Registrar's Decision 20-12-015

OUTCOME

The Registrar found:

• In the Mercedes Transaction:
  
  1. Lenux Auto misrepresented the Mercedes as having no damage over $2,000.
  2. Lenux Auto failed to provide a purchase agreement to the consumer,
  3. Lenux Auto misrepresented the odometer reading of the Mercedes in an advertisement, and
  4. The consumer has failed to prove detrimental reliance on the above misrepresentations.
  5. There was no clear, convincing and cogent evidence provided to establish why the corporate veil of Lenux Auto should be pierced and liability placed personally on Hassan Zahedian as a declared shareholder, but not sole owner.

There was no clear, convincing and cogent evidence provided to establish why the corporate veil of Lenux Auto should be pierced and liability placed personally on Hassan Zahedian as a declared shareholder, but not sole owner.

The Registrar is without jurisdiction to take regulatory action against Lenux Auto as their Motor Dealer Registration had expired at the time the complaints were made and therefore there is no licence to regulate or risk of harm to mitigate.

OUTCOME

The Registrar found:

• In the Volkswagen Transaction:
  
  1. Lenux Auto failed to declare damage over $2,000 on the bill of sale,
  2. Lenux Auto provided to the Authority a falsified inspection report from CAS Automotive,
  3. Hassan Zahedian authorized, permitted, or acquiesced in providing the falsified inspection report from CAS Automotive, and
  4. Greg Bybel has failed to prove any detrimental reliance on Lenux Auto’s failure to disclosure damage over $2,000 is linked to the $1,192.80 in repairs for the airbag he claims.

There was no clear, convincing and cogent evidence provided to establish why the corporate veil of Lenux Auto should be pierced and liability placed personally on Hassan Zahedian as a declared shareholder, but not sole owner.

The Registrar is without jurisdiction to take regulatory action against Lenux Auto as their Motor Dealer Registration had expired at the time the complaints were made and therefore there is no licence to regulate or risk of harm to mitigate.

• In the Volkswagen Transaction:
  
  1. Lenux Auto failed to declare damage over $2,000 on the bill of sale,
  2. Lenux Auto provided to the Authority a falsified inspection report from CAS Automotive,
  3. Hassan Zahedian authorized, permitted, or acquiesced in providing the falsified inspection report from CAS Automotive, and
  4. Greg Bybel has failed to prove any detrimental reliance on Lenux Auto’s failure to disclosure damage over $2,000 is linked to the $1,192.80 in repairs for the airbag he claims.

The Registrar found Hassan Zahedian breached section 33(2)(a) of the MDA-Reg by not acting with honesty and integrity when he permitted, authorized, or acquiesced in Lenux Auto providing a false inspection report to the Authority.

Given the limited liability found against Hassan Zahedian, the Registrar requested the Authority and Mr. Zahedian provide additional submissions on the appropriate compliance response.

• Regarding remedy for the Consumers, the Registrar found that:
  
  1. Harwinder Kumar has failed to prove detrimental reliance on the misrepresentations that were found to occur in the Mercedes Transaction, as related to his claimed remedy. As such, the Registrar is without legal authority to provide a remedy to Harwinder Kumar. The Registrar made no comment on any other remedy Harwinder Kumar may be able to seek. Harwinder Kumar should seek independent legal advice.
  2. Greg Bybel has failed to prove detrimental reliance on the misrepresentation that was found to occur in the Volkswagen Transaction, as related to his claimed remedy. As such, the Registrar is without legal authority to provide a remedy to Greg Bybel. The Registrar made no comment on any other remedy Greg Bybel may be able to seek. Greg Bybel should seek independent legal advice.