Company: TRUE
Filing Date: 2025-05-06
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001327318-25-000016
Chunk: 116

Company: TrueCar, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-05-06
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part II, Item 1A
Chunk 116
---
. The complaint, as subsequently amended, sought declaratory and injunctive relief based on allegations that we were engaging in unfairly competitive practices and were operating as an unlicensed automobile dealer and autobroker in contravention of various state laws. Later that year, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed this lawsuit “without prejudice,” which means that while this litigation is currently resolved, it could be re-commenced at a later date.

•California Consumer Class Action: In 2015, we were named as a defendant in a putative class action lawsuit filed by Gordon Rose in the California Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles, which we refer to as the California Consumer Class Action. The complaint asserted claims for unjust enrichment, violation of the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act and violation of the California Business and Professions Code, based in part on allegations that we are operating in the State of California as an unlicensed automobile dealer and autobroker. After the trial and appellate courts rejected the plaintiff’s motion for class certification, he voluntarily dismissed the remainder of his case, meaning that the California Consumer Class Action is currently resolved.

•Haas Class Action: In 2017, we were named as a defendant in a putative class action filed by Kip Haas in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint asserted claims for violation of the California Business and Professions Code, based principally on allegations of false and misleading advertising and unfair business practices. The complaint sought an award of unspecified damages, interest, injunctive relief and attorney’s fees. Later that year, the parties entered into a binding settlement agreement, and the litigation was dismissed.

***

If regulators or other third parties take the position in the future that our products or services violate applicable brokering, “bird-dog” or advertising laws or regulations, responding to those allegations could be costly, require us to pay significant sums in settlements, require us to pay civil and criminal penalties, including fines, interfere with our ability to continue providing our products and services in certain jurisdictions or require us to make adjustments to our products and services or the manner in which we derive revenue from our participating dealers, any or all of which could result in substantial adverse publicity, loss of TrueCar Certified Dealers from our network, decreased revenues, increased expenses and decreased profitability.

Insurance Regulatory Laws

The advertising and sale of automobile insurance is highly regulated by the jurisdictions in which we do business. Although we do not sell insurance, certain of our partners sell insurance to the public in general and may sell insurance to our