Quick Contact

News

• Car Buyer Rights in Virginia Extended Warranties
• Leased Cars Instead of Clunkers are Popular for High Schoolers
• 3 Auto Dealer Tactics the Overhaul Missed: By RON LIEBER
• CONSUMER WATCH: The downside of voluntary repossession
• Misrepresentation costly for Norfolk dealership
• USED-VEHICLE PURCHASE
• J. Smith v. Casey Chevrolet, Circuit Court of Newport News, Virginia:
• Charlie Falk Auto Wholesale, Inc. Pays Judgments
• CONSUMER WATCH: Looking for options in tough cases
• Consumer Watch: Couple gets some relief in warranty case

more >

Case Results

• Auto Fraud
• Richmond Dealer Guilty of Fraud, Punitive Damages Awarded

Awarded: $34,000 in punitive damages

• Dealership Found Guilty of Fraud in Sale of BMW
• CAR DEALER ORDERED TO PAY $140,000 + FOR FRAUD, CLAIMS POVERTY
• Charlie Falk Auto Wholesale, Inc. Pays Judgments
• Settled Case - Auto Fraud
• Settled Case - Prior Wreck Auto Fraud
• Automobile Fraud
• Auto Fraud - Settled Case
• Car Dealership Pays Over $114,500 For Fraud In Selling Wrecked Vehicle

Awarded: Over $114,500

• Misrepresentation costly for Norfolk dealership

Awarded: $114,400

• Auto Fraud Case Results
• Yo-Yo Sale Results in Allegations of Fraud, Violation of the Virginia Consumer Protection Act, Violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and Equal Credit Opportunity Act
• GM Dealer Settles Fraud Case After Two Mistrials

Awarded: Confidential

• Dealership Settles Case on Automobile Fraud, Violation of VA Consumer Protection Act, and The Federal Odometer Act.

Awarded: $57,000

more >

DISCLAIMER: Please note that every case is different and these verdicts and settlements, while accurate, do not represent what we may obtain for you in your case.

Charlie Falk Auto Wholesale, Inc. Pays Judgments

S. Laury v. Charlie Falk Auto Wholesale, Inc. S. Cruz v. Charlie Falk Auto Wholesale, Inc.

In these cases, John Cole Gayle, Jr., of The Consumer Law Group, obtained two judgments against Charlie Falk Auto Wholesale, Inc. (“Falk”), a Virginia used-car dealer. The judgments amounted to approximately $90,000, which included punitive damages for fraud in the sale of automobiles. Falk refused to pay these judgments, claiming lack of funds and that the company was going out of business. The dealership then re-opened under another name. Mr. Gayle then applied to a fund established by the state of Virginia for compensation of our client’s compensatory damages and attorney fees. This fund is set up to partially compensate consumers when dealerships go out of business after judgment for fraud. The maximum recovery is $20,000 per case. On the eve of receiving an award from the fund, and after Mr. Gayle advised Falk that he was filing another suit for fraudulently transferring assets during litigation, Falk capitulated and paid a compromise settlement of $81,000 to satisfy these judgments.