It was bound to happen. The tremendous growth of digital marketing and social media was an invitation for government regulation. For instance, the Federal Trade Commission recently updated its truth-in-advertising guidelines, which were last revised in 1980, to address the commercialism of the Web. Federal and state regulators are taking the position that social media is not a loophole for deceptive marketing practices and are actively enforcing and cracking down on social media deception. Proper social media ethics are now a matter of law, not just personal preference.

Faking Reviews

The FTC’s updated Endorsement and Advertising Guidelines require companies to ensure that their posts are completely accurate and not misleading, and planting or allowing fake reviews is a violation. The Guidelines are extremely broad and can apply to anyone writing reviews on rating sites, web sites or promoting products through social media sites, including blogs.

There are several companies out there that offer seemingly quick and easy ways to improve your ratings on review sites. Be careful! A Dealership in Texas suffered devastating reputation damage because of the review-posting practices of a company they hired. A customer discovered that suspicious “reviewers” were writing 5-star reviews about all kinds of businesses and dealerships across the nation on the same day. This debacle was uncovered in October of 2010, yet news stories continue to show up on the dealer’s page one search results.

While the above case may be an example of a dealer who unfortunately hired the wrong vendor, an area of real concern is the activity of a company’s own employees. The FTC recently charged a California marketing company with deceptive advertising after it found that the company’s employees were posing as ordinary consumers posting positive reviews online.

Dealers may face liability if employees use social media to comment on their employer’s services or products without disclosing the employment relationship. The FTC requires the disclosure of all “material connections” between a reviewer and the company that is being reviewed. These connections can be any relationship between a reviewer and the company that could affect the credibility a consumer gives to that reviewer’s statements, such as an employment or business relationship. So if employees, friends, family or vendors post reviews to prop up a dealership’s online reputation, they must clearly disclose any relationship they have with the company. In addition, all reviews must be an honest opinion based on a real experience. Reviewers must never endorse a product or service that they have not used personally or create any other form of false endorsement. It’s all about transparency and full disclosure.

Besides the obvious potential damage to a dealer’s reputation, failure to follow these regulations can result in substantial penalties. In recent actions, the New York Attorney General fined a cosmetic surgery company $300,000 for ordering its employees to write fake reviews of its face-lift procedure and the FTC ordered a company marketing instructional DVDs to pay $250,000 for fake reviews posted by the company's affiliate marketers. The FTC has indicated that companies are fully responsible and liable for all inappropriate actions of their employees, their vendors, and any advocates they recruit. Reviewers may also be held personally liable for statements made in the course of their endorsements.

Paying For Reviews

The practice of offering a free oil change or gas card to a customer in exchange for a good survey has long been frowned upon by manufacturers. Because there are no factory gatekeepers when it comes to online ratings, it may seem tempting to offer customers an incentive to post a positive review.  The good news is that you can if you want to; the not-so-good news is that the regulations require that any reviewer provided with any form of compensation such as free services, rewards, incentives, promotional items, gifts, samples, or review items, must fully disclose the source and nature of any compensation received.

So, if you pay for reviews and the reviewers fail to disclose their compensation, you may face liability. This is an area where it’s easy to get caught and besides the legal danger, your reputation will likely take a big hit.

Advertising on Social Media Sites

The wisdom of trying to “sell” on social media sites by posting inventory, prices, or payments is an ongoing debate, but the fact remains that many dealers are engaged in this activity in some form. While I have no opinion on the relative merits of whether to “sell or not to sell” on social media, it’s important to note the potential implications of these types of activities.

Despite the fact that social media tends to be a low-keyed, casual type of communication, advertising regulations don’t go away. In fact, The Federal Trade Commission recently announced that it was updating its document Dot Com Disclosures: Information About Online Advertising. The primary focus of the document, which was first issued in 2000, is to inform advertisers that consumer protection laws and the requirement to provide clear and conspicuous disclosures applies to the online world in addition to the offline world.

So, in a nutshell, if inventory is posted or prices/payments are quoted on social media it’s likely that the posts will be deemed to be advertisements and will be subject to state and federal disclosure and truth in advertising regulations. Lack of space is no excuse either. Even if you’re advertising on Twitter and limited to 140 characters, you must include a clear link to any necessary disclosures. A good rule of thumb is to have any information that could possibly be construed as advertising reviewed by upper management or a qualified professional before it is posted.

