Really Right

If you live in many parts of California and your finances are a mess, then you probably know that Paul Blanco is your best bet to get a deal on a car. Paul Blanco targets his marketing at folks that generally don’t qualify for vehicle loans thru traditional dealership financing.

We will continue to provide much-needed services to Californians without a great credit score but who must have transportation to live, work and raise a family…
— Paul Blanco

Yesterday, news broke that California’s Attorney General, Xavier Becerra, filed a lawsuit against Blanco for being unethical.

A 32-page complaint filed Monday in Alameda County accuses the company of running a sophisticated scheme to lure customers into a dealership only to later lie about their incomes and the value of the cars they were purchasing to convince lenders to approve the loans.

The company paid for ads promising customers could get their credit checked over the phone, a tactic designed to avoid the embarrassing experience of having a loan denied in person. Call center operators had detailed scripts, which would include telling customers to “please hold while I process your application,” only to return five seconds later to congratulate them on meeting the credit criteria for “several of our lenders.”
But Becerra says an unnamed manager at the call center said operators would not process loan applications at all. Instead, the act was a ruse to collect information and generate sales leads.

Once customers arrived at the dealership, Becerra says the company would lie about how much money a potential borrower earned each year to deceive lenders. An audit by one finance company found that out of 320 incomes reported from the company’s location in Fresno, more than 78% of them were inflated by at least $500 per month.

Becerra also said the company made lots of money by selling optional add-ons, such as insurance or service contracts, by falsely telling customers they were required by law. In some cases, Becerra said customers did not know they were purchasing add-ons because employees would hide the paperwork by placing their hands over the disclosures – a technique employees at the dealership referred to as a “hands-down close.”

“We’re talking about hardworking families who make every dollar count, seeing their hard earned money swindled away by dishonest tactics that put them in unaffordable debt,” Becerra said.

California sues auto dealer for false ads, loan documents

My first thought upon hearing of this suit yesterday is “Who did Blanco forget to pay off in California’s Democrat Party?”

Neither Xavier Becerra nor his predecessor Kamala Harris seems to have cared too much that Wells Fargo Bank, headquartered in San Francisco, “…signed up thousands of auto loan customers for costly car insurance without their consent, resulting in many having their vehicles repossessed.”

Source: Wells Fargo Settling California Car Loan Suit for $385M

The scandals continue at America’s third-largest bank by assets, Wells Fargo. Already reeling from a fake checking and credit card accounts crisis that cost former CEO John Stumpf his job, the firm admitted on Thursday evening it placed hundreds of thousands of unnecessary insurance contracts with its auto loan customers.

In total, Wells Fargo said between 2012 and 2017 it placed approximately 570,000 customers into a form of insurance called collateral protection insurance, which duplicated their existing coverage. The CPI product, which protects lenders against vehicle damage, is often not a feature of many automotive loans because car buyers’ are covered under their existing auto insurance. Wells Fargo used a third party to place CPI policies when it believed customers were not covered under their insurance. However, the bank now says it accidentally duplicated coverage and added unnecessary costs to customers’ monthly loan payments.

Another Disaster For Wells Fargo: Troubled Bank Admits Charging Unnecessary Auto Insurance

Becerra’s suit accuses Blanco of similar behavior as Wells Fargo but on a much smaller scale. In a quick Internet search, I couldn’t find any mention of Harris or Becerra being in the forefront of going after Wells Fargo for much more egregious behavior.

Please note that Presidential wannabee Kamala Harris was San Francisco District Attorney and then California Attorney General during most of the period when Wells Fargo was ripping-off customers literally right in her front yard. Makes me wonder where Wells Fargo was spending their PAC money while this fraud was going on?

Don’t forget, California does require auto insurance and so do lenders. Did Blanco offer insurance as a way to have some level of vertical market integration just like the Democrat’s favorite, Warren “Uncle Pennybags” Buffett? It is well documented elsewhere on this blog that Buffett has made much of his fortune off the backs of the poorest Americans, some of it doing the exact same thing for which Blanco is accused.

I know some dealers offer insurance coverage in case you don’t have any. Given Blanco’s clientele, perhaps after 17 years in business, he found that this was the best way for his customers to get insurance by building it into the payment.

Maybe this is all just a misunderstanding because Blanco simply forget to send his annual contribution to our pay-to-play Insurance Commissioner, Ricardo Lara?

