Ford Sues L.a. Lemon Law Firm Alleging 'utter Fabrications' Inflated Fees By 7,000%

Ford Motor Co. is suing a salient Los Angeles citrus rule patient for allegedly inflating their fees by arsenic overmuch arsenic 7,000%, nan company’s latest effort to ace down connected California attorneys who it says are exploiting nan state’s unsocial rule to protect consumers from defective cars.

Quill & Arrow, a individual wounded patient that represents drivers suing complete alleged “lemons” — vehicles pinch significant, unfixable manufacturing flaws — has agelong been a thorn successful nan broadside of Ford. Since 2021, Ford said its has paid them much than $100 million, astir half successful lawyer fees.

That profit, Ford alleges successful a national suit revenge Thursday, came from billing records that were “utter fabrications.”

Quill & Arrow utilized an overseas “army” of low-paid, non-lawyers to thief record thousands of citrus lawsuits and past pretended nan activity was done by California attorneys, who billed arsenic overmuch arsenic $950 per hour, Ford alleged successful its complaint.

Ford claims that nan bulk of nan activity was really done by non-lawyers successful countries specified arsenic Mexico and nan Philippines, who sewage paid arsenic small arsenic $13 per hour.

Quill & Arrow was founded successful 2019 by attorneys Kevin Jacobson and Jonathan Shirian, according to nan firm’s website, which touts recovering $500 cardinal successful citrus rule payouts. The partners called Ford’s suit “nothing much than an effort to soundlessness firms who would situation to clasp them responsible and activity justness for consumers.”

“It grossly mischaracterizes nan facts and nan declare that Quill & Arrow created fabricated lawyer billing records is absurd,” nan patient said successful a statement.

California’s citrus law, considered 1 of nan strongest user protections successful nan nation, allows drivers to get a refund aliases replacement of a surgery car if nan shaper can’t hole it. If nan driver is not satisfied, they tin sue.

If nan driver wins, nan rule allows attorneys to cod their fees from nan car shaper — alternatively than return a percent of nan client’s winnings, arsenic is communal successful individual wounded cases. This interest structure, Ford argues, has turned nan rule into a bonanza for plaintiff attorneys. The longer nan lawsuit drags on, nan institution argues, nan much nan rule patient tin reap successful profit.

Ford alleges nan patient intentionally slowed down its clients’ cases to thrust up their billable hours, instructing drivers not to pass pinch Ford and pushing them toward filing a lawsuit.

“California’s Lemon Laws are successful request of betterment and nan courts request to workout much oversight, fixed nan fraud we proceed to expose,” said Doug Lampe, counsel astatine Ford, successful a statement. The rule is “being blatantly abused by nan citrus rule plaintiffs lawyers, nan barroom is not policing its ain and nan courts request to show interest awards pinch acold much skepticism and scrutiny.”

The cases, he said, “have go astir nan lawyers for nan lawyers.”

Lemon rule cases person exploded successful California successful nan past decade from astir 4,500 cases successful 2015 to astir 30,000 successful 2024, according to an analysis from nan Assembly Judiciary. These cases, officials warned, “are poised to cripple nan entirety of California’s civilian justness system.”

In 2024, nan legislature tightened nan state’s citrus law, requiring further steps earlier a driver could sue. The measure seems to person put small dent successful nan caseload: Lemon lawsuits surged to grounds levels nan pursuing year.

Ford’s suit marks nan 2nd effort by 1 of America’s largest car manufacturers to spell connected nan discourtesy against citrus rule attorneys successful Southern California.

Ford sued a cohort of section citrus rule firms successful May 2025, accusing attorneys of collecting astatine slightest $100 cardinal successful “phantom ineligible fees” by billing for hours they ne'er worked. The case, which was brought nether nan Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, aliases RICO, alleged lawyers worked together to record a flurry of fraudulent cases pinch billable hours that defied logic.

A partner astatine Knight Law Group, an L.A.-based citrus rule firm, erstwhile billed an “ostensibly heroic but physically impossible” 57.5-hour workday, Ford alleged.

Knight Law Group denied inflating their billing, calling nan suit a “thinly cloaked effort to soundlessness firms who would situation to clasp them responsible and activity justness for consumers.”

A judge threw retired nan suit successful March connected nan grounds that lawyers were protected nether nan First Amendment from being sued for nan contented of their lawsuits unless nan lawsuit was proven fraudulent. Ford says it plans to appeal.

The time aft nan lawsuit against Knight Law Group was served, Ford alleged, Quill dedicated a squad to “scrubbing” their ain timesheets of “impossible clip entries.”