Talk:TrueCar

Untitled
Hi - I tried to start improving this article by removing some of the promotional copy and making it more concise. It stills needs a lot of help with citations for claims as well as controversies. I will continue to work on it as time permits.Goalloverhere (talk) 21:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

advert flag
i went through the article and did some major cleanups. i think that we can remove the advert flag now -- it's not nearly as promotional as it once was. im going to take it off, but if you disagree, let me know and wkml,l[kjbihpo,. knkne can discuss it. thanks. GoGatorMeds (talk) 19:09, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

request edit
I am affiliated with TrueCar and noticed inaccuracies in the page. Due to the conflict of interest policies at Wikipedia, I'm requesting that the page be edited rather than making the edits myself.

First, the article states: "In March 2015, TrueCar was sued and the company was found guilty of false advertising of its non-negotiation policy and violations of the Lanham Act. the case was later dismissed, in 2019, and was followed by the filing of an investor lawsuit."

This statement contains three errors:

1. TrueCar was not "found guilty" of anything. The ruling in question was a denial of TrueCar's motion to dismiss; that is, it determined only that a jury should consider the claim. Then, the court later revisited its decision and dismissed the plaintiffs' case.

2. The statement implies a connection to the investor's securities lawsuit. There is no connection. The cases are unrelated and involve different claims.

3. The statement also implies that the investor's suit came after the dismissal of the Lanham Act case, which is also incorrect. The investor's suit was filed before the Lanham Act case was dismissed, although, as noted above, that is an irrelevant fact because the cases are unrelated.

The dockets for both of those cases are publicly available on PACER, and in fact the PACER docket is cited in the current article (footnote 29).

Second, the article states: "In December 2017, Truecar settled with shareholders for an amount in excess of $28 million for violating the Securities Act of 1934 by providing false information to investors. The State of California had filed the suit for violation of state laws."

This statement also contains three factual errors:

1. The statement collapses two separate lawsuits. The lawsuit that was settled in December 2017 was filed by the California New Car Dealers Association for alleged violation of state laws. Here is a link to an Automotive News article on the settlement: https://www.autonews.com/article/20171214/RETAIL07/171219814/truecar-california-dealers-association-settle-lawsuit.

2. The State of California did not file that lawsuit. The State of California has never sued TrueCar for anything.

3. The shareholder litigation was filed in March 2018 and preliminarily settled in August 2019 (not December 2017). A final approval hearing has been scheduled for January 2020. This information is also available on PACER. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.37.138.218 (talk) 00:43, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Reply 12-NOV-2019
Regards, Spintendo  10:39, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your clarification of these items. However, it is not enough that these nuances exist. They need to be incorporated by you into verbatim sentences which can then be added, once approved, to the article.
 * To that end, please devise the appropriate claim statements which lay out this information correctly, and then propose those statements here on the talk page. Those claim statements need to be worded exactly to how they will appear in the article, along with the appurtenant verifying references. Any text which is proposed to be removed should also be stated verbatim in the request. Kindly open a new edit request when ready to proceed with this proposed verbatim text.
 * Also note that all posts made to the talk page need to be signed by you by using four tildes.