Manchester City Nissan FTC $4M junk-fees settlement (19 Aug 2026)

On 19 August 2026, the Federal Trade Commission and the State of Connecticut announced a $4 million settlement with Manchester, Conn., auto dealer Chase Nissan LLC (d/b/a Manchester City Nissan) and named owners/managers over alleged deceptive fees—including double-charging for “certified pre-owned” vehicles and inserting charges such as total loss protection into financing without consumer authorization. The FTC case page lists case status Pending and shows stipulated-order filings dated 19–20 August 2026. ShopperCove is not a party to the case, has not purchased from Manchester City Nissan, and has not contacted FTC or Connecticut AG staff for this article. Facts below come from the FTC’s 19 August 2026 press release, the case page, the stipulated order PDF, the January 2024 complaint PDF, and the amended complaint PDF, all read on 5 October 2026. Complaint theories are allegations unless a court has already adjudicated them. This is not legal advice.

There is no affiliate link in this article. This post has no affiliate links.

Who the FTC and Connecticut sued

From the case page and stipulated order:

• Corporate defendant: Chase Nissan LLC, d/b/a Manchester City Nissan
• Individual defendants named on the case caption / order definitions include Patrick Dibre, Refaat Soboh (aka Brian Soboh), Michael Hamadi, and Aiham Alkhatib (order definitions); the case caption also lists Matthew Chmielinski and Fred Mojica (aka Freddy Mojica), with earlier individual stipulated orders on the timeline (5 Sep 2025)
• Venue: U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut (Case No. 3:24-cv-00012 on the amended complaint / order)
• Commission vote approving the stipulated final order (press): 2–0

What the agencies alleged

From the 19 Aug 2026 press, the 4 Jan 2024 complaint press, and the complaint PDFs (allegations):

• Customers were frequently charged thousands in unlawful fees (press summary of dealer data)
• Some consumers were told they had to pay to “certify” used cars already advertised as certified pre-owned (double-charge theory)
• Charges such as total loss protection and other add-ons were frequently inserted into financing without knowledge/consent, or consumers were told add-ons were required
• Dealership allegedly misrepresented government / registration fees and other mandatory charges
• Theories under Section 5 of the FTC Act and Connecticut’s CUTPA

What the stipulated order requires (high level)

From the 19 Aug 2026 press and stipulated order PDF:

• Monetary judgment: $4,000,000 in favor of the State (Connecticut), jointly and severally, for consumer redress / restitution (order text allocates payment timing; counsel held funds for payment to the State)
• Misrepresentation bans, including whether vehicles are certified or include a limited manufacturer warranty
• Total price transparency: clearly and conspicuously disclose, as the most prominently displayed item, the maximum total price a consumer must pay for a vehicle, excluding only required government charges
• Express, informed consent required before charging consumers for any charge
• Press note: stipulated final orders have the force of law when approved and signed by the district court judge; case page status remains Pending as of sources read 5 Oct 2026

Who gets paid — and scam watch

• The press frames the $4 million for consumer redress (Connecticut AG: millions back to customers)
• As of 5 October 2026, do not treat cold DMs, “Manchester Nissan refund portal” lookalikes, or paid claim facilitators as official unless Connecticut AG / FTC redress instructions say so
• Report fraud at ReportFraud.ftc.gov

Why ShopperCove is covering this (not another processor case)

October FTC coverage already includes payment-processor matters (Nuvei, Humboldt), fuel cards (FleetCor/Corpay), subscriptions (Amazon Prime), Robinson-Patman (Southern Glazer’s), junk fees (Lens.com), and MLM/loyalty. Manchester City Nissan is an auto-dealer junk-fees / certified-pre-owned settlement—not a payment-processor facilitation case and not a CPSC recall. It also sits next to the FTC’s March 2026 warning letters to 97 auto dealership groups about advertised total price.

Bottom line

As of 5 October 2026, Chase Nissan LLC / Manchester City Nissan has a public FTC–Connecticut $4 million stipulated settlement package over alleged deceptive certification and unauthorized add-on / fee practices. Filed in D. Connecticut; FTC case status Pending; redress framed for consumers. Read the press release and case page. No affiliate.

Sources

• 01ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/ManchesterCityNissan-StipulatedOrder.pdf
• 02ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/001-2024.01.04-Complaint.pdf
• 03ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/ChaseNissan-AmendedComplaint.pdf

Related

• 01shoppercove.com/blog/fleetcor-corpay-ftc-100m-fuel-card-settlement-october-2026
• 02shoppercove.com/blog/amazon-prime-ftc-refund-200-october-2026
• 03shoppercove.com/blog/southern-glazers-ftc-robinson-patman-settlement-october-2026
• 04shoppercove.com/blog/lens-com-ftc-hidden-fees-lawsuit-october-2026
• 05shoppercove.com/blog/amway-ftc-225m-mlm-settlement-october-2026
• 06shoppercove.com/blog/corteva-ftc-pesticide-loyalty-settlement-october-2026
• 07shoppercove.com/blog/ftc-impersonation-rule-anpr-platforms-ads-september-2026
• 08shoppercove.com/blog/amazon-ftc-secret-ad-surcharge-lawsuit-august-2026