Social Media Policy

Social media applications such as blogs, social networking, and video sharing have soared in popularity so it’s important that dealers control the information that’s coming out of their business. Policies and procedures should be put in place to spell out how employees are expected to conduct themselves within social media.  A social media policy can help take the guesswork out of what is appropriate for employees to post about a company to their social networks.

There are a number of potential legal issues with employees’ use of social media that should be addressed such as the danger of possible privacy, harassment, discrimination or defamation claims. Beyond legal risks, employees can harm a company’s reputation by disseminating controversial or inappropriate comments regarding the employer. However, employer restrictions on the use of social media can be tricky. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently issued a complaint against an Illinois dealership, alleging that the dealership unlawfully terminated an employee for making critical comments about the dealership on Facebook. While some unprofessional and inappropriate conduct may not be protected, the intersection of social media and the NLRA is an evolving area of the law.

The best way to protect your dealership from legal trouble is by establishing formal social media policies for your staff. Companies often get in the most trouble when they fail to train their employees about appropriate social media use and disclosure. To prevent this from happening, it’s a good idea to create a written social media policy and training program for your company and carefully monitor social media use.

It was bound to happen. The tremendous growth of digital marketing and social media was an invitation for government regulation. For instance, the Federal Trade Commission recently updated its truth-in-advertising guidelines, which were last revised in 1980, to address the commercialism of the Web. Federal and state regulators are taking the position that social media is not a loophole for deceptive marketing practices and are actively enforcing and cracking down on social media deception. Proper social media ethics are now a matter of law, not just personal preference.

Faking Reviews

The FTC’s updated Endorsement and Advertising Guidelines require companies to ensure that their posts are completely accurate and not misleading, and planting or allowing fake reviews is a violation. The Guidelines are extremely broad and can apply to anyone writing reviews on rating sites, web sites or promoting products through social media sites, including blogs.

There are several companies out there that offer seemingly quick and easy ways to improve your ratings on review sites. Be careful! A Dealership in Texas suffered devastating reputation damage because of the review-posting practices of a company they hired. A customer discovered that suspicious “reviewers” were writing 5-star reviews about all kinds of businesses and dealerships across the nation on the same day. This debacle was uncovered in October of 2010, yet news stories continue to show up on the dealer’s page one search results.

While the above case may be an example of a dealer who unfortunately hired the wrong vendor, an area of real concern is the activity of a company’s own employees. The FTC recently charged a California marketing company with deceptive advertising after it found that the company’s employees were posing as ordinary consumers posting positive reviews online.

Dealers may face liability if employees use social media to comment on their employer’s services or products without disclosing the employment relationship. The FTC requires the disclosure of all “material connections” between a reviewer and the company that is being reviewed. These connections can be any relationship between a reviewer and the company that could affect the credibility a consumer gives to that reviewer’s statements, such as an employment or business relationship. So if employees, friends, family or vendors post reviews to prop up a dealership’s online reputation, they must clearly disclose any relationship they have with the company. In addition, all reviews must be an honest opinion based on a real experience. Reviewers must never endorse a product or service that they have not used personally or create any other form of false endorsement. It’s all about transparency and full disclosure.

Besides the obvious potential damage to a dealer’s reputation, failure to follow these regulations can result in substantial penalties. In recent actions, the New York Attorney General fined a cosmetic surgery company $300,000 for ordering its employees to write fake reviews of its face-lift procedure and the FTC ordered a company marketing instructional DVDs to pay $250,000 for fake reviews posted by the company's affiliate marketers. The FTC has indicated that companies are fully responsible and liable for all inappropriate actions of their employees, their vendors, and any advocates they recruit. Reviewers may also be held personally liable for statements made in the course of their endorsements.

Paying For Reviews

The practice of offering a free oil change or gas card to a customer in exchange for a good survey has long been frowned upon by manufacturers. Because there are no factory gatekeepers when it comes to online ratings, it may seem tempting to offer customers an incentive to post a positive review.  The good news is that you can if you want to; the not-so-good news is that the regulations require that any reviewer provided with any form of compensation such as free services, rewards, incentives, promotional items, gifts, samples, or review items, must fully disclose the source and nature of any compensation received.

