auto dealer in black and red logo
MenuMENU
SearchSEARCH

Texas Dealers Agree to Pay $85,000 for Deceptive Advertising

Three Dallas-area dealerships have agreed to pay $85,000 to settle charges that they violated a 2014 Federal Trade Commission (FTC) administrative order that barred them from deceptively advertising the cost of buying or leasing a car.

by Staff
August 19, 2016
3 min to read


WASHINGTON, D.C. — Three Dallas-area dealerships have agreed to pay $85,000 to settle charges that they violated a 2014 Federal Trade Commission (FTC) administrative order that barred them from deceptively advertising the cost of buying or leasing a car.

According to the FTC, New World Auto Imports Inc., New World Auto Imports of Rockwall Inc., and Hampton Two Auto Corporation — collectively known as Southwest Kia — violated the 2014 order by concealing sales and lease terms that added significant costs or limited who could qualify for vehicles at the advertised prices.

These ads, according to the regulator, were also in violation of the Truth in Lending Act and the Consumer Leasing Act, which require clear and conspicuous disclosure of credit and lease terms. Aside from the $85,000 fine, the FTC's proposed order would bar the dealership from violating both acts.

In 2014, the FTC approved final consent orders on a settlement involving 10 dealerships that engaged in deceptive advertising. Per the settlement, the dealerships were prohibited from misrepresenting the cost of leasing, financing or any other material fact about price, sale, financing or leasing of a vehicle in an advertisement.

The settlement was part of “Operation Steer Clear,” which the commission described as a nationwide sweep focusing on misleading advertising associated with the selling, financing and leasing of motor vehicles. Among the 10 dealerships targeted was Southwest Kia.

At the time, according to the FTC, Southwest Kia was advertising vehicles that consumers could purchase for low monthly payments. The dealerships, however, were hiding the fact that consumers would have a final balloon payment that would amount to more than $10,000. The dealerships also advertised that consumers could drive home a vehicle for specific low monthly payments, but failed to inform consumers that the advertised offer was for a lease and that they would owe substantially more upfront. 

According to the FTC, these advertisements violated the Consumer Leasing Act and Regulation M for failing to disclose certain lease related terms. They also violated the Turth in Lending Act and Regulation Z for failing to disclose certain credit-related terms.

The recent case — filed Aug. 18, 2016, in the U.S. District Court of Texas, Dallas Division — centered on a Southwest Kia television ad and mailers. The TV ad promoted two cars for under $200 a month. But in fine print that appeared for only two seconds, the dealerships disclosed that the offer applied only to leases, not sales, and required a $1,999 payment due at signing. Similar disclosure issues were found in the mailers.

“One dealer mailed ads claiming a new car could be purchased for $179 per month, but, in print too small to read without magnification, disclosed that $1,999 would be due up front, along with tax, title and license fees, and that $8,271 would be due at the end of a 38-month financing term,” the FTC stated in its press release.

The ads, according to the regulator, targeted consumers with major credit problems. The dealerships advertised vehicles for $250 per month. However, in fine print, the dealership disclosed that the offer was based on a "4.25 annual percentage rate that few, if any, consumers with such major credit issues could obtain.”

The FTC also said Southwest Kia failed to keep records required by its 2014 order.

The commission vote to authorize staff to refer the complaint to the U.S. Department of Justice and to approve the proposed stipulated order was 3-0.

Originally posted on F&I and Showroom

More Compliance

two cars on a billboard, No Hidden Fees
ComplianceMay 1, 2026

Dealer Ads and the FTC

The agency has made it clear in recent enforcement actions and warnings, in auto retail and other industries, that advertised prices must include all nonoptional costs to the consumer.

Read More →
Complianceby StaffFebruary 4, 2026

AAMS Training and Mosaic Compliance Services Merge

The strategic combination is intended to expand technology-driven compliance solutions for the automotive industry.

Read More →
ComplianceOctober 6, 2025

The Jurisprudence of Pricing

Legal concept helps makes sense of California’s recently passed version of the failed federal CARS legislation.

Read More →
Ad Loading...
ComplianceJuly 17, 2025

Trump 2.0 and Enforcement Priorities

The upshot is don’t relax, because regulation indeed continues.

Read More →
Blue and white Automotive Service Professionals logo presented over a blue background with various wrench tools.
Fixed Opsby StaffJune 11, 2025

June Is Automotive Service Professionals Month

Observance is opportunity to thank technicians for their crucial role in auto retail.

Read More →
Complianceby StaffJanuary 30, 2025

Cox Automotive Releases Compliance Guide

New edition walks auto dealers through relevant regulations for 2025.

Read More →
Ad Loading...
Complianceby StaffDecember 24, 2024

Trump 2.0 and Retail Automotive

Administration’s plans should generally bode well for the industry.

Read More →
Complianceby StaffOctober 17, 2024

CARS Rule Update: 5th Circuit Oral Arguments Recap

In this video, Jim Ganther of Mosaic Compliance Services, recaps the key takeaways from the oral arguments in the critical CARS Rule case, including potential outcomes and what dealers should do to stay ahead of compliance changes.

Read More →
ComplianceSeptember 19, 2024

State of the CARS Rule, Part 3

The players in the automotive industry should coordinate their responses to this pending regulation.

Read More →
Ad Loading...

The Future of Car Dealer Documents

Where forms, documents, agreements and contracts could be in 50 years.

Read More →