Mitsubishi Motors Credit of America Accused of Adding Undisclosed Fees to Auto Leases Under the Guise of "Taxes" in Florida |
 |
A Florida class action has been filed against auto financing company Mitsubishi Motors Credit of America, Inc., on behalf of vehicle lessees who allege that the company charged them "taxes" that were actually just undisclosed fees to cover wear and tear, and excess mileage on the vehicles, in violation of Florida consumer protection laws and the federal Consumer Leasing Act. The action seeks unspecified compensatory damages.
Though the action is currently restricted to Floridians who have leases with Mitsubishi Motors Credit of America, or whose lease with the company expired in the last year, the attorneys who filed this action are interested in hearing from persons who lease or have leased vehicles in other states as well. If you have had a similar experience with a different car leasing agency, you should also feel free to contact them.
At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and
settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and
other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints.
Other Automotive Cases of Interest
Millions of consumers have been defrauded into paying thousands extra for a so-called pre-owned Ford over the past four years when the car may have gone through the same certification as any other used car. Vince and Jessica Childers of Hebron, Michigan allege that they, along with at least 59 other customers, purchased used automobiles from Hebron Auto Sales for which the dealership did not have title. The Childerses allege that Hebron Auto Sales kept the money but did not give the car titles to the purchasers. Federal antitrust law allows triple punitive damages against entities that are found guilty of unlawfully tampering with the free enterprise system. 63 different class actions have been filed against automotive paint manufacturers on behalf of all persons and businesses purchased automotive paint from January 1, 1993 to at least December 31, 2000. The action alleges that the companies conspired together in violation of U.S. antitrust laws to fix automotive paint prices across the U.S. If a fee is properly paid by a business owner, it may be wrong for the business to pass that fee on to consumers. The class has been certified in an action filed against 636 Texas auto dealerships on behalf of certain car buyers who purchased cars after September 1, 1995, and were forced to pay "dealers inventory tax" to the dealerships in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. The action seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.
North Carolina car dealership Alan Vester is now facing a class-action lawsuit, alleging unfair and deceptive trade practices, negligence, fraud and other violations of state law.
The lawsuit, filed late last month, claims Alan Vester dealerships have been using these practices to get financing for customers who may not have qualified, and it says the practice has been going on for the past four years, involving 90 percent of the chain's vehicles. The parties have reached a tentative $1.5 million settlement of a class action filed against automotive parts manufacturer Federal-Mogul Corporation (OTCBB: FDMLQ, formerly NYSE: FMO) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between October 22, 1998, and May 25, 2000. To recover under the settlement, a completed proof of claim postmarked no later than January 9, 2004, must be mailed to the claims administrator.
|