So, if you pay for reviews and the reviewers fail to disclose their compensation, you may face liability. This is an area where it’s easy to get caught and besides the legal danger, your reputation will likely take a big hit.

Advertising on Social Media Sites

The wisdom of trying to “sell” on social media sites by posting inventory, prices, or payments is an ongoing debate, but the fact remains that many dealers are engaged in this activity in some form. While I have no opinion on the relative merits of whether to “sell or not to sell” on social media, it’s important to note the potential implications of these types of activities.

Despite the fact that social media tends to be a low-keyed, casual type of communication, advertising regulations don’t go away. In fact, The Federal Trade Commission recently announced that it was updating its document Dot Com Disclosures: Information About Online Advertising. The primary focus of the document, which was first issued in 2000, is to inform advertisers that consumer protection laws and the requirement to provide clear and conspicuous disclosures applies to the online world in addition to the offline world.

So, in a nutshell, if inventory is posted or prices/payments are quoted on social media it’s likely that the posts will be deemed to be advertisements and will be subject to state and federal disclosure and truth in advertising regulations. Lack of space is no excuse either. Even if you’re advertising on Twitter and limited to 140 characters, you must include a clear link to any necessary disclosures. A good rule of thumb is to have any information that could possibly be construed as advertising reviewed by upper management or a qualified professional before it is posted.

Social Media Policy

Social media applications such as blogs, social networking, and video sharing have soared in popularity so it’s important that dealers control the information that’s coming out of their business. Policies and procedures should be put in place to spell out how employees are expected to conduct themselves within social media.  A social media policy can help take the guesswork out of what is appropriate for employees to post about a company to their social networks.

There are a number of potential legal issues with employees’ use of social media that should be addressed such as the danger of possible privacy, harassment, discrimination or defamation claims. Beyond legal risks, employees can harm a company’s reputation by disseminating controversial or inappropriate comments regarding the employer. However, employer restrictions on the use of social media can be tricky. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently issued a complaint against an Illinois dealership, alleging that the dealership unlawfully terminated an employee for making critical comments about the dealership on Facebook. While some unprofessional and inappropriate conduct may not be protected, the intersection of social media and the NLRA is an evolving area of the law.

The best way to protect your dealership from legal trouble is by establishing formal social media policies for your staff. Companies often get in the most trouble when they fail to train their employees about appropriate social media use and disclosure. To prevent this from happening, it’s a good idea to create a written social media policy and training program for your company and carefully monitor social media use.

There are a number of good reasons for operating an ethical and legally compliant dealership, not the least of which is staying out of a courtroom.  Perhaps the most important - and most often overlooked - reason is increased customer satisfaction.  There are times when an employee may feel that he or she came out the winner by bending the rules a little, but what about the dealership’s reputation?  What about the customers who were mislead?  It seems like there might be some losers in the game.

Customers often make decisions during a vehicle sale transaction that they come to regret after the “ether has worn off”.  Perhaps they read the contract more carefully after they got home or showed it to a relative, friend, neighbor, etc.  The customer may notice some imperfections on the vehicle in the light of day and have it inspected by a mechanic or body shop or run a vehicle history report.  If there is a concern, some customers will let the dealer know while others will just chalk it up to (bad) experience.

Now, if the dealer is lucky enough to get a chance to rectify the customer’s concern, how will the complaint be handled?  Will it be “Sorry, all sales are final” or “You signed the contract”?

What about the customer that doesn’t bother to report the concern?  You can be sure they’re telling somebody about the transaction.  Or perhaps they’re telling thousands of people via social media?

Here are some examples of after-sale situations that can cause potential customer satisfaction nightmares:

• The customer sees your advertisement for a price lower than was charged for the vehicle.
• The customer discovers additional charges on the contract for items that he or she thought were included in the price of the vehicle.
• The customer discovers that F&I products were sold at much-higher-than-market prices.
• The customer discovers additional charges on the contract for items that he or she never agreed to purchase.
• The customer gets a call from the lender who asks for verification that the vehicle has a sunroof – and it doesn’t.
• The customer discovers that the price of the vehicle was raised to cover negative equity on the trade-in when after being told that the dealer agreed to purchase the trade-in for the full loan balance.
• The customer gets a call from the lender asking for verification of an income amount which is much higher than what was written on the credit application.
• The customer discovers that the vehicle purchased had undisclosed prior damage.
• The customer runs a vehicle history report and discovers that the vehicle purchased was an undisclosed previous rental, a prior demo, flood damaged, etc.
• The customer brings the vehicle in for repairs and discovers that the warranty or service contract coverage or term was misrepresented.

