September 21, 2026

By Barrie Charapp Beaty
Charapp & Weiss, LLP
bbeaty@cwattorneys.com

On August 19, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the State of Connecticut secured a $4 million settlement with Chase Nissan LLC, along with its owners and managers, including general, sales and finance managers, resolving allegations of deceptive and unfair practices in the advertising, marketing, promotion, offering for sale, lease, or financing, and sale, lease, or financing of motor vehicles.

The FTC and Connecticut sued for deceptive and unfair practices in violation of the FTC Act and the Connecticut Unfair trade Practices Act (“CUTPA”).  The FTC alleged that the dealership did not honor their advertised prices, double-charged consumers the cost to certify vehicles they had already advertised as certified, charged consumers for add-ons the consumer either did not know about or authorized, and lied about the amount of mandatory state registration and other fees consumers must pay.

The above ruling is not an isolated incident. The FTC has pursued similar cases across the country over the past few years.  The stipulated consent order not only provides for monetary compensation be paid to the state of Connecticut  for restitution and redress, but are the Defendants are “permanently restrained and enjoined from misrepresenting, expressly or by implication,” “permanently restrained and enjoined from charging a consumer without having obtained the consumer's Express, Informed Consent,” and “permanently restrained and enjoined from representing, expressly or by implication, any information relating to any amount a consumer may pay to purchase, finance, or lease a motor vehicle without disclosing the Total Price, Clearly and Conspicuously, as the most prominently displayed item in any visual disclosure.”  While many previous settlements with the FTC include owners and general managers, this order is unique in that it also include sales and finance managers.  Each individual defendant will be required to make required disclosures to the FTC in that individual’s title or role in any business activity related to selling and financing vehicles for the next 6 years.  

The 97 Warning Letters and FTC FAQs issued

The most recent FTC settlement with Chase Nissan LLC aligns with the intent of the FTC’s warning letters sent to 97 dealership groups nationwide back in March 2026.  The letters highlighted six deceptive practices that are in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits “unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce.”

1. Advertising a price that does not reflect all required fees. The advertised price must be the total price the consumer is expected to pay, excluding only government fees such as tags, title and taxes.
2. Advertising a price that reflects rebates or discounts not available to all consumers. Conditional rebates and discounts cannot be built into the advertised price if not every buyer qualifies.  Including a disclaimer will NOT solve this issue, contrary to popular belief.
3. Advertising a price that fails to take into account the amount of an additional required down payment.
4. Conditioning the advertised price on consumers using dealer financing. The advertised price must be available to cash buyers and to customers using outside financing, not only to those who finance through the dealership.
5. Requiring consumers to buy additional items not reflected in the advertised price. If a consumer must buy an add-on to get the advertised price, that add-on belongs in the price.
6. Advertising unavailable or non-existent vehicles.

On September 15, 2026, the FTC finally published the long-awaited Automobile Industry Pricing Transparency: FAQs. The FTC’s Christopher Mufarrige had promised that FAQs would be forthcoming back in April 2026 during the webinar hosted by the NADA, which was in response to those 97 warning letters.  Within the document, the FTC addressed 14 “common questions.”  We highly suggest that you take a look at the actual publication: https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/automobile-industry-pricing-transparency-faqs.  Though much of the publication’s answers have been discussed by various experts in the industry, it does elaborate on some long awaited questions such as in-transit vehicles.  In-Transit vehicles are permitted to be advertised but it must be clear that the vehicles are not on the dealership’s lot.  Transparency is most important: if a vehicle is in transit or located at an offsite location, the advertisement must plainly state this fact. 

How Dealers Can Avoid FTC Action

Most prominent price needs to be the Ceiling not the Floor. Any charge the dealership imposes and a consumer must pay, including processing or documentation fees, freight or destination, belongs in the dealer’s most prominent advertised price. Only government charges (tax, title, and registration) may be excluded. Audit your online listings and third-party postings so the advertised price matches the price a consumer is actually offered.  

Sell add-ons as optional. Products added to a vehicle including paint or fabric protection, VIN etching, total loss protection, and service contracts, should have value to the consumer and must be disclosed, itemized, and truly optional. Any pre-installed product to be charged to the consumer must be included in the most prominent advertised price.  For best practices, it is advised not to pre-install optional products. In the Chase Nissan and Napleton matters, mislabeled and unauthorized add-ons were central to the government's case.

Get express, informed consent for every charge. The consent requirement in recent settlement orders is specific: before adding a charge, explain what it covers, how much it costs, and whether it is optional, then obtain the consumer's affirmative agreement. A signature at the end of a long closing process, or a final payment screen, does not cure a charge that was never clearly explained. Build documented consent into your F&I workflow so each add-on has a clear, separate authorization.  Make sure you have those menus signed, dated and explained to the consumers.  

Disclosures. The disclosures in advertisements should be “clear and conspicuous,” and used to explain an advertised term, NOT to negate it. 

Deliver what you advertise. If a vehicle is advertised as “certified,” complete the certification and honor the associated warranty. The certification should be clear whether it’s a dealer certification or a manufacturer certification process.  Consumers automatically think its manufacturer certified and if its not, stating only “Certified” is deceptive.  Do not charge separately to certify a car already advertised as certified. Do not advertise vehicles you cannot sell or prices that cannot be met. 

Train your people and audit regularly. The Dealer as well as Managers within your dealership(s) must stress their unwavering commitment to ethical conduct and compliance with the law. Sales and finance staff need to know what is advertised and what is included in the price. A single screenshot of a price the dealership will not honor, or one deal with an unauthorized charge, is the fact pattern these cases are built on. Periodic self-audits, with the assistance of counsel, of advertising, deal jackets, and add-on authorizations will catch problems before a regulator does.  Continued training of staff is necessary to remain in compliance.

The bottom-line is simple: the most prominent price a customer sees should be the price the customer pays (or less), and every additional charge should be optional, disclosed, and affirmatively authorized. That standard is inexpensive to meet compared with the cost of an enforcement action. Dealers who move now, with the guidance of counsel, are far better positioned than those who receive demands from government authorities.