Jason Mirabito went from finance director at a luxury dealership group to whistleblower.
Critical Shifts:
-
F&I practices are facing increased scrutiny. Allegations surrounding payment packing, undisclosed add-ons, and pricing transparency reflect broader regulatory concerns affecting the entire retail automotive industry.
-
Large dealership groups face increased compliance pressure. As dealer networks grow, leadership oversight, training, documentation, and internal controls become critical safeguards against operational and reputational risk.
-
Whistleblower cases can expose dealership culture and processes. Litigation involving former employees often brings internal practices, compensation structures, and management decisions into public view.
-
Independent dealers can turn transparency into a competitive advantage. Clear pricing, straightforward F&I disclosures, and customer-first processes can help smaller operators build trust while the industry faces heightened regulatory attention.
_____________________________________________________________
When Jason Mirabito accepted what he believed was his dream job as finance director at Jaguar Land Rover of Sarasota and a support executive for several of Morgan Auto Group’s (MAG) premier Southwest Florida locations, he likely never imagined he would become a whistleblower in one of the industry's most closely watched legal battles.
For a veteran finance executive, stepping into a leadership role within Florida’s largest automotive empire, a corporate juggernaut operating 76 dealerships, should have represented the pinnacle of a career. Instead, according to a civil complaint filed in Hillsborough County Circuit Court, Mirabito says he found himself inside an intense operational pressure cooker where backend profit goals allegedly collided head-on with federal consumer protection laws.
In the retail automotive world, the Finance and Insurance (F&I) office has long been the highest-margin department in the dealership. According to Mirabito's lawsuit, however, the culture inside certain MAG dealerships was driven by a systematic "payment packing" scheme.
Payment packing refers to quoting a customer a higher monthly payment than necessary and later using the difference to include optional products or services, often without clearly disclosing the additional charges. The complaint alleges finance managers were expected to artificially inflate a customer's monthly payment quote early in negotiations. According to the filing, that additional "room" in the payment was then filled with high-profit, unrequested add-on products such as paint protection, fabric warranties, or identity theft monitoring, leaving customers to unknowingly finance products they had not knowingly agreed to purchase.
For Mirabito, according to the complaint, the breaking point was not simply the sales tactics themselves, but the alleged focus on vulnerable customers. The lawsuit quotes what it describes