Sure, you made the deal. But is it really worth putting the reputation that you have worked years to build at risk? Take compliance and ethical behavior seriously.  A commitment to honesty and fair dealing will protect your company, your employees, your customers and, most importantly, your good name.

There are a number of good reasons for operating an ethical and legally compliant dealership, not the least of which is staying out of a courtroom.  Perhaps the most important - and most often overlooked - reason is increased customer satisfaction.  There are times when an employee may feel that he or she came out the winner by bending the rules a little, but what about the dealership’s reputation?  What about the customers who were mislead?  It seems like there might be some losers in the game.

Customers often make decisions during a vehicle sale transaction that they come to regret after the “ether has worn off”.  Perhaps they read the contract more carefully after they got home or showed it to a relative, friend, neighbor, etc.  The customer may notice some imperfections on the vehicle in the light of day and have it inspected by a mechanic or body shop or run a vehicle history report.  If there is a concern, some customers will let the dealer know while others will just chalk it up to (bad) experience.

Now, if the dealer is lucky enough to get a chance to rectify the customer’s concern, how will the complaint be handled?  Will it be “Sorry, all sales are final” or “You signed the contract”?

What about the customer that doesn’t bother to report the concern?  You can be sure they’re telling somebody about the transaction.  Or perhaps they’re telling thousands of people via social media?

Here are some examples of after-sale situations that can cause potential customer satisfaction nightmares:

• The customer sees your advertisement for a price lower than was charged for the vehicle.
• The customer discovers additional charges on the contract for items that he or she thought were included in the price of the vehicle.
• The customer discovers that F&I products were sold at much-higher-than-market prices.
• The customer discovers additional charges on the contract for items that he or she never agreed to purchase.
• The customer gets a call from the lender who asks for verification that the vehicle has a sunroof – and it doesn’t.
• The customer discovers that the price of the vehicle was raised to cover negative equity on the trade-in when after being told that the dealer agreed to purchase the trade-in for the full loan balance.
• The customer gets a call from the lender asking for verification of an income amount which is much higher than what was written on the credit application.
• The customer discovers that the vehicle purchased had undisclosed prior damage.
• The customer runs a vehicle history report and discovers that the vehicle purchased was an undisclosed previous rental, a prior demo, flood damaged, etc.
• The customer brings the vehicle in for repairs and discovers that the warranty or service contract coverage or term was misrepresented.

Sure, you made the deal. But is it really worth putting the reputation that you have worked years to build at risk? Take compliance and ethical behavior seriously.  A commitment to honesty and fair dealing will protect your company, your employees, your customers and, most importantly, your good name.

A recently filed lawsuit against an auto dealership accused a sales manager of sexual harassment and sexual battery against a salesperson. According to the complaint, the employee was harassed continuously over a ten day period and ultimately quit due to the alleged behavior.  The complaint further stated that the dealership should have known what was going on and tried to correct it.

The dealership responded that the claims have no merit, that it has a zero-tolerance harassment policy and that human resources was not contacted about the situation, as its employee handbook specifies.

I have no idea what the true merits of this particular case are, but it brings to mind what an uphill battle fighting these claims can be.

In some cases, employers may be considered to be “strictly liable” for sexual harassment, meaning that the employer is liable for harassment by an employee or other individual even if the employer did not know about the harassment or acted immediately to stop it. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has recognized a viable defense to this liability. If an employer can prove that it exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any sexually harassing behavior and the complaining employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventative or corrective opportunities the employer provided or to otherwise avoid harm, the employer may avoid liability for unlawful harassment. Note however, where a supervisor’s harassment includes a tangible employment action (for example, firing the individual); this defense may not be used. An employer is always liable for harassment by a supervisor on a prohibited basis that culminates in a tangible employment action. The Supreme Court recognized that this result is appropriate because an employer acts through its supervisors, and a supervisor's undertaking of a tangible employment action constitutes an act of the employer.

