Big O Tires Road Hazard Protection Class Action Settlement (California Only)

Class Eligibility

All persons who are citizens of the State of California and who at any time after January 2, 2009, purchased a TPP (Tire Protection Plan) from Big O Tires, LLC.

Estimated Amount

$12.46 – $25.51

Cash and Coupon Options Are Available to Class Members

Proof of Purchase

Yes

Case Name

Fratilla v. Big O Tires LLC,
Case No. 37-2013-00028542-CU-BT-CTL

Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Diego

Case Summary

In the Lawsuit, the Class Representatives allege that Big O has violated the law in connection with its sale of the TPP. Regarding Big O’s allegedly unlawful sale of the TPP, the specific violations alleged by Class Representatives include:

● The Class Representatives allege that Big O was legally required to meet net worth or insurance requirements in order to sell the TPP, but failed to do so;

● The Class Representatives allege that Big O has failed to make a disclosure which the Class Representatives allege Big O was required to make in regard to the alleged insurance-or-net-worth requirement;

● The Class Representatives allege that the text of the TPP is legally required to conspicuously print in bold type no smaller than the surrounding type the language in the TPP that excludes coverage, and that Big O has allegedly failed to comply with this alleged legal requirement;

● The Class Representatives allege that the text of the TPP is legally required to state the obligor’s full corporate name (or a fictitious name approved by the Insurance Commissioner), telephone number, and vehicle service contract provider license number, and that Big O has allegedly failed to comply with this alleged legal requirement;

● The Class Representatives allege that the TPP is legally required to state the name of the purchaser and the name of the seller, and that Big O has allegedly failed to comply with this alleged legal requirement;

● The Class Representatives allege that the TPP is legally required to conspicuously state the TPP’s purchase price, and that Big O has allegedly failed to comply with this alleged legal requirement;

● The Class Representatives allege that the TPP is legally required to contain a clear description of the covered product, and that Big O has allegedly failed to comply with this alleged legal requirement;

● The Class Representatives allege that the TPP is legally required to contain a step-by-step explanation of the procedure that the customer should follow in order to obtain performance of any obligation under the TPP including, but not limited to, the full legal and business name of the service contractor, the mailing address of the service contractor, the person or class of persons authorized to perform service, the method of giving notice to the service contractor of the need for service, whether the cost of transporting the product for service or repairs will be paid by the service contractor, the place where the product may be delivered for service or repairs or a toll-free telephone number the buyer may call to obtain that information, and all fees, charges and other costs that the buyer must pay to obtain service, and that Big O has allegedly failed to comply with this alleged legal requirement;

● The Class Representatives allege that the TPP is legally required to provide that it is cancelable by the purchaser within the first 60 days after receipt of the contract, and that it is legally required to disclose in a specified manner the customer’s cancellation and refund rights, and that Big O has allegedly failed to comply with these alleged legal requirements;

● The Class Representatives allege that Big O misrepresents that the TPP provides consumers with free tire rotations, when, in actuality, all of Big O’s new tire customers are already entitled to free tire rotations regardless of their purchase of the TPP, or fails to adequately disclose this fact;

● The Class Representatives allege that Big O misrepresents that the TPP provides consumers with free flat repair, when, in actuality, all of Big O’s new tire customers are already entitled to free flat repair regardless of their purchase of the TPP, or fails to adequately disclose this fact;

● The Class Representatives allege that Big O misrepresents that the TPP provides consumers with free tire rebalancing, when, in actuality, all members of Subclass A are already entitled to free tire rebalancing regardless of their purchase of the TPP, or fails to adequately disclose this fact;

● The Class Representatives allege that Big O misrepresents that the TPP provides consumers with a warranty against defects in workmanship and materials, when, in actuality, all of Big O’s new tire customers are already entitled to a warranty against defects in workmanship or materials regardless of their purchase of the TPP, or fails to adequately disclose this fact; and

● The Class Representatives allege that Big O fails to provide the terms and numerous limitations of its “Roadside Assistance Service” along with the TPP itself, which “Roadside Assistance Service” has little, if any, value to the consumer.

The Class Representatives allege that Big O’s above-described practices connected to the sale of its TPP constitute unfair competition, for purposes of California’s Unfair Competition Law (the “UCL”), because such business practices are allegedly likely to deceive the public, are allegedly unlawful and are allegedly unfair. The Class Representatives seek recovery of the monies which Big O obtained through sale of the TPP through alleged unfair competition, as well as an injunction (i.e., a court order) requiring Big O to cease and desist from the alleged unfair competition.

The Class Representatives also seek recovery under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act (hereinafter the “CLRA”) of the monies which Big O obtained through sale of the TPP through alleged unfair competition, actual and exemplary damages which the Class Representatives contend Big O’s customers have suffered as a result of the practices described above, which Plaintiff contends violate the CLRA, as well as an injunction (i.e., a court order) requiring Big O to cease and desist from the practices described above, which the Class Representatives contend violate the CLRA.

Settlement Pool

$1,471,794.00

Deadline

07/19/18

Contact



Fratilla v. Big O Tires

KCC, Settlement Administrator

P.O. Box 404041

Louisville, KY 40233-4041

1-844-210-2592

info@TireProtectionClassAction.com