Displaying 1 - 20 of 398
Concurring Statement of Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson Joined by Commissioner Mark R. Meador Regarding Lindsay Automotive Group
FTC, Maryland Attorney General Secure Full Refunds and Additional Penalties Against Lindsay Auto Group for Deceptive Pricing Practices and Unwanted Add-ons
Lindsay Chevrolet, et al, FTC and State of Maryland v
The FTC and Maryland Attorney General charged Lindsay Automotive Group with systematically deceiving and overcharging car-buying consumers for years, costing them millions of dollars in junk fees and unwanted add-on products.
In December 2024, the FTC and Maryland Attorney General charged Lindsay Automotive Group with systematically deceiving and overcharging car-buying consumers for years, costing them millions of dollars in junk fees and unwanted add-on products. In March 2026 the FTC announced a settlement in the case in which the defendants will pay full refunds and additional penalties to redress defrauded consumers.
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension (Affiliate Marketing Rule)
Asbury Automotive Group, Inc., et al., In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission is acting against a large automotive dealer group, Asbury Automotive, for systematically charging consumers for costly add-on items they did not agree to or were falsely told were required as part of their purchase. The FTC also alleges that Asbury discriminates against Black and Latino consumers, targeting them with unwanted and higher-priced add-ons.
In an administrative complaint, the FTC alleges that three Texas dealerships owned by Asbury that operate as David McDavid Ford Ft. Worth, David McDavid Honda Frisco, and David McDavid Honda Irving, along with Ali Benli, who acted as general manager of those dealerships, engaged in a variety of practices to sneak hidden fees for unwanted add-ons past consumers. These tactics included a practice called “payment packing,” where the dealerships convinced consumers to agree to monthly payments that were larger than needed to pay for the agreed-upon price of the car, and then “packed” add-on items to the sales contract to make up that difference.
FTC Warns 97 Auto Dealership Groups About Deceptive Pricing
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension (Used Car Rule)
FTC Finalizes Order Settling Allegations that GM and OnStar Collected and Sold Geolocation Data Without Consumers’ Informed Consent
General Motors LLC., et al., In the Matter of
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension (Affiliate Marketing Rule)
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension (Used Car Rule)
Valvoline and Greenbriar; Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Orders to Aid Public Comment
FTC Requires Divestiture of Oil Change Shops in Valvoline-Greenbriar Deal
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request (Information Furnishers Rule)
Chase Nissan/Manchester City Nissan
The Federal Trade Commission and the State of Connecticut are taking action against auto dealer Manchester City Nissan (MCN), along with its owner and a number of key employees, for systematically deceiving consumers about the price of certified used cars, add-ons, and government fees.
The complaint alleges that the dealership, in addition to deceiving consumers, regularly charges them junk fees for certification, add-on products, and government charges without the consumers’ consent, sometimes costing them thousands of dollars in unwanted and unauthorized charges.