The result in the this case may well come down to whether or not the court believes that the employer exercised “reasonable care” and that the employee “unreasonably” failed to take advantage of opportunities that the employer provided.

Most dealerships have an anti-harassment policy in place that they have all of their employees sign. That’s a great first step, but the questions remain: Have the employees actually read the policy and do they really understand it? Are they really aware of the procedures set forth in the policy to protect them from harassment?

If employees are trained on exactly what to do in the case of harassment (like who to report it to, and so forth) and fail to do so, the dealer will likely be in a better position to defend itself against a claim. On the other hand, if victims of harassment are uncertain about whom to report the harassment to within the company or worse yet, their claims are not taken seriously; they may feel their only recourse is to contact an attorney. That’s when it gets ugly.

The following procedures can be helpful in demonstrating that an employer has taken reasonable care in preventing or mitigating harassment:

• Preparing and adopting an anti-harassment policy and communicating the anti-harassment policies to all employees.
• Clearly communicating that harassment will not be tolerated and clearly explaining prohibited conduct.
• Creating a sexual harassment complaint procedure and explaining the employee’s obligation to report any conduct that may be viewed as harassing.
• Providing every employee with a copy of the harassment policy and complaint procedure, and redistributing it periodically.  The policy and complaint procedure should be written in a way that will be understood by all employees in the employer's workforce.
• Making the anti-harassment policy easily accessible via the company intranet, posters, employee handbooks and including it in the new-hire process.
• Providing sexual harassment training to all employees to ensure that they understand their rights and responsibilities.
• Taking any claim seriously and investigating it.
• Taking prompt and appropriate action.

Unfortunately, being a traditionally male-dominated industry, harassment claims against auto dealerships are not an uncommon occurrence. Having a policy in place and hanging posters may not be enough to adequately protect yourself.

A recently filed lawsuit against an auto dealership accused a sales manager of sexual harassment and sexual battery against a salesperson. According to the complaint, the employee was harassed continuously over a ten day period and ultimately quit due to the alleged behavior.  The complaint further stated that the dealership should have known what was going on and tried to correct it.

The dealership responded that the claims have no merit, that it has a zero-tolerance harassment policy and that human resources was not contacted about the situation, as its employee handbook specifies.

I have no idea what the true merits of this particular case are, but it brings to mind what an uphill battle fighting these claims can be.

In some cases, employers may be considered to be “strictly liable” for sexual harassment, meaning that the employer is liable for harassment by an employee or other individual even if the employer did not know about the harassment or acted immediately to stop it. Fortunately, the Supreme Court has recognized a viable defense to this liability. If an employer can prove that it exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct any sexually harassing behavior and the complaining employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventative or corrective opportunities the employer provided or to otherwise avoid harm, the employer may avoid liability for unlawful harassment. Note however, where a supervisor’s harassment includes a tangible employment action (for example, firing the individual); this defense may not be used. An employer is always liable for harassment by a supervisor on a prohibited basis that culminates in a tangible employment action. The Supreme Court recognized that this result is appropriate because an employer acts through its supervisors, and a supervisor's undertaking of a tangible employment action constitutes an act of the employer.

The result in the this case may well come down to whether or not the court believes that the employer exercised “reasonable care” and that the employee “unreasonably” failed to take advantage of opportunities that the employer provided.

Most dealerships have an anti-harassment policy in place that they have all of their employees sign. That’s a great first step, but the questions remain: Have the employees actually read the policy and do they really understand it? Are they really aware of the procedures set forth in the policy to protect them from harassment?

If employees are trained on exactly what to do in the case of harassment (like who to report it to, and so forth) and fail to do so, the dealer will likely be in a better position to defend itself against a claim. On the other hand, if victims of harassment are uncertain about whom to report the harassment to within the company or worse yet, their claims are not taken seriously; they may feel their only recourse is to contact an attorney. That’s when it gets ugly.

