|
Bellavia Gentile & Associates, LLP in conjunction with co-counsel
have filed several lawsuits in Federal Court to recover damages
resulting from the failure of General Motors, Ford and DaimlerChrysler
to properly reimburse numerous dealers for parts used in repairing
vehicles under the manufacturers warranty program. Plaintiffs
assert causers of action for (i) violation of New York Vehicle
and Traffic Law ("VTL") ß 465 (1) and (ii) breach
of contract.
Under
their respective franchise agreements with the "factories"
each Plaintiff was required to perform all necessary repairs covered
by the factory's warranties to its retail customers, at no expense
to the customer, and the factory was required to reimburse each
Plaintiff for labor and replacement of parts installed in such
repairs upon receipt of a claim for reimbursement.
Since
October 1992, VTL ß 465(1) has explicitly required motor
vehicle franchisors to reimburse their New York franchised dealers
for replacement parts installed in warranty repairs at "notÖ
less the price and rate charged by the franchised motor vehicle
dealers in the community or marketing area for like services to
no -warranty and/or no-service contract customers provided such
price and rate are reasonable."
Notwithstanding
the passage of VTL ß 465, which was specially designed and
enacted to substantially increase the level of warranty reimbursement
to dealers, auto manufacturers have done nothing to comply with
the statute and continued to reimburse all of its franchised dealers
at the national reimbursement rate of cost plus 30% (for earlier
year models) and cost plus 40% (for later year models).
In
fact, not only have manufacturers systematically and substantially
under reimbursed Plaintiff's for warranty parts in blatant violation
of VTL ß465, and breach of contract, but their computerized
warranty claims submission system, which all dealers are required
to use, will not even process claims seeking parts reimbursed
at a rate other than the default rate of cost plus 40%. However,
this default rate forced upon all New York dealers is, on average
approximately 30% less than the price charged by the other dealers
in Plaintiffs' respective "community or marketing areas"
for like service to non-warranty customers. Indeed, the reimbursement
rate of cost plus 40% is substantially below the factories own
suggested retail price (or "MSRP") which is approximately
cost plus 67% for most parts.
I.
Legal Analysis
Based on a plain reading of Section 465, the factories liability
is clear. The main defense advanced by the factories are premised
on the notion that it was somehow required of each Plaintiff to
determine prevailing non-warranty prices in its community or marketing
area and to specifically demand reimbursement at such prices in
each of its warranty claims to the factory. That notion was soundly
rejected by Senior Judge Sifton in the Universal Ford case, also
handled by this firm (denying Ford's motion for summary judgment
that was based on Plaintiff's alleged failure to submit particularized
claims setting forth the prices dealer claimed Ford must pay under
VTL ß465), and by the late-judge Allen Schwartz in a thorough
and well-reasoned decision in the case of Ralph Oldsmobile v.
General Motors Corp. Therefore, the only real issues in these
cases relate solely to the extent of Plaintiff's damages.
Every
franchised dealer in the State of New York may be entitled to
damages, both retroactively for several years of underpayments,
and prospectively for reimbursement at the retail rate.
The
key factor to resolve Plaintiff's meritorious claims for compensatory
and prospective relief, either by judgment or preferably by settlement,
are to establish (1) the prevailing community/marketing area rate
for each dealer and (2) a reasonable formula to apply those rates
to actual warranty parts claims to arrive at the ultimate warranty
parts reimbursement to which each dealer is entitled. In the context
of either litigation or settlement, this case can be readily ascertained
and accomplished.
First,
the prevailing community/marketing area rate each dealer can be
established by ascertaining the geographic area from which each
dealer draws the majority of its customers. For litigation purposes,
Plaintiffs have retained experts who, at considerable expense,
have utilized accurate and reliable statistical methods and processes
to sample actual customer repair orders from each of the named
dealers. Plaintiffs' experts then determined that dealer's individual
community/marketing area. The applicable retail markup rates are
then determined by looking at average retail markup rates (reflected
on each of the dealers' year-end financial statements) for those
dealers located within a given dealer's radius or community/marketing
area. The final step in establishing the community/marketing area
rate is to compute an average markup rate based on the rates of
all of the dealers within each given area.
Second,
once the community/marketing area rates are established, then
we apply those rates to each dealer's warranty claims. Past warranty
claims are clearly reflected on each of the dealers' past year-end
financial statements, and future warranty claims can be processed
on the basis of the average community markup rates to be applied
to claims made on an ongoing basis. Moreover, a reasonable cost
of living or similar adjustment can be made to ensure that the
rates remain current on a prospective basis.
Bellavia
Gentile & Associates, LLP and their co-counsel have spent
over two years designing and implementing a damage model that
would be compelling and determinative at trial. Hundreds of thousands
of dollars in expert fees and data retrieved have been expended
on behalf of the dealers in prosecuting the cases.
If
you agree that the manufacturers should be held to follow the
law, and that your dealership has been unfairly deprived of substantial
revenues and working capital, you should contact us to discuss
your rights more fully. Generally, most dealers' claims for retroactive
damages alone, forgetting the value of a higher mark-up going
forward, are in the mid to high six figure range.
|