Blanco did pay his protection money to the Liberals in 2018 but apparently not enough recently.

SACRAMENTO (CBS13) — More than six months after a deadly shooting in her backyard, the grandmother of Stephon Clark is finding some healing from a helping hand.

This renovation of love started with digging up some physical and emotional dirt. It was six months ago when Sequita Thompson’s South Sacramento backyard became a crime scene after the shooting death of her grandson.

Amid the turmoil of the last six months and pleas for progress on the deadly officer-involved shooting has been a call for healing.

Word got around that the home was in need of a facelift. That’s when local car dealership owner Paul Blanco stepped in. He Donated $25,000 to give Thompson and her family a fresh start.

Kind Act Aimed At Healing Home At Center Of Stephon Clark Shooting

Folks, I’m not necessarily defending Blanco, just trying to point-out that other businesses in California exploit the poor much more than Blanco is accused of doing and they get a pass. Have you seen the interest rates at the payroll advance company in your neighborhood? Most folks are paying about 30 percent interest on revolving charge accounts including appliance purchases, credit cards, and the like. As long as they have the word “bank” in their name, such confiscatory rates seem to be legal.

Talk about disproportionately hurting the poor, have you see gasoline prices in California versus the rest of the country. Gasoline prices here are about a dollar a gallon more than most other states thanks to our State government. On top of that, the Legislature then steals the money collected on fuel taxes and puts it in the General Fund instead of maintaining our roads. Becerra’s Party is doing this without fear of reprisal or repercussions.

It looks to me that Becerra has decided to “shakedown” Blanco for being good at what he does. As many lawsuits as Becerra has filed against Donald Trump, I’m surprised he has time for Blanco. It really makes me wonder what Blanco’s voter registration is. This suit is the type of political grandstanding I would expect from Becerra in a hotly contested election year.

The likely outcome of this is that Blanco will agree to a fine and a change in business practices.

Neither Becerra, nor Kamala Harris before him, had a reputation for upholding the law; only the parts that they personally agreed with. (Can you say Proposition 8?) It’s sad when the chief law enforcement officer of the State has one set of rules for his friends and another for everyone else. Such behavior nullifies the concept of equal protection under the law and makes the law arbitrary and a political weapon. In the old days this was called tyranny now it’s just standard operating procedure in this once Golden State.

There is nothing more iconic and universal in the United States than car ownership. Besides the Second Amendment, nothing symbolizes our freedom more. Which I guess is why the Left needs to attack it.

Yesterday, two news stories surfaced about Democrats wanting to outlaw cars and their private ownership. First up was Gavin Newsom responding to Donald Trump. Trump wants to strip California of its right to set its own standards for vehicle pollution. And then Presidential wannabe, Andrew Yang, commenting on cars and climate change.

Newsom on State’s Rights

Yesterday, Local television station KOVR posted an article from CNN called California Gov. Gavin Newsom: Trump Administration ‘Threatening’ Private Business

Folks, when I see a California Democrat accusing a businessman (Donald Trump) of threatening business, I know I’m about to take a journey of imagination through the Twilight Zone.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom slammed the Trump administration and Republicans for their “complete silence on state’s rights, but also free enterprise” in light of President Donald Trump’s decision to curtail state-set emissions standards.

“They’re calling private sector corporations to the mat and threatening them,” Newsom, a Democrat, told CNN’s Don Lemon on Wednesday night on “CNN Tonight.”

Folks, FYI, when you see Newsom talking about state’s rights then you know something is off. Newsom is using the State’s rights argument to flaunt Federal law. This is how California can have sanctuary cities, decriminalization of drugs, refuse to prosecute illegal immigrants that commit crimes, etc.

Then Newsom goes on to claim that he is for free enterprise? Really? OK Gavin, then why is free enterprise almost nonexistent in your state? Why are businesses, the middleclass, and retirees fleeing your state by the thousands every month?

Why is it OK for California to dictate to automakers what emission standards should be but the national government should butt-out?

What Newsom is calling “state’s rights” is newspeak for unchecked tyranny.

For decades, California has effectively forced the rest of the nation to adopt their auto emission standards because manufacturing is easier to one standard than too many.

California’s waiver under the Clean Air Act allowed it to set standards tighter than the federal government’s, which have been adopted by more than a dozen states and became the de-facto nationwide standard because automakers do not design different sets of vehicles to meet standards in different states.

