Author: lfsuser

ATTENTION OWNERS OF FORD FOCUS AND FORD FIESTA

LINK TO CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT DOCUMENT

You are running out of time to act. Ford has settled a Class Action lawsuit involving the transmission in the 2012 – 2016 Ford Focus and 2011 – 2016 Ford Fiesta. The transmission is called Dual Power Shift 6-Speed (DPS6) or simply Power Shift. This settlement may significantly limit your rights and prevent you from getting even more money. You must act before September 5, 2017!

We believe that the transmission in the Ford Focus and Ford Fiesta has a defective design. We understand that Ford has attempted to repair the defective transmission by upgrading seals and replacing the clutches. We have also seen Ford replace the computer that controls the transmission, Transmission Control Module (TCM), as well as, the software.

Ford dealerships may have told you that the transmission is within “tolerance” or “specification.” Even if a dealer told this to you, we may be able to obtain a result for you that exceeds the payment contemplated by the Class Action settlement.

If you own a 2012 – 2016 Ford Focus or a 2011 – 2016 Ford Fiesta, please contact Auto Fraud Legal Center for a free evaluation of your rights. We are here to help you! We have been representing consumers in California for over thirty years.

September 5, 2017 is your deadline to act!

Learn More

Kim v. Premium Finance

Client was told the vehicle had been inspected and was in good condition. The vehicle actually had several leaks, and needed new brakes and sensors. Premium Finance also advertised a 3 month warranty and then failed to provide it at the time of sale.

Learn More

Duarte v. Ontario Volkswagen

Auto Fraud Legal Center has settled a case which required Ontario Volkswagen to buyback the subject vehicle. Our clients were sold a vehicle that had 2,000 miles on the odometer but the engine came from a salvaged vehicle with over 112,000 miles on it. The replacement engine was discovered 36,000 miles later. Ontario Volkswagen also failed to disclose the deferred downpayment on the contract.

Learn More

Seymour v. American Dream Auto Sales – Settled

Clients were not told the vehicle had accident and frame damage at the time of purchase. American Dream Auto Sales also overcharged license fees and failed to refund the overcharge.

Learn More

Thorns v. Colmex Auto Sales – Settled

Client purchased a vehicle that had not passed smog. Colmex Auto Sales also failed to repair the items on the Due Bill.

Learn More

New Suit Against John L. Sullivan Chevrolet and General Motors

Auto Fraud Legal Center filed a new case against John L. Sullivan Chevrolet and General Motors. In the lawsuit we allege John L. Sullivan Chevrolet improperly certified a wrecked vehicle, and lied about the accident when asked by our clients prior to sale. We also allege General Motors failed to provide any oversight and allowed John L. Sullivan Chevrolet to sell a damaged vehicle as Chevy CPO.

Have you also had problems with John L. Sullivan Chevrolet or General Motors? Call Auto Fraud Legal Center for a Free Consultation!

(800) 466-5366

Learn More

Douglas v. John Johnsons Cars; Fuentes Auto Sales, Inc.; Navy Federal Credit Union

Auto Fraud Legal Center has successfully settled a claim involving two dealerships and a credit union that collectively sold client a vehicle and failed to provide the title. After purchase, the bank continued to demand monthly payments for the vehicle while knowing that title had not been provided and that Fuentes Auto Sales was refusing to provide title unless it was paid an additional $10,000+.

Learn More

Dykes v. Imports Auto Outlet

Client was not told the vehicle was reported as a total loss even though the dealer had actual knowledge of the report. The settlement required the dealer to repurchase the vehicle, pay $11,750 in punitive damages, and the following injunction:

Defendant Mutual Goal, Inc., dba Imports Auto Outlet, shall, for any vehicle which Mutual Goal, Inc. knows has been reported as a total loss, junk, salvage, or as having any other title brand, post the following disclosure on a vehicle while it is displayed for sale at retail in at least 14-point bold black type, except for the title “Warning” which shall be in at least 18-point bold black type, on at least a 4 x 5.5 inch red background in close proximity to the Federal Trade Commission’s Buyer’s Guide:

“WARNING

According to at least one Vehicle history report, this vehicle has been reported as a total-loss vehicle by an insurance company, has been reported as a junk or salvage vehicle, or has a title brand which may materially affect the value, safety, and/or condition of the vehicle. Because of its history as a total loss, junk, salvage, or title-branded vehicle, the manufacturer’s warranty or service contract on this vehicle may be affected.”

Learn More

Jopson v. Marshall Auto

Marshall Auto failed to disclose a deferred down payment on our client’s contract, and sold our client a vehicle that had a rolled back odometer.

Learn More