THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Friday, October 14, 1994 TAG: 9410140586
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY MARC DAVIS, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: PORTSMOUTH LENGTH: Medium: 70 lines
Nora Chisolm knows exactly what drew her to Charlie Falk for a used car in 1992.
``I guess it was all the commercials: `It's easy to get a car! Ride today!' All that,'' Chisolm recalled.
In retrospect, she said, ``I should have gone up the road.''
Chisolm, a 37-year-old Coast Guard secretary from Portsmouth, was one of four women who filed the federal class-action lawsuit against Charlie Falk Auto Wholesalers in June 1993.
Her experience - and those of fellow plaintiffs Tina Wilce, Laura Richards and Starlette Seamster, all of Norfolk - led to Thursday's multimillion-dollar settlement.
The hardest part of the 16-month litigation, Chisolm said, was going through a grueling three-hour deposition with Falk's attorneys. But filing the lawsuit was right, she said.
``It made me feel pretty good, to stand up for something I believed in, against someone who was hurting other people,'' Chisolm said.
According to Chisolm, here's what happened:
It began when Chisolm needed a car in May 1992. Falk's lot on Military Highway was the first and only lot where she shopped. She bought a 1988 Pontiac LeMans for $6,525, putting down $200 of her own money, plus $100 from her mother. She promised to pay Falk $200 more in a few days, then financed the rest.
``I really didn't have the money to get a car,'' Chisolm said. ``I just did it.''
A few days later, the car began slowing in traffic for no apparent reason. She returned it for repairs three times. The last time, Falk was pressuring her for the $200 she still owed. Chisolm refused to pay until the car was fixed.
Within a month, she had defaulted on the loan. The finance company repossessed the car, then transferred it and the loan to Falk for $1,000. Chisolm was puzzled.
``I thought: Why would they sell it for $1,000 when they sold it to me for six times that?'' Chisolm said.
Chisolm's attorney later charged that this artificially low ``sale'' price was the crux of a criminal conspiracy between Falk, the finance company and the collection agency owned by Falk.
Based on this ``sale'' price for the car, the collection agency calculated that Chisolm owed a ``deficiency'' of $3,661 - the difference between her defaulted loan and the value of the repossessed car.
Falk resold the car to another customer in July 1992 - two months after selling it to Chisolm - for $6,900, according to the lawsuit.
Chisolm was the first of the four plaintiffs to go through depositions with Falk's attorneys. The others watched her to learn.
``It was just like I was on trial,'' Chisolm said. ``They fired questions one after another. . . . They wanted to know all the cars you ever owned in your life, for years back: `Who financed it? What happened to it? Did you sell it?' Good grief! Who can remember that?''
Now, Chisolm has advice for anyone shopping for a car.
``I want people to know where not to go and what to look for, how these car dealers can do you wrong,'' she said. ``Make sure you know what you're doing. Make sure you can pay for it. And make sure you take a mechanic with you when you go.'' ILLUSTRATION: Photo
Chisolm
KEYWORDS: LAWSUIT CAR DEALERSHIP by CNB