A consumer has accused an automobile dealership of misrepresenting the status and price of a vehicle sold as new, raising concerns about transparency in car sales and protections for buyers. The complaint was filed by Gina R. Gagliardi on May 15, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against Port Jeff Chrysler Jeep Inc.
According to the court filing, Gagliardi alleges that Port Jeff Chrysler Jeep Inc. engaged in deceptive, misleading, and unlawful conduct during the sale of what was purported to be a new motor vehicle. The manufacturer’s window sticker listed the price at approximately $48,375; however, the Retail Installment Sale Contract (RISC) executed by Gagliardi reflected a cash price of about $60,643.07. At the time of purchase, the vehicle had approximately 2,492 miles on its odometer.
The complaint states that Gagliardi sought to purchase a new vehicle and relied on representations from Port Jeff Chrysler Jeep Inc. that the car was indeed new. Despite these assurances, while both the bill of sale and Retail Certificate of Sale (MV-50) identified the vehicle as new, the RISC labeled it as a demonstrator or "demo." Gagliardi claims she relied upon these representations and omissions when entering into the transaction.
Gagliardi alleges that this conduct constitutes deceptive acts and practices, false advertising, fraudulent misrepresentation, and violations of federal and state consumer protection statutes. Specifically cited are alleged violations of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), Regulation Z, and New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350.
The legal filing outlines four causes of action: violation of TILA and Regulation Z for failing to accurately disclose material credit terms; violation of New York General Business Law section 349 for engaging in deceptive acts directed at consumers; violation of section 350 for false advertising regarding price and status; and common law fraud for knowingly making false representations concerning both status and pricing.
Gagliardi asserts that she suffered monetary damages due to these actions. The complaint states: "Defendant’s conduct caused Plaintiff to sustain monetary damages and other consequential harm." It further alleges that "Defendant failed to accurately disclose material credit terms and pricing information," resulting in disclosures that were "inaccurate, misleading, and materially deceptive in violation of TILA and Regulation Z." Regarding state law claims, it is asserted that "the conduct complained of was materially misleading and likely to mislead a reasonable consumer," causing actual injury.
As relief from the court, Gagliardi seeks actual damages to be determined at trial; statutory damages under TILA; treble damages pursuant to New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350; punitive damages; rescission and restitution; attorney’s fees and costs; pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; as well as any other relief deemed just by the court.
The plaintiff is represented by David Kasell of Kasell Law Firm based in Long Island City, New York. The case is identified as Case No. 2:26-cv-02961.
Source: 226cv02961_Gagliaridi_v_Port_Jeff_Chrysler_Jeep_Inc_Complaint_Eastern_District_New_York.pdf