LoJack Canada Customers Launch Class Action Lawsuit To Get Their Money Back

Have you or someone you know been a LoJack Canada Enterprises tracking system customer? Quebec consumers are now suing the company for discontinuing its tracking services in Canada as of June 30, 2020, in this new LoJack vehicle tracking class action lawsuit.

Class Members include anyone who is domiciled or has been domiciled in Quebec, and has not been reimbursed for advances paid to LoJack in excess of the services actually provided following the termination of their fixed-term service contract to be performed successively by LoJack on June 30, 2020.

LoJack Customers Launch Class Action For Discontinued Tracking Services

In 2014, the plaintiff signed a service contract with LoJack Canada Enterprises Inc. The contract was for a specified period and was to be executed successively, in that the defendant undertook to provide vehicle “LoJack Alert” tracking services for a period of seven years.

LoJack Canada Enterprises Inc. markets and distributes the Boomerang, using the Company’s patented technology. LoJack’s tracking device is a cellular-based asset tracking system, capable of locating stolen automobiles, heavy equipment, and valuable objects utilizing the cellular systems of major regional telecommunications companies.

On August 13, 2014, the plaintiff had the LoJack tracking device installed in his vehicle, at the hefty cost of $918.65 with taxes.

According to the LoJack vehicle tracking class action lawsuit Canada, the vehicle tracking service was scheduled to expire on August 12, 2021.

Nevertheless, on May 25, 2020, LoJack Canada Enterprises advised its customers that it would no longer provide vehicle tracking services in Canada as of June 30, 2020.

LoJack Canada Enterprises’ Customers Want Their Money Back

Like many other LoJack customers, the plaintiff wants his money back, specifically, the $153.11, with interest, that he overpaid the company for the remainder of the contract, notes the LoJack vehicle tracking class action lawsuit.

According to the LoJack vehicle tracking class action lawsuit, LoJack is liable under Quebec’s consumer protection law for not reimbursing customers specified amounts, in proportion to the months in the future for which LoJack will not perform its contractual obligations.

LoJack Vehicle Tracking Class Action Lawsuit Claims Consumer Protection Law Breach

Article 11.3 of the Quebec Consumer Protection Act specifies that merchants may not unilaterally cancel a fixed-term service contract involving sequential performance by the merchant, except for “serious reason” or are required to refund the consumer the advances paid for the services, which the plaintiff argues do not apply to this case or were not done.

Additionally the Consumer Protection Act requires a merchant who intends to cancel an indeterminate-term service contract involving sequential performance to notify the consumer in writing at least 60 days before the date of cancellation.

According to the LoJack vehicle tracking class action lawsuit, the defendant did not cite any serious reason for terminating the contract and did not reimburse the plaintiff the advances it received in excess of the services provided, in conformity with consumer protection law.

Therefore, the LoJack vehicle tracking class action lawsuit is seeking the reimbursement of money paid in excess to the company, which amount to $153.11, with interest at the legal rate to the lead plaintiff.

The class action lawsuit also seeks the reimbursement of each Class Members an amount, yet to be determined, in proportion to the months remaining in the contract of service for which the defendant will not perform its contractual obligations, with interest.

Know Your Consumer Rights!

In Quebec, The Consumer Protection Act protects consumers in several ways. It has general rules that apply to merchants providing products and services to consumers, and special rules for certain types of products and services.

A contract for services, such as the LoJack vehicle tracking service contract, is a contract by which a provider of services agrees to provide a service, as opposed to an object, to a consumer in exchange for a payment.

Importantly, the general rule in Quebec is that the provider of services must respect certain rules when it comes to ending the contract, namely:

• The provider must have a serious reason to terminate the contract

Some examples of serious reasons allowing a provider of services to end the contract include, among others, a client’s refusal to cooperate with the provider, or where the client is abusive, disagreeable or impolite.

• The provider cannot end the contract at a time that causes the client damage.

The supplier of the service must do whatever is necessary to ensure that the client does not suffer any immediate damage due to the stopping of the service.

What do you think about the LoJack vehicle tracking class action lawsuit? Tell us what you think in the comments below!

Class Members are represented by Bouchard + Avocats Inc.

The LoJack Vehicle Tracking Class Action Lawsuit is Jacques Daniel v. Lojack Canada Enterprises ULC, Case No. 200-06-000251-200, in the Superior Court of Québec, District of Québec, Canada.