Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2016/04/19) */ Our advertising stated that the certificate be brought to the dealer ship to match the numbers to determine how much was won.We have used this advertising several times and have had no other complaints Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2016/04/21) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) For many years the Publishers' Clearing House sent people a letter telling them on the first page that they had won a sweepstakes, but explaining in small print on the back page that they had merely won the right to see the names of the actual winnersSound familiar? The Autos is doing the same thing on a much smaller scaleEventually Attorneys General of states sued PCH for "false, deceptive, and misleading" marketingPCH defended themselves by saying the truth of their offer could be found in the small print of their last pagePCH lost the case and was fined $million dollarsAt first I thought Auto's marketing was clever, but it turns out that using small print to hide the truth may be taken as evidence of "intent to defraud." My next step will be to talk to the Fresno County prosecutor or perhaps take the case to small claims court myselfI do not accept the Autos defensive rationalizationMy guess is that the Fresno courts will agree with meAutos should be ashamed of themselves
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2016/04/19) */ Our advertising stated that the certificate be brought to the dealer ship to match the numbers to determine how much was won.We have used this advertising several times and have had no other complaints Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2016/04/21) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) For many years the Publishers' Clearing House sent people a letter telling them on the first page that they had won a sweepstakes, but explaining in small print on the back page that they had merely won the right to see the names of the actual winnersSound familiar? The Autos is doing the same thing on a much smaller scaleEventually Attorneys General of states sued PCH for "false, deceptive, and misleading" marketingPCH defended themselves by saying the truth of their offer could be found in the small print of their last pagePCH lost the case and was fined $million dollarsAt first I thought Auto's marketing was clever, but it turns out that using small print to hide the truth may be taken as evidence of "intent to defraud." My next step will be to talk to the Fresno County prosecutor or perhaps take the case to small claims court myselfI do not accept the Autos defensive rationalizationMy guess is that the Fresno courts will agree with meAutos should be ashamed of themselves