SoCalLemonLaw Blog

When Maria Lourdes de Guevara visited Glendale Mitsubishi, seeking to buy a safe and reliable used car, she had no idea that she was walking into a den of deceit and fraud.

Maria’s primary language is Spanish, and she has difficulty speaking or reading with English.  She trusted Glendale Mitsubishi’s Spanish-speaking salespersons to treat her honestly.  They sold her a 1999 Izusu Rodeo, assuring her that it was a good car and would serve her needs well.  Glendale Mitsubishi’s salespersons would only provide Ms. Guevara with an English version of her purchase contract, depriving her of the opportunity to find out about the deal in her own language.

Not long after she took delivery, she found out that the vehicle had been in a serious collision and had undisclosed frame damage.  When she went to the dealership to confront the salespersons and manager who had misled her, they ignored her, believing her to be a helpless, hapless Spanish-speaking consumer with no ability to hire an attorney.

They were wrong.  Maria found Brennan, Wiener & Associates (“BWA”) of La Crescenta, Southern California’s leading car dealer fraud and lemon law specialists.  BWA filed a lawsuit on behalf of Ms. Guevara, alleging fraud for not disclosing the frame damage and also alleging that the dealership had violated California law concerning taking advantage of persons who cannot speak English with English-only contracts.  BWA litigated the case for the better part of a year.  As trial approached, Glendale Mitsubishi “heard the footsteps” and settled the case for an amount over $180,000.00.

“It’s high time that dealers start respecting the rights of consumers”, states Robert F. Brennan of Brennan, Wiener & Associates.  “All too often we see the same story played out over and over again: dealers assume consumers are too dumb or too weak to stand up for their consumer rights.  We see this particularly among immigrant communities, where dealers are most likely to exploit people with little or no sophistication and little or no ability to stand up themselves to redress the fraud.  I’m particularly happy that Glendale Mitsubishi had to pay Ms. Guevara, because hopefully it teaches them a lesson about exploiting people who otherwise have little ability to stand up for their rights.”

Riverside, Ca.—A unanimous jury in Riverside on Wednesday, April 5, 2006, ordered Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc. and Fleetwood Motorhomes of California, Inc. to pay Bill and Juanita Adkins damages for a defective motorhome which the Adkins purchased in 1997.

“The motorhome had a lot of defects and Fleetwood never got to the bottom of fixing them,” commented the Adkins’ attorney, Robert F. Brennan, Esq. of Brennan, Wiener & Associates in La Crescenta, Ca.  “The jury could have awarded a lot more damages, and Fleetwood got away lucky that it didn’t get tagged with a much larger verdict.  Still, Fleetwood never offered a nickel to settle this case although the coach in had problems from the first day.”

The Adkins purchased the coach in February, 1997 from Holiday R.V. Superstores in Las Cruces, New Mexico.  Although the case was filed and tried in Riverside, the Riverside judge applied New Mexico law because the purchase was there.

“There were defects with the slide-out, the air conditioner, the toilet, the entry step, the awning, the leveling jacks…on and on,” commented Brennan.  “It’s really a pity that Fleetwood sold this defective coach to elderly people who really did not have the strength to deal with all of the problems.  You would hope that Fleetwood would have a little more empathy for the situation.”  Bill Adkins is 77 years old and his wife is 67.  They are semi-retired.

The jury’s award of approximately $5,600 in damages to the Adkins is less than what the Adkins requested from the jury, but the verdict will likely erase the large debt that the couple still owes on the motorhome.  Thus, the trial result was more than worthwhile.

Brennan continued, “Obviously, the Adkins would have liked a larger award of damages, but they are happy to have won and are pleased to be in a position to successfully negotiate with the finance company which financed the coach.  Right now, the finance company wants six figures from these people, and it’s simply not fair.  The jury’s verdict gives the Adkins the ability to negotiate on equal footing with the finance company, because the finance company stands to lose it all if it pushes too hard to collect on the debt.  Because of how hard Fleetwood fought this case, it is a definite victory for the Adkins, both against Fleetwood and against the finance company.”