Three consumers who accused DARCARS Automotive Group dealerships of charging more for vehicles than was advertised have withdrawn their 2022 lawsuits against the group.
Three consumers who accused DARCARS Automotive Group dealerships in Connecticut of charging more for vehicles than was advertised have withdrawn their 2022 lawsuits against the group.
Mary-Jo Halloran had ended her case against DARCARS Infiniti of Greenwich over alleged behavior under its prior ownership, when it was known as Greenwich Infiniti, in January. Arkadiusz and Katarzyna Gaska withdrew their action against DARCARS Lexus of Greenwich on June 1, two weeks after they succeeded in having the litigation returned to the Connecticut judicial system from a federal court.
Details related to the resolution of the two cases were unavailable.
“Unfortunately, I am not able to discuss the nature of any agreement between my clients and DARCARS for those two files,” Daniel Blinn, managing attorney of Consumer Law Group in Hartford, Conn., and counsel for Halloran and the Gaskas, wrote in an email to Automotive News.
Emails seeking comment from DARCARS, of Bethesda, Md., and one of its attorneys had not been returned at the time of publication.
But last year, the group said it was “confident in our position on the facts and the law, and trust our legal experts to manage the process,” regarding the Gaska case.
The Gaskas said that in 2022 they bought a 2019 Lexus RX 350 from DARCARS Lexus of Greenwich that both a CarGurus listing and the dealership said cost $40,838. But the retail installment sales contract listed the vehicle’s price with accessories as $42,238 and included a charge for a sales commission of $844.76, they said.
The Gaskas alleged charging more than was advertised violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, as did applying a commission not permitted under Connecticut conveyance fee law.
They had sought class-action status for their case, which DARCARS argued would capture plaintiffs outside Connecticut and merited the case being heard in U.S. district court instead of the Connecticut Superior Court system. The Gaskas fought to return the case to state court, and while U.S. District Judge Michael Shea rejected their primary arguments, on May 17 he ordered the case returned to the state court.
Halloran’s lawsuit stemmed from a 2019 Infiniti QX60 she bought that same year from Luxury Cars of Greenwich, which did business as Greenwich Infiniti. DARCARS bought the store in 2020 and renamed it DARCARS Infiniti of Greenwich.
Halloran sued Luxury Cars of Greenwich; DARCARS of Millbank Avenue, the company that does business as DARCARS Infiniti of Greenwich; and Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp., the captive finance company involved in the deal.
Halloran said she saw the QX60 advertised on the dealership’s website for $36,993, and then for $39,496 the next day. After being told the dealership would honor the $36,993 price, Halloran said, she agreed to buy and finance the vehicle.
However, the store bumped the price to $39,064.39, according to Halloran, who said she didn’t notice the increase because she trusted the dealership. She said the deal included a $499 dealer conveyance fee she hadn’t been notified of in the ad or before receiving the contract.
Halloran’s lawsuit alleged she signed in “wet ink” but that the deal transmitted to Nissan Motor Acceptance’s Infiniti Financial Services was an electronic contract with a forged signature and different (but still higher-than-expected) cash pricing, sales tax and registration costs as well as a $199 VIN etching fee. The transmitted document also contained an arbitration clause not found in the contract Halloran received.
She said the dealership never gave a purchase order, nor did it provide her with the electronic contract.
Halloran had alleged the dealership and Nissan Motor Acceptance violated the state unfair trade practices law. She accused the captive of breaking the Retail Installment Sales Financing Act by accepting the forged contract even after her attorney told the company she didn’t execute it.
Nissan Motor Acceptance, which had denied any wrongdoing in a 2022 court filing, declined to comment on the case and its withdrawal. An attorney for Luxury Cars of Greenwich also declined to comment.
