Auto Finance News

The California New Car Dealers' Association has challenged Volvo’s OEM subscription service.  Here are links to the Petition (http://www.informz.net/impexium-cncda/data/images/2019-1-15%20CNCDA%20Petition%20re%20Care%20by%20Volvo.pdf) and to the recent Press Release from the CNCDA (https://www.cncda.org/news/california-new-car-dealers-unanimously-granted-dmv-investigation-sought-in-volvo-petition/).    Severson continues to monitor such alternative finance and ownership arrangements for the industry.     Read More

In Fay v. Showcase Motors, No. 78111-1-I, 2019 Wash. App. LEXIS 2074 (Ct. App. Aug. 12, 2019), the Washington Court of Appeal found that the trial court erred in granted summary judgment to a car dealer on a consumer’s claim that the dealer misrepresented the down payment required to purchase a Shelby Mustang. We conclude the trial court erred in… Read More

In Murillo v. A Better Way Wholesale Autos & Westlake Servs., Llc, No. 3:17-CV-1883 (VLB), 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117043 (D. Conn. July 15, 2019), Judge Bryant confirmed a runaway arbitration award against a car dealer.  The parties agreed to arbitrate their disputes before the American Dispute Resolution Center ("ADR") as a desk arbitration and under the American Arbitration Association… Read More

Representative Waters, who heads the House Financial Services Committee, issued a statement in advance of hosting hearings on discrimination in automobile purchasing and financing.  According to the witness list, testimony was limited to consumer advocates and no witnesses from industry testified.  (https://financialservices.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=403647)  Representative Waters issued this statement: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Buying a car is a significant purchase for many Americans… Read More

The CFPB just issued it’s Supervisory Highlights, paying particular attention to automobile finance and issues regarding ancillary products. The Bureau continues to examine auto loan servicing activities, primarily to assess whether servicers have engaged in unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices (UDAAPs) prohibited by the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (CFPA). Recent auto loan servicing examinations identified unfair… Read More

In Fasusi v. Washington Motorcars, Inc., 2018 WL 4896722, at *1 (E.D.Va., 2018), Judge Brinkema issued a default judgment against a car dealer after discovery sanctions were awarded, the dealer's bankruptcy was dismissed, and the dealer's counsel withdrew. In this civil action, plaintiff brings a variety of statutory and common law claims against defendant stemming from defendant's alleged improper conduct… Read More

At the American Bar Association's meeting in Chicago this month, the ABA Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice proposed Resolution 104B on discrimination in auto lending, a copy of which can be found here.  The resolution was withdrawn for further consultation with the ABA's Business Law Section. http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/house_adopts_trio_of_resolutions_on_gender_family_and_sexual_orientation Read More

In Ally Financial, Inc. v. State Treasurer, State of Michigan,  2018 WL 3520302, at *6–7 (Mich., 2018), the Michigan Supreme Court found that auto finance companies properly sought tax refunds for post-repossession deficiency balances. In the present case, we have to make sense of the fifth item, “repossessed property.” The statute clearly states that “repossessed property” is not part of… Read More

In Vega v. CarMax Auto Superstores, LLC, 2018 WL 3216347, at *5 (Cal.App. 2 Dist., 2018), the Court of Appeal held in an unpublished decision that a son, whose mother purchased a vehicle for him, could not recover for economic loss and personal injuries sustained when the vehicle he drove malfunctioned and had an accident, causing him personal injury and… Read More

In Dacumos v. Toyota Motor Credit Corporation, 2018 WL 2059562 (W.D.Wash., 2018), Judge Martinez dismissed a credit reporting claim against an automobile finance company deriving from an earlier settlement where the company allegedly agreed not to collect further on the Account. Plaintiff also contends that TMCC breached Paragraph 2.b. of the Agreement by reporting Plaintiff’s loan balance as $13,593.00 instead of… Read More