As a used car dealer you are automatically an easy target for just about any crusader that passes your way and wants to take a pot-shot at one of natures bad guys. So many stories and jokes have been passed down about car dealers over the years that it would be hard to find anyone who hasnt already been at least partially brain-washed against you. For sure, there are some dealers who deserve a bad reputation. Unfortunately, public opinion is more like a shot-gun than a target pistol and when anyone takes a pot-shot at an unscrupulous dealer, everyone in the business gets splattered some.

There is really only one group of people I can think of that is as much maligned in the public opinion polls as car dealers... and that is Lawyers. You would think that they would look at car dealers as kindred souls or at least brothers under the skin and would feel understanding enough about your problems to leave you alone. But, it just isnt that way. In fact, some trial lawyers even have meetings to learn more about how easy it is to win law suits against you. It must be easy money since most dealers are so afraid of potentially prejudicial jury verdicts that they are usually willing to settle out of court even when they are innocent. The truth is, it is often cheaper even when you are totally right, to just give-in and settle rather than fight and have to pay all of your own attorneys fees win or lose. And if you lose, you can bet that they will want you to pay the other attorneys fees as well.

Generally, the second most expensive purchase a person makes during his lifetime is a car. And, since he will probably want a different car every two to five years, the average buyer may have to deal with a car dealer a dozen times during his lifetime. Now, if dealers are as predatory as some lawyers want to believe, life is going to be one big trauma after another for car buyers who are being accosted by predatory sales persons as soon as they set foot on a car lot. At least one lawyer has publicly stated that in every car sale some attempt is made to fool the consumer to improve the sellers profit margin, usually successfully.

Certainly, the statutes were intended to make honesty and fair play a part of our lives. Dishonest buying and selling activities should be stopped. But, an intelligent person should always keep in mind that not every seller is a thief, and not every buyer is a saint. Maybe some lawyers, in order to maintain a level of self respect, have to convince themselves that their adversary is basically evil and therefore when he himself resorts to word-play and truth-bending it is only a justifiable pay-back against a car dealer who deserves it anyway. If that is the way things really are, then the whole system stinks and justice is not only blind, it is prejudicially stupid. But, being a border line Pollyanna at heart, I dont think that is true. I think that there are indeed some bad dealers in this world. And, there are some bad customers. And, yes, there are also some bad lawyers out there as well. Its too bad that those three groups cant just hang around together and just sue each other back and forth and leave the rest of us alone. Since that just isnt reality, you had better learn as much as you can about trying to avoid any appearance of dishonesty or deceit.

At this point, I want to solidly assure you that I am not a lawyer and I dont give legal advice. I do read a lot, and I listen really well, so I have picked-up a lot of information that may be of use to others. Before you form an opinion or act on anything I might write or say, please consult your own lawyer.

One of the first remedies attempted against a dealer is that of simply trying to back-out of the sales contract on the basis that the dealer acted deceptively or unfairly. Fraud in the inducement is one claim that can often be made to cause a contract to be voided. All that has to be done is to prove to the court that you the dealer (or your salesman or closer) made one of the following representations with the intention that the customer be induced to act on that representation:

Falsely represented a specific material fact.

Knew or should have known that a representation was false.

Made a representation without knowledge of its truth

or falsity.

Even though you or your representative made what you intended to be a totally innocent representation, if it turns out that it was false and the customer parted with his money believing that representation to be true, the contract could be voidable under the fraud in the inducement argument.

Now, we all know that the customer signs a bunch of forms when he buys a car, and many of them contain wording about no other promises, warrantees or guarantees. It would certainly seem that with all these signatures, there should be no argument about any other representations. Well, watch out for this old fraud in the inducement attack. It can be argued that once the fraud in the inducement has occurred, all else that follows can be voided. So, if the fraud occurred before the signing, then none of the signing is valid. Therefore your signed disclaimers are worthless. Check it out.

One of the reasons lawyers like to use the fraud in the inducement attack rather than simply attacking under the usual Deceptive and Unfair Trade Laws is that fraud in the inducement opens the door for them to argue that rather than just being negligent, the dealer was guilty of an intentional tort (fraud) and the customer should be able to collect for triple damages, mental anguish and dealership payment of the customers attorneys fees. Contingency fees become bigger when the verdict calls for bigger dollars, and generally it is easier to collect attorney fees from a dealership than from a normal citizen.

Some examples of statements and practices that could be attacked as fraud are as follows:

Discuss the previous usage of a vehicle (little ole lady).

Discuss the quality of care provided by prior owner.

Discuss the regularity of service previously provided.

State that dealers mechanic checked it out as OK.

Have blank spaces on signed contract.

Hide or pass-over disclosures meant to inform customer.

Slide insurance on contract without customer knowing.

Expressed warranties (verbal promises) by salesman.

Discuss the fitness for a particular purpose.

The above list is just a beginning. Every day, somebody dreams up a new way to exagerate or inflate the percieved value of a deal. Just be aware that no matter how good your intentions are, there is someone out there who is going to accuse you of being unfair or deceptive. You owe it to yourself to be cautious. I really believe it would be wise to have a deal recap check list to have the customer sign before you let him sign any of the contracts. On the check list, I would make sure he acknowledges that no promises were made to induce him to sign other than what is included in the contract. Have this signed before the regular papers are signed, rather than after.