Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 14 SEPTEMBER 2015

Appellate Decision Helps CA Dealers Navigate CLRA Responses

On August 27, 2015, the California Court of Appeals reaffirmed the denial of plaintiff's fees and costs totaling $182,273.00 in Benson v. Southern California Auto Sales, Inc., et al, Case No. G050484.

United StatesConsumer Protection

On August 27, 2015, the California Court of Appeals reaffirmed the denial of plaintiff's fees and costs totaling $182,273.00 in Benson v. Southern California Auto Sales, Inc., et al, Case No. G050484. This is a significant ruling for California car dealers because the court held that a reasonable and timely response to a Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) notice letter precludes recovery of plaintiff's attorney's fees and costs.

The Benson case depicts a familiar story to many dealers who have received CLRA letters. A careful review of what happened in the Benson case can help dealers determine what should go into a CLRA response.

The CLRA seeks to protect consumers from unfair and deceptive acts and also facilitates pre-complaint settlement of consumer actions in a limited period of time. Under the CLRA, a plaintiff must give written notice of particular violations under the CLRA. The written notice requirement is intended to forestall litigation by

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from