An Illinois dealership group allegedly advertised vehicles at enticingly low prices, but when customers arrived, they were informed that those vehicles had pre-installed add-ons, and the add-ons weren’t included in the advertised price. The sales staff was also alleged to have expressed that the add-ons were required to be purchased for additional, undisclosed fees.

Result: $20 million settlement — the largest in history against a dealer group.

Plus, to avoid further action from the Illinois AG and the FTC, the dealer group was ordered to ensure:

• Advertised vehicle prices include all mandatory dealer fees and add-ons;
• Express, informed customer consent be obtained for any optional fees, products, or services sold; and
• Clear and conspicuous disclosures exist for consumers setting forth that optional items are — just that — optional.

An Arizona dealership was allegedly advertising vehicles at significant discounts, and when customers arrived at the dealership to complete the sale, they were told the advertised price was no longer available. Instead, the dealer allegedly added hundreds of dollars to sales for a so-called “market adjustment,” pre-installed add-ons, and miscellaneous fees. Finally, dealership employees allegedly told customers the add-ons were required to purchase the vehicle. (Are you noticing a trend yet?)

Result: $2.6 million judgment.

And to avoid further action by the Arizona AG and FTC, the dealership was ordered to abide by procedures that prevent unfair or deceptive acts or practices (UDAP) associated with vehicles’ advertised price.

A Rhode Island dealer was alleged to have included hidden fees in vehicles’ final sales prices and to have misstated that optional add-on charges were mandatory. Allegedly, these mandatory fees were not included in the advertised price of the vehicles, and it was never disclosed that optional add-on products and services were, in fact, optional.

Result: $1 million in customer refunds and a state fine.

In Maryland, a dealership allegedly included an added sales commission in a vehicle’s final sales price, which was not disclosed in advertisements, and customers were unaware they could refuse it.  Further, customers alleged there were significant charges tacked on for pre-installed equipment and that there were market adjustment charges that were never disclosed in advertisements.

Result: $3 million settlement plus consumer refunds.

To avoid further action from the Maryland AG and the FTC, the dealer was ordered to stop charging sales commission fees or similar fees.

Another Maryland dealer is alleged to have advertised vehicle prices that employees ultimately refused to honor, charged customers millions in “junk fees,” and published advertised prices that included a multitude of rebates that no one would realistically qualify for. The complaint contends that a sampling of transactions showed that 88% of the consumers paid more than the advertised price.

Result: Pending