Unable To Overcome Stain Of Breaking Into Mentally Disabled Customer's Home And Stealing $70,000, Dealership Closes

Remember that Seattle used car dealership that broke into a mentally disabled customer’s house and stole $70,000, and turned out to have a history of on the job drug-use, shady tactics, and abusing mentally handicapped customers? Seems the new owners were never able to overcome those little besmirches on its good name and the dealerships are closing. Huling Bros, consider this your auto de fe.

Dealerships closing after Huling Bros. scandal [Seattle Times]
(Photo: Thomas James Hurst)


Edit Your Comment

  1. FightOnTrojans says:

    So… let me get this straight: One sleazy car dealer buys a group of car dealerships from another sleazy car dealer, only to discover that he was scammed? Umm… and he is surprised why? Guess there’s no more honor amongst thieves, eh?

  2. Chicago7 says:

    What is this, an Edgar Allen Poe writing contest?

    Hahahaha! Good job.

  3. riggs says:

    If I owned a car dealership anywhere close to there, I think I would do some rebranding with the following slogan…

    “Finally, a car dealership that WON’T break into your house and steal your vehicle!”

  4. hypnotik_jello says:

    Well, the headline is incorrect/misleading, the current ownership of the dealership didn’t break into the customer’s home – it was the prior owner.

  5. rjhiggins says:

    Ben, do you have permission from The Seattle Times to use their photo on your site?

    Yes, you gave a credit, but that doesn’t obviate the need to get permission.

    Yes, this is a pet peeve of mine. I don’t understand the mindset that because it’s on the Web it’s OK to copy and paste it into your own site.

    Commenters, please read up on the concept before you start screaming “fair use.”

  6. cde says:

    @rjhiggins: Fair use. especially due to the consideration of NEWS CASTING.

  7. faust1200 says:

    @rjhiggins: WTF?

  8. Karl says:

    New developments in this story: [seattletimes.nwsource.com]

    Basically, the current owners are suing the former owners for failing to disclose the scandal prior to the sale. The former owners are ALSO suing the current owners to evict them for failure to pay rent for the past few months (the former owners still own the land).

  9. Buran says:

    @rjhiggins: Fair Use.

  10. FightOnTrojans says:

    You left out this part: “We’ll just bend you over.”

  11. PinkBox says:

    Ew.. sleazy dealerships. I remember going to one place that tried to talk me into financing a car for almost 50%! Insane! I walked out and when I got to my car (which was a fair walk away), this creep suddenly runs up trying to offer me a better deal! HA!

    I got a much better loan online at only 8% and took my business elsewhere. :P Amazing that people actually fall for that kind of thing.

  12. MikeHerbst says:

    Can’t believe no one has posted this:

    “Auto de fe? What’s an auto de fe?”

  13. rjhiggins says:

    @faust1200: Guess I’d ask you the same question, if that’s all you have to say.

  14. ThinkerToys says:

    @MikeHerbst: “It’s what you oughtn’t do but you do anyway!”

  15. IndyJaws says:

    Props on the use of Auto de fe!

  16. EmmK says:

    That dealer has been scummy for a long time. In 1999, they told me that a vehicle with a particular set of options was coming on to the lot in the next week, so I bought it (with cash). Three weeks later, the vehicle still hadn’t been delivered, and I was calling them every day. Finally, they said the vehicle was in. Yay!

    Except, when I picked it up, it WASN’T the vehicle I had paperwork for, per the VIN. It was a totally different vehicle that they thought I’d be happy to drive off the lot since it was the same make, model, and color. Because, you see, I’m a woman, so what else could possibly matter? Well, hell yes, it all mattered. It mattered a great deal to me and to General Motors, since I was buying through the employee purchase program (my dad worked for GM). GM didn’t take kindly to the bait-and-switch attempt. There was a LOT of yelling. I did end up keeping the vehicle that was delivered, at a significant loss to the dealership, and they had to install the missing options on their dime. By the time it was all done, I was not popular in West Seattle.

    Ever since then, we’ve referred to that place as Hurling Brothers and warned off everyone we could. So when this story broke, the schadenfreude, it was delicious.

  17. marsneedsrabbits says:

    Let me add this to my Day Planner, so I don’t forget: “Feel sorry for car dealership which has a history of scamming the mentally handicapped – even though the current owners didn’t actually personally cheat the weak and downtrodden”.
    Okay, done and done. I’ll get to it right after I finish putting the last few feathers on my pig.
    It warms my heart to know that consumers are holding companies to community standards. The bricks through the windows were a bit much, but refusing to shop and buy at a business which preys on the weakest among us is just dandy.

  18. bdgbill says:

    Umm…What the hell are “mentally handicapped” people doing buying cars in the first place?

    Even if you assume that someone who can be described as “mentally handicapped” may be able to safely operate a car, these people probably should not be buying cars without assistance.