Rosner, Barry & Babbitt, LLP’s Auto Fraud Legal Center is pleased to announce that the Orange County Superior Court, Honorable Gail Andler presiding, certified a class action lawsuit against Fladeboe VW and VW Credit. The lawsuit, entitled Mariotti v. Fladeboe VW, et al, Case No. 30-2008-00113991-CU-FR-CJC, revolves around Fladeboe VW’s practice of dating subsequent contracts the same day as original contracts. A subclass of consumers whose contracts were assigned to VW Credit was also certified. Ms. Mariotti alleges that Fladeboe VW made improper financial disclosures on her contract by backdating the contract and making the disclosures based on her original contract date, rather than her subsequent contract date. It is believed the case affects between 20-25 persons who purchased vehicles from Fladeboe VW between 2004 and 2008. The case has not yet been set for trial. For more information about the case, contact Hawk Barry at 800-466-5366 or hawk@rbblawgroup.com.
Backdating Class Action Certified in Orange County
July 2nd, 2010Notice Sent to Consumers by Court in San Bernardino Backdating Class Action
June 29th, 2010Rosner, Barry & Babbitt argues arbitration class action in Court of Appeal
June 29th, 2010Rosner, Barry & Babbitt, LLP’s Auto Fraud Legal Center Partner Hawk Barry appeared before the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Two, on Monday, June 28, 2010, for oral argument in the case of Fisher v. DCH Honda of Temecula. The Fisher case is a class action case on behalf of two classes of consumers, one with backdated retail installment sale contracts and one with retail installment sale contracts that disclose the license and registration fees jointly, rather than separately. DCH Honda of Temecula had moved in the trial court to compel the case to arbitration, but Judge Mac Fisher of the Riverside County Superior Court denied DCH’s motion in February 2009. DCH then filed an appeal. In April 2010 the Court of Appeal issued a tentative ruling affirming the trial court’s order, and disagreeing with the hoding of the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit in Ting v. AT&T (9th Cir. 2003) 319 F.3d 1126. The tentative ruling indicated that it would be certificed for publication. After hearing oral argument from Mr. Barry and defense counsel, the case was taken under submission. A decision from the Court of Appeal is due by September 27, 2010.