Legal Topics

Consumer law — Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act — Vehicle predelivery service charges — Costs and profit disclosure 

Jan 15th, 2023 in by admin

Consumer law — Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act — Vehicle predelivery service charges — Costs and profit disclosure — Affirmative defenses — Auto dealer that included costs and profit disclosure regarding predelivery service charges on retail lease order for vehicle, but not on motor vehicle lease agreement, cannot avoid liability under FDUTPA for failing to include mandatory disclosure on all documents by asserting substantial compliance with disclosure requirement or relying on contemporaneous instrument rule — Safe harbor provision of FDUTPA, providing that Act does not apply to act or practice required or specifically permitted by federal or state law, is not applicable — Dealer has not proven that Florida statute authorizing dealer to charge fee for using Electronic Filing System allows dealer to charge predelivery service fees without making disclosures required by FDUTPA — Merger clause — Dealer cannot avoid liability based on merger clause because this would violate plain language of FDUTPA and operate as waiver of FDUTPA protections — Estoppel defense fails where dealer cannot show any misleading conduct by plaintiff or reasonable detrimental change in its own position based on plaintiff’s conduct — Waiver defense is not supported by any evidence — Defenses attempting to limit dealer’s FDUTPA exposure based on doctrine of avoidable consequences and failure to mitigate are contrary to public policy — Conditions precedent — Record evidence refutes defense alleging plaintiff’s failure to send the presuit demand letter required by statute — Lack of causation is denial, not an affirmative defense — Summary judgment is granted in favor of plaintiff as to all affirmative defenses — Plaintiff is still required to prove causation and damages elements of claim — On motion for reconsideration, court holds that plaintiff demonstrated per se violation of Section 501.976(18), and thereby established the first element of FDUTPA, where it was undisputed that retail order contained “costs and profit” disclosure and lease did not