California Supreme Court Refuses To Review Ruling Holding Claims Under the Automobile Sales Finance Act are Subject to Four Year Statute of Limitations
Auto Fraud Legal Center’s Auto Fraud Legal Center is pleased to announce the California Supreme Court has refused to review a trial court decision holding actions for rescission under the Automobile Sales Finance Act are subject to a four-year statute of limitations. The Supreme Court issued its order denying a petition for review filed by Santa Maria Ford and Wells Fargo Dealer Services on December 14, 2011, in Santa Maria Ford v. Superior Court (Martinez), Case Number S197395. In Martinez, Santa Maria Ford and Wells Fargo Dealer Services filed motions for summary judgment arguing Mr. Martinez’s claim under the Automobile Sales Finance Act was subject to either a one-year, or three-year, statute of limitations. In August 2011, the trial court agreed with Mr. Martinez the appropriate statute of limitations for an action for rescission of a written contract is four years pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 337. Santa Maria Ford and Wells Fargo Dealer Services filed a petition for a writ of mandate with the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District, which summarily denied the petition. The Supreme Court then denied Santa Maria Ford and Wells Fargo Dealer Services’ petition for review.
In the underlying class action, Mr. Martinez alleges Santa Maria Ford and Wells Fargo Dealer Services violated the Automobile Sales Finance Act by failing to separately disclose fees on purchase contracts, and labeling fees as “not applicable” when in fact the customer was charged for the fees. The proposed class covers all persons who purchased vehicles from Santa Maria Ford between May 26, 2006, and May 26, 2010.
For more information on this, or any of Auto Fraud Legal Center’s class action lawsuits against car dealerships and financial institutions, contact Hawk Barry or Angela Smith at 800-466-5366.