Passport Imports, Inc.

Also known as: Passport Toyota.

The FTC alleged that Passport dealerships used more than 21,000 deceptive urgent recall mailers in 2015 and 2017 to bring vehicle owners to service departments. The defendants agreed to orders barring misrepresentations about recalls and other material vehicle facts.

1Official action

Resolved. Refunded, settled, ceased operating, or the claim did not hold up. Kept for the record.

Identity

Published so you can confirm this entry refers to the party you are checking, and not to somebody who shares a name.

Registrations
FTC v. Passport Imports, Inc. (FTC case 162-3193, 2018)
Jurisdictions
United States (federal)

Recall mailers led to federal settlements

The FTC alleged that the Passport dealerships and other defendants sent more than 21,000 deceptive urgent recall notices to vehicle owners in 2015 and 2017. The release says nearly 7,000 Toyota owners received postcards in early 2015 and more than 14,000 Nissan owners received similar notices in June 2017. According to the complaint, the defendants did not limit the lists to vehicles with open recalls, and the vast majority of the covered vehicles had no open recall.

The FTC alleged that the notices were intended to increase business at the dealerships’ service departments. After receiving them, hundreds of owners contacted Passport call centers, and many were told they had to visit a dealership to learn whether a recall applied. The release identifies three dealership business names: Passport Toyota, Passport Nissan of Alexandria, Virginia, and Passport Nissan of Marlow Heights, Maryland.

The FTC filed a federal complaint alleging that the notices violated the FTC Act. Proposed stipulated orders signed by the defendants permanently prohibit misrepresentations about whether a vehicle is subject to an open safety recall or service campaign and about certain other material vehicle facts.

What is not established

The release reports FTC allegations and stipulated settlements. It does not report a monetary judgment or state that every vehicle named in the mailers lacked an open recall.

Sources

Every claim above rests on one of these. Open them and check.

  1. Enforcement action October 10, 2018
    Washington, DC-Area Car Dealerships, Marketing Firm Settle Deceptive Advertising Charges

Right of reply

No contact has been logged for this entry yet.

If you are named here and something is wrong, dispute this entry. There is no charge, the route never expires, and your response is published unedited.

Other marketing & creative entries

See all marketing & creative entries, or browse the full record.


First recorded October 10, 2018 · Last updated October 10, 2018