The following procedures can be helpful in demonstrating that an employer has taken reasonable care in preventing or mitigating harassment:

• Preparing and adopting an anti-harassment policy and communicating the anti-harassment policies to all employees.
• Clearly communicating that harassment will not be tolerated and clearly explaining prohibited conduct.
• Creating a sexual harassment complaint procedure and explaining the employee’s obligation to report any conduct that may be viewed as harassing.
• Providing every employee with a copy of the harassment policy and complaint procedure, and redistributing it periodically.  The policy and complaint procedure should be written in a way that will be understood by all employees in the employer's workforce.
• Making the anti-harassment policy easily accessible via the company intranet, posters, employee handbooks and including it in the new-hire process.
• Providing sexual harassment training to all employees to ensure that they understand their rights and responsibilities.
• Taking any claim seriously and investigating it.
• Taking prompt and appropriate action.

Unfortunately, being a traditionally male-dominated industry, harassment claims against auto dealerships are not an uncommon occurrence. Having a policy in place and hanging posters may not be enough to adequately protect yourself.

Much of what employees learn in the car business is from watching and listening to their co-workers. This type of education can be invaluable in many areas such as sales presentation, demonstration, and closing techniques. Of course, it can also lead to picking up bad habits like pre-qualifying customers by appearance or shortcutting the sales process.

An area that is frequently learned more by osmosis than by formal training is legal compliance.  Dealers often assume that their employees possess adequate regulatory know-how simply because they’ve been in the business for a while. But who taught them the rules? Have they been properly trained in compliance or are they just winging it? It’s important to realize that at some point in their career, many automotive professionals were taught the “old school” way of doing business. Some dealership practices they’ve learned are not necessarily legal or ethical but the employees simply rely on doing business the way it’s always been done. Many of these old school tactics are so common that employees don’t realize how risky they are:

Sales manager to salesperson: “Your customer has great credit but the bank is going to need more income. I don’t think they’ll ask for proof”.

Sales manager to finance manager: “Listen, these folks are in a hurry. Let’s make them mental owners. Just have them sign a contract real quick and we’ll get the rest of the paperwork done another time. If they leave without signing something, they won’t be back”.

Sales manager to salespeople: “Guys, that ad car is a big loser. Switch your customers to something else unless we can make a ton on the back end”.

Sales manager to finance manager: “Joe’s got this guy committed at $30 a month more then we need.  Let’s make some back-end money!”

Sales manager to salesperson: “We can probably get this guy done, but there’s going to be a big bank fee.  If he wants that Sentra, don’t mention the ad price. We need to sell it for a few grand more for the deal to make sense. He’ll be happy we can get him done”.

Sales manger to sales person:  “It looks like the negative equity is her hot button. Here’s what we’ll do: Tell her that we’ll pay off her trade and get her committed at $379 a month. I’ll just add the negative equity to the price.”

Finance manager to salesperson: “Let your customer know that the bank may call her and ask some questions. Make sure she tells them that the car is for her and not her brother!”

Finance manager to sales manager:  “I don’t care if you take a hold check for the downpayment, but the bank isn’t going to go for a deferred down, so we need to show it as cash on the contract.”

Finance manager to used car manager: “We’re over-advanced on that Tahoe deal. I need a book sheet for $15,500. Book it with premium wheels and sound.”

The vast majority of dealership employees are well-meaning, honest people, but assuming that they know everything they need to about compliance, especially in the current environment, is risky at best. When was the last time you had a comprehensive compliance check-up done? If it’s been a while (or never), now is the time. Once you have identified the areas that are in need of attention, the staff should be properly trained.  Education is a vital step towards protecting your business. After all, if employees don’t know or understand the rules, how can they be expected to follow them?

Chances are, you wouldn’t let someone drive your car unless you were certain that they knew how to drive. It makes sense to be just as careful when you’re handing them the keys to the dealership.

Much of what employees learn in the car business is from watching and listening to their co-workers. This type of education can be invaluable in many areas such as sales presentation, demonstration, and closing techniques. Of course, it can also lead to picking up bad habits like pre-qualifying customers by appearance or shortcutting the sales process.

An area that is frequently learned more by osmosis than by formal training is legal compliance.  Dealers often assume that their employees possess adequate regulatory know-how simply because they’ve been in the business for a while. But who taught them the rules? Have they been properly trained in compliance or are they just winging it? It’s important to realize that at some point in their career, many automotive professionals were taught the “old school” way of doing business. Some dealership practices they’ve learned are not necessarily legal or ethical but the employees simply rely on doing business the way it’s always been done. Many of these old school tactics are so common that employees don’t realize how risky they are:

Sales manager to salesperson: “Your customer has great credit but the bank is going to need more income. I don’t think they’ll ask for proof”.