Compared to the 1970’s, California has about triple the population and a fraction of the amount of air pollution. If you look at a cost/benefit graph of costs, we are at the point where any decrease in allowable emissions will cost a significant amount.

Folks, it’s one thing for California to want to have lower emissions from cars but California wants to outlaw car ownership altogether. California also aspires to be the first state in the nation to outlaw internal combustion engines for both cars and trucks. Trump is wanting to free the auto industry from the crazy standards that California and former President Obama agreed to for the next decade.

California has this strange idea that we are “green” and into “sustainability.” This of course is self-delusion and nonsense. Look at the collapse of our recycling program. We can’t send our crap to China anymore so it just goes from the recycle bin to the landfill. Which is worse, our current air quality or the long-term effects of all the stuff we bury that gets into the water table? If California was serious about the environment as they claim then we would recycle all our trash within our own borders. As previously stated on this blog, Elon Musk is better suited for this task than trying to run a car company.

Also, if Gavin cared about the private sector then why is there a bill on his desk (AB 1482) to confiscate all residential rental property and setup a statewide scheme of rent control? Why are Democrats clamoring to bifurcate Proposition 13 and jack-up the tax rate on businesses? Why do entry level jobs have to pay $15 per hour?

The article continues:

“Federalism be damned; state rights, 10th Amendment be damned; Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon be damned,” Newsom said Wednesday when asked why he thought a Republican administration was exerting its power over a state-level decision — traditionally a cornerstone of conservative policy.

Newsom pointed to Reagan’s efforts as the state’s governor in 1967 to address smog in Los Angeles, arguing that it led to the bipartisan Clean Air Act signed by Nixon, a fellow California Republican, in 1970.

Newsom raises a good question in the above quote but clearly he is shading the facts to make an argument he doesn’t really believe. On this side of the Civil War and the New Deal, what is the Tenth Amendment to a Liberal? Just that he acknowledges the validity of the Tenth Amendment might be viewed by some as an accomplishment. When Democrats are saying good things about Nixon and Reagan in the same sentence, it should make you wonder why. Newsom is cherry picking data points to make a prima facie argument.

The only real question that you need to have about the above quote is “What is the nature of the agreement that California can set stricter emission rules?” Is it a regulation or a law? If it’s a regulation then as head of the Executive Branch, Trump can change it, if it’s a law then only Congress can change it.

Contrary to the way Newsom framed his complaint, this is not the first time that California and the Federal government have butted heads over vehicle emissions.

Yang on Banning Car Ownership

Andrew Yang, one of the herd of Democrat Presidential Wannabees, had some really honest and shocking words yesterday on cars as well. In short outlaw them.

Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang said the United States may have to eliminate private car ownership to combat climate change during MSNBC’s climate forum at Georgetown University Thursday morning.

He told MSNBC host Ali Velshi that “we might not own our own cars” by 2050 to wean the United States economy off of fossil fuels, describing private car ownership as “really inefficient and bad for the environment.” Privately owned cars would be replaced by a “constant roving fleet of electric cars.”

“Well I mentioned before that we might not own our own cars. Our current car ownership and usage model is really inefficient and bad for the environment,” Yang said.

The plan also includes a zero emissions standard for all new cars by 2030 and hundreds of billions of dollars in investments in emission-free ground and air transportation.

Yang: Climate Change May Require Elimination of Car Ownership

Folks as documented elsewhere on our blog, at current rates, there is not enough production of raw materials during the next 50 years to convert Great Britain to an all-electric fleet of vehicles let alone the whole world. The rare metals produced mostly via mining in Africa, South America, and elsewhere just can’t support such a demand. The utopian dream of an all-electric fleet is nonsense. And as we have previously documented, mining capacity is just one of many reasons that this can’t be accomplished.

My other thought is this, isn’t large scale strip mining, slave labor, and filling the treasuries of depots and dictators somehow tainting the idea of zero emissions? I thought Liberals frowned on rich people living on the backs of the poor, but enough about how you iPhone was made.

Folks all this emission and electric vehicle talk is just a way to deny us the freedom of mobility that we have known all our lives.

Oh, if you haven’t hear, Yang’s stock is rising in the Democrat field.

Yang enjoyed a recent polling bump and is now in fourth place in the California primary ahead of formerly “top-tier” candidate Sen. Kamala Harris (D., Calif.).

2020’s election is about our way of life and direction of our country. Do you want California values or American values?