DATE: Thursday, August 7, 1997              TAG: 9708070482

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B4   EDITION: FINAL 

SOURCE: BY MIKE MATHER, STAFF WRITER 

DATELINE: HAMPTON                           LENGTH:   63 lines

CRUMPLER DEALERSHIP ACCUSED OF FORGING CUSTOMER SIGNATURES

A Nissan attorney and two company representatives on Wednesday accused Bob Crumpler's car dealership of falsifying warranty claims and forging customer signatures.

The ongoing hearing before the Department of Motor Vehicles will help determine whether Crumpler can keep his Newport News Nissan dealership.

Nissan Motor Corp. has been trying for months to divorce itself from Crumpler after a hidden camera caught the dealer uttering racial slurs about an employee at a mobile home park Crumpler owns. Crumpler, however, is fighting to keep the dealership.

Testimony on Wednesday focused on several warranty claims Nissan representatives flagged as fraudulent after a January audit of the dealer's account. The audit came a month after Crumpler's racial slurs made headlines.

Seven customers were called as witnesses by Nissan.

Among the carmaker's claims and evidence:

The name of a Peninsula man who has never driven a Nissan car was listed on a warranty claim as the owner of a pickup truck that was actually part of Crumpler's used-car fleet. Nissan paid Crumpler $358 for fixing three warranty problems. But a company representative admitted that two of the three repairs would have been authorized no matter who owned the truck.

Several owners of 1993 Nissan Altimas testified that they had never seen the duplicate repair bills for work they never requested. The duplicate work orders sent to Nissan for reimbursement claimed that mechanics had fixed expensive oil leaks. The customers' signatures on those bills were apparently forged. A Nissan expert mechanic who examined the cars said the warranty work was never done.

A former Bob Crumpler service manager used the vehicle identification number from another employee's truck to bilk Nissan for fictitious warranty repairs.

Crumpler attorney Bill Lehner's cross examinations hinted at what his defense will be.

Lehner suggested that the disputed oil-leak repairs may have been completed without the customers' knowledge as part of a customer-satisfaction program. He also coaxed some of the customers into admitting they couldn't remember specifically what work they had authorized two years ago.

When deciding whether Crumpler can keep his franchise, DMV officials will consider the preponderance of the evidence. That standard is much lower than what is required to prove fraud in a criminal case.

The franchise agreement between Nissan and Crumpler's dealership requires Crumpler employees to do warranty work on all Nissans, no matter where they were purchased. It is the same agreement for all Nissan dealers.

In 1996, Nissan paid Crumpler's dealership $600,000 for handling 1,600 claims, according to testimony.

But Nissan sometimes audits the warranty claims of dealers. In a 1995 audit, Nissan disputed $121,000 in warranty claims from Crumpler's dealership, according to testimony. The carmaker also questioned several customer signatures that appeared to be fraudulent.

In a second audit in January, Nissan investigators said they found 40 warranty claims that appeared to be false or inflated.

Testimony on Nissan's fraud claims continues today. ILLUSTRATION: Photo

Bob Crumpler was confronted Wednesday by Nissan charges that several

warranty claims were considered fraudulent. KEYWORDS: HEARING

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu