The case concerned the Vermont Attorney General's authority under the Consumer Fraud Act to sue assignees who held notes and mortgages obtained through deceptive home solicitation sales of swimming pools by Custom Pools, Inc. The trial court held that the Act did not permit such an action against Gramatan and Chemical Bank because they had not directly committed any unlawful acts. The Supreme Court reversed, concluding that the statutory language authorizing suits against persons "using" unlawful methods or practices encompassed the assignees' employment of the fraudulently procured documents. The court reasoned that the Act is remedial and must be liberally interpreted to effectuate its purpose of protecting consumers by imposing responsibility on financing parties positioned to oversee sellers.

business & regulatory