Northland Dodge Fined

Friday, January 06, 2006 02:20 PM

The B.C. Motor Dealers Council has hit a local dealership with a hefty fine after the Registrar examined complaints about advertising and pricing. As read exclusively on Opinion250.com August 17th of 2005, the Director of licensing for the Motor Dealers Council of B.C. had started to follow up on concerns expressed about advertising.

The Registrar's decision on the matter is now complete, and Northland Dodge Chrysler Ltd. and Northland Motor Holdings Ltd. of Prince George are facing some expensive discipline for what the Registrar calls a "consistent pattern of unacceptable business practices."

Northland Dodge Chrysler has been fined $50,000 and the related firm, $10,000.

View previous articles: Local Plymouth/Chrysler/ Dodge Dealership's Ads Questioned and Media Must Have No Favourites.

In his ruling, the Registrar, Ken Smith, cited a number of violations to the Motor Dealer Act and the Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act, including a failure to clearly identify dealer ownership in their advertising; incorrect pricing of vehicles on display; the employment of unlicensed salespersons; failure to disclose "total asking price" of vehicles; improper pricing and innumerable "deceptive" advertising practices.

Disciplinary hearings were held September 29, 2005, in Prince George, and December 21, 2005, in Burnaby. Ample opportunity had been provided between these hearings for the dealerships to change their style of business.

The Registrar said, in part:
". . . the representatives from these dealerships did not deny that these two companies consistently and repeatedly contravened the legislation. In fact, they basically admitted to the evidence provided by MDC’s investigators and staff."

The fines must be paid within 30 days or the dealerships may face cancellation of their licenses, although they have a right to request that the Registrar reconsider the decisions. That request must be filed within the 30 day time frame for paying the fine. At this point, there has been no such request.

The Motor Dealer Council is an administrative authority established pursuant to the laws of British Columbia and has been delegated the responsibility of administering the Motor Dealer Act and related regulations. The legislation requires that all businesses selling motor vehicles to the public in British Columbia, and all salespersons working for those businesses, be properly licensed.

The complete ruling can be found on the MDC web site, www.mdcbc.com.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Friday, January 06, 2006 02:20 PM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: admin on January 6 2006 10:43 PM

Aas you can see, the first four comments posted to this item have been deleted. There is no evidence to support the accusations being made.
-Elaine Macdonald

Posted by: McDuck on January 7 2006 12:37 AM

Do we detect some media censorship here? It is not quite clear why the comments were deleted. I bought a truck at this dealership in June, is there things I should be aware of?

Posted by: Gofaster on January 7 2006 7:51 AM

I was not making accusations but rather airing my thoughts. So if accusations were felt I appolgise.

Posted by: Percy on January 7 2006 8:17 AM

I think that the fines are appropriate.

The resulting free advertising will also serve it's purpose.

Seems fair to me. Let the market decide. Percy

Posted by: diplomat on January 7 2006 8:57 AM

My opinion is that a customer has the final say based on past experiences. If a business conducts itself ethically it will have nothing to worry about.

That is my opinion, but perhaps it will be deleted as well.

Posted by: admin on January 7 2006 9:12 AM

The new comments on the matters related to Northland Dodge in the most recent postings are quite acceptable.The first four that were deleted were done so because they bordered on libel and you simply cannot make statements which you cannot prove conclusively. There is a saying when writing, "When in doubt leave it out"
We at opinion 250 do not want to police the comments beyond libel and reasonably good taste. Those parameters should not be difficult to live under to protect you and 250. That is, we beleive, not too much to ask for so that free speech has an opportunity to work.

Ben Meisner, Editor

Posted by: Percy on January 7 2006 9:15 AM

Thank you Ben. You are absolutely right. Percy

Posted by: zoom on January 7 2006 11:11 AM

The MDC is a self regulatory organization set up to protect consumers, the maximum fine handed out obviously shows that Northland/CMG may not have the consumers interest at heart.

Posted by: Mike on January 7 2006 11:56 AM

What you have done is proof that free speech does not work. If I wish to make any remark that upsets someone(heaven forbid) and opinion 250 doesn't like it, too bad. Don't call 'censorship' freedom of speech. Why do you consider yourself liable if I say something? Are you responsible for whatever comes out of my mouth? If I'm on your property and yell an obscenity at someone, are you responsible? I'm using your service, It's easy to find out who I am, you are not my mentor, yet you are censoring what I say on a forum? I will make it clear to everyone right now: Opinion 250 is not responsible for anything I post on this site. My opinions are my opinions. Why call it OPINION 250? Lots of folks have a shitty opinion and I am entitled to listening to them. I want to hear them. Thanks for your time.

Posted by: diplomat on January 7 2006 12:06 PM

Ben, I can certainly live with your decision and let's face it: You can delete anything you want to, you are in charge.

However, you said: "The first four that were deleted were done so because they bordered on libel and you simply cannot make statements which you cannot prove conclusively."

You assume that all of the four were borderline but what if someone like me would say that I have written documentation to back my comments?

Just a thought.

Posted by: admin on January 7 2006 2:42 PM

This will be my last comment on the issue. If you speak a libel to someone in a crowd it is you who becomes solely responsible for that libel. If on the other hand Opinion 250 publishes that libel they also are libel, regardless of whether you wish to hold them harmless or not. You may recall, the company I worked for paid $55,000 dollars in a libel action that was initiated against me and the company I worked for because I repeated on the air a story that was carried in the Vancouver Province. I didn't write the story, I simply repeated it. In other words we repeated the libel. The Province made a deal with the person who was suing us and we were left holding the bag. We paid and we paid dearly. If there are those who think free speech entitles them to say whatever they want about whoever they want, they should read Canada's libel laws. As for the comment that someone has documented evidence. The Province said its source for the story was correct and it was documented. Well the rest is history.If we have to prove every single line that is written here meets the libel standard I fear very little will reach the board and so may I say once more, "When in doubt leave it out " and there will be no need for further comment. Free speech is just that, if you feel your comments are being censored in some way then seek out another venue for publication and see if you meet the test there.

Ben Meisner , Editor

Posted by: spanky on January 8 2006 11:52 PM

Meisner has the attitude of "when in doubt leave it out", as the spankster, I much rather prefer, "When in doubt whip it out". I also believe that this northland business is rather entertaining. Keep it up dudes/dudettes!

later.........