<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>California Lemon Law Specialists BLOG</title>
	<link>http://www.calemonlawblog.com</link>
	<description>Protecting California residents from Auto Lemons</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 19:50:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	<!-- generator="WordPress/3.1.2" -->

	<item>
		<title>California Supreme Court Refuses To Review Ruling Holding Claims Under the Automobile Sales Finance Act are Subject to Four Year Statute of Limitations</title>
        <pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 19:50:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[Rosner, Barry &#38; Babbitt, LLP’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. ...<br /> <a href="http://www.calemonlawblog.com/2011/12/california-supreme-court-refuses-to-review-ruling-holding-claims-under-the-automobile-sales-finance-act-are-subject-to-four-year-statute-of-limitations/">Read More &#187;</a>]]></description>
		<link>http://www.calemonlawblog.com/2011/12/california-supreme-court-refuses-to-review-ruling-holding-claims-under-the-automobile-sales-finance-act-are-subject-to-four-year-statute-of-limitations/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>10 Important Questions to Ask When Buying a Used Car</title>
        <pubDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2011 17:01:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[The Gawker Media-owned car weblog Jalopnik asked readers to contribute the 10 most important questions to ask when buying a used car as part of their daily “Answers of the Day” segment. The 10 best questions published on October 19, 2011 were: 10. Is this the original paint? — New paint could indicate car was rusting or involved in a previous accident. 9. Can I check the oil? — An “earmark for trouble with a used car,” Jalopnik says, look for water, fuel, or foam in the oil. 8. Can you put this on the lift? — This will allow you to check for leaks or rust, but furthermore, you know there is something amiss if the dealer will not let you do this. 7. Why are you selling it? — It is “a question that openly invites the seller to lie to you,” Jalopnik says, but it will still...<br /> <a href="http://www.calemonlawblog.com/2011/10/10-important-questions-to-ask-when-buying-a-used-car/">Read More &#187;</a>]]></description>
		<link>http://www.calemonlawblog.com/2011/10/10-important-questions-to-ask-when-buying-a-used-car/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Four Class Actions Allege Price Fixing, Seek $5 Million in Damages</title>
        <pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:09:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<description><![CDATA[An international investigation of price fixing has led to four class-action lawsuits alleging that a scheme to raise the price of wire harnesses in turn raised the price of vehicles, Crain’s Detroit Business reported on October 18, 2011. Court documents show the class action suits seek damages exceeding $5 million. According to Crain’s, the suits stem from an investigation of the global wire harness business that began in 2010, with the U.S. Department of Justice and officials from the European Union and Japan being involved in the investigations. The Justice Department hit Furukawa with a $200 million fine, and Crain’s said three of its executives are scheduled to plead guilty for their role in alleged global price-fixing scheme. The Federal Bureau of Investigation raided several suppliers in its antitrust investigation, but the company’s North American subsidiary, American Furukawa, took the first blow as a result of the 20-month investigation. We have posted...<br /> <a href="http://www.calemonlawblog.com/2011/10/four-class-actions-allege-price-fixing-seek-5-million-in-damages/">Read More &#187;</a>]]></description>
		<link>http://www.calemonlawblog.com/2011/10/four-class-actions-allege-price-fixing-seek-5-million-in-damages/</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>

