Ballesteros

Ballesteros v. Ford Motor Co.

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 25, 2025A172271California8,450 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chou, J.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

A. Ballesteros’s Contract with Fairview Ballesteros purchased a new 2017 Ford Explorer Sport (Explorer) at Fairview in August 2018. He signed a pre-printed form entitled “RETAIL

INSTALLMENT SALE CONTRACT – SIMPLE FINANCE CHARGE (WITH

ARBITRATION PROVISION)” (Contract). Under the terms of the Contract, he agreed to buy the Explorer on credit rather than for cash. In doing so, he agreed to pay Fairview the amount he was financing plus a finance charge. The Contract identified the Explorer that Ballesteros purchased. It set forth federal truth-in-lending disclosures, including the amount financed, the annual percentage rate, and the total sale price. It noted that Ballesteros was trading-in a car to reduce the amount he owed for the Explorer. It identified optional service contracts, without detailing the terms of those agreements. The Contract was only between Ballesteros, identified as the “Buyer” and “You,” and Fairview, identified as the “Seller-Creditor,” “we,” and “us.” There were no other parties or signatories to the Contract. The first page of the Contract included an “Agreement to Arbitrate,” which stated that “you [Ballesteros] or we…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.