Sales manager to finance manager: “Listen, these folks are in a hurry. Let’s make them mental owners. Just have them sign a contract real quick and we’ll get the rest of the paperwork done another time. If they leave without signing something, they won’t be back”.

Sales manager to salespeople: “Guys, that ad car is a big loser. Switch your customers to something else unless we can make a ton on the back end”.

Sales manager to finance manager: “Joe’s got this guy committed at $30 a month more then we need.  Let’s make some back-end money!”

Sales manager to salesperson: “We can probably get this guy done, but there’s going to be a big bank fee.  If he wants that Sentra, don’t mention the ad price. We need to sell it for a few grand more for the deal to make sense. He’ll be happy we can get him done”.

Sales manger to sales person:  “It looks like the negative equity is her hot button. Here’s what we’ll do: Tell her that we’ll pay off her trade and get her committed at $379 a month. I’ll just add the negative equity to the price.”

Finance manager to salesperson: “Let your customer know that the bank may call her and ask some questions. Make sure she tells them that the car is for her and not her brother!”

Finance manager to sales manager:  “I don’t care if you take a hold check for the downpayment, but the bank isn’t going to go for a deferred down, so we need to show it as cash on the contract.”

Finance manager to used car manager: “We’re over-advanced on that Tahoe deal. I need a book sheet for $15,500. Book it with premium wheels and sound.”

The vast majority of dealership employees are well-meaning, honest people, but assuming that they know everything they need to about compliance, especially in the current environment, is risky at best. When was the last time you had a comprehensive compliance check-up done? If it’s been a while (or never), now is the time. Once you have identified the areas that are in need of attention, the staff should be properly trained.  Education is a vital step towards protecting your business. After all, if employees don’t know or understand the rules, how can they be expected to follow them?

Chances are, you wouldn’t let someone drive your car unless you were certain that they knew how to drive. It makes sense to be just as careful when you’re handing them the keys to the dealership.

The vast majority of dissatisfied customers who threaten to call an attorney never do. For the few that follow through, the results can be devastating. While it’s true that many customers’ complaints have little or no merit, there can be a real danger if the wrong plaintiff’s attorney gets involved.

You may be thinking “we have lawyers of our own and insurance for that sort of thing, so bring it on”. Well, here’s the problem: many lawsuits that stem from seemingly insignificant complaints snowball into massive class action cases based upon other issues entirely. There are a number of plaintiffs’ attorneys out there who are absolutely brilliant at turning dealer oversights or technical violations into class action lawsuits. For instance, one dealership’s failure to honor its promise to swap rims on a vehicle resulted in a class action lawsuit for backdating rewritten contracts where the court ordered that the over 1,500 class members could elect to return their vehicles and rescind their contracts.

Let’s face it, most common consumer vs. dealer lawsuits or Lemon Law claims don’t pay big attorney fees, but class action lawsuits do. It doesn’t matter if the customer’s complaint is valid or if they have actually suffered any real damage; these attorneys simply want the opportunity to get their hands on your files. A Missouri dealer group recently settled a documentation fee class action lawsuit for over $8 million. The attorneys alleged that the charges constituted the “unauthorized practice of law”.  Ridiculous, yes, but the attorney fees totaled $675,000.

Other lawsuits have begun from mechanical issues, alleged misrepresentation of a vehicle’s condition, lies or unkept promises, undisclosed prior damage or vehicle history, payment packing claims, failure to honor warranties or service contracts, you name it. They’ve ended up becoming class action claims for improper disclosures, overcharging of fees, improper contract rescissions, undisclosed deferred downpayments, backdated contracts, etc.

Even if  class action status is not pursued or granted, attorneys often seek unfair and deceptive acts and practices claims for technical violations by painting a picture of “the greedy dealer profiting from the poor, unsuspecting consumer”.  Believe me; it’s not that tough to sell to most judges and juries, and the ultimate cost to the dealership is often substantially more.

The good news is that these lawsuits are avoidable. Most customers will not seek out an attorney unless they feel that they have no other choice or feel that they are being ignored or mistreated by dealership personnel. Two things that are virtually guaranteed to enrage a customer are unreturned calls or being treated in a confrontational manner by staff members. Many potential legal issues can be avoided by simply responding to customer complaints and perhaps offering a goodwill concession.

All customer concerns should be addressed promptly by qualified personnel, regardless of their perceived validity. It’s vitally important that care be taken when communicating with customers – their attorney may use what you say against you. Many times a customer will contact an attorney after they have felt that they were being ‘bullied” into signing a new contract or threatened with repossession, legal action or consequences to their credit rating. It’s a good idea to have customer complaints reviewed by your legal counsel or compliance officer to make sure that all your ducks are in a row.

Finally, check your ego at the door. While it may be distasteful to let an unreasonable customer “win” when you feel you’ve done nothing wrong, it makes good business sense to take a step back and examine the potential downside. Once an attorney gets involved, your chances of working out the problem directly with the customer diminish greatly. At the end of the day, does it make more sense to give in to the customer and move on with life or dig in your heels and risk a devastating lawsuit?

The vast majority of dissatisfied customers who threaten to call an attorney never do. For the few that follow through, the results can be devastating. While it’s true that many customers’ complaints have little or no merit, there can be a real danger if the wrong plaintiff’s attorney gets involved.

You may be thinking “we have lawyers of our own and insurance for that sort of thing, so bring it on”. Well, here’s the problem: many lawsuits that stem from seemingly insignificant complaints snowball into massive class action cases based upon other issues entirely. There are a number of plaintiffs’ attorneys out there who are absolutely brilliant at turning dealer oversights or technical violations into class action lawsuits. For instance, one dealership’s failure to honor its promise to swap rims on a vehicle resulted in a class action lawsuit for backdating rewritten contracts where the court ordered that the over 1,500 class members could elect to return their vehicles and rescind their contracts.

Let’s face it, most common consumer vs. dealer lawsuits or Lemon Law claims don’t pay big attorney fees, but class action lawsuits do. It doesn’t matter if the customer’s complaint is valid or if they have actually suffered any real damage; these attorneys simply want the opportunity to get their hands on your files. A Missouri dealer group recently settled a documentation fee class action lawsuit for over $8 million. The attorneys alleged that the charges constituted the “unauthorized practice of law”.  Ridiculous, yes, but the attorney fees totaled $675,000.

Other lawsuits have begun from mechanical issues, alleged misrepresentation of a vehicle’s condition, lies or unkept promises, undisclosed prior damage or vehicle history, payment packing claims, failure to honor warranties or service contracts, you name it. They’ve ended up becoming class action claims for improper disclosures, overcharging of fees, improper contract rescissions, undisclosed deferred downpayments, backdated contracts, etc.

Even if  class action status is not pursued or granted, attorneys often seek unfair and deceptive acts and practices claims for technical violations by painting a picture of “the greedy dealer profiting from the poor, unsuspecting consumer”.  Believe me; it’s not that tough to sell to most judges and juries, and the ultimate cost to the dealership is often substantially more.

The good news is that these lawsuits are avoidable. Most customers will not seek out an attorney unless they feel that they have no other choice or feel that they are being ignored or mistreated by dealership personnel. Two things that are virtually guaranteed to enrage a customer are unreturned calls or being treated in a confrontational manner by staff members. Many potential legal issues can be avoided by simply responding to customer complaints and perhaps offering a goodwill concession.

All customer concerns should be addressed promptly by qualified personnel, regardless of their perceived validity. It’s vitally important that care be taken when communicating with customers – their attorney may use what you say against you. Many times a customer will contact an attorney after they have felt that they were being ‘bullied” into signing a new contract or threatened with repossession, legal action or consequences to their credit rating. It’s a good idea to have customer complaints reviewed by your legal counsel or compliance officer to make sure that all your ducks are in a row.

Finally, check your ego at the door. While it may be distasteful to let an unreasonable customer “win” when you feel you’ve done nothing wrong, it makes good business sense to take a step back and examine the potential downside. Once an attorney gets involved, your chances of working out the problem directly with the customer diminish greatly. At the end of the day, does it make more sense to give in to the customer and move on with life or dig in your heels and risk a devastating lawsuit?