41,995. Mr. S asked the dealer about this, and they told him the extra was the interest on the purchase – that it was still being purchased for $31,995, but that was a reflection of the interest through the term of the loan. Mr. S had never bought a car before, and believed them. The dealer did not give him a copy of the loan paperwork (and did not show him a copy of it when they had him sign electronically), which showed that they had been lying. In reality, the dealership just increased the purchase price by the amount of Mr. S’ down payment, and “swallowed” that down payment. They then pocketed the $10,000 down payment, and had him finance $31,995 – which meant that
he paid $41,995 plus interest on the $31,995.

After he got home, Mr. S showed the Buyer’s Order to his family, who told him there was something wrong. He contacted the dealership, who refused to give him a copy of the loan paperwork, so he got a copy from the bank. Once he saw the true numbers on the loan paperwork, he knew he had been scammed. He also knew that there was no way he could afford to pay the increased price – half again as much as it should have been – and still be able to afford his medication and rent. So he went back to the dealer and tried to reason with them and get them to correct the deal. At first, the continued to gas-light him, insisting that the extra amount was the interest on the deal. When he told them he wasn’t buying that, and also explained his medical condition, hoping that some human compassion would get the dealer to do the right thing – the dealer merely laughed at him.

Mr. S. then came to us. We tried to resolve the case by them refunding the extra $10,000 plus finance charges, and attorney fees incurred. The dealership refused, and continued trying to gas- light their way out of it. Despite all the documents to the contrary, they continued to insist that the extra amount was a finance charge. So we went to trial. After we presented our case, the Court entered a judgment for Mr. S and against the dealership and its finance manager for $65,326.23.

Another dealer had to learn the hard way that it is better to do the right thing than to steal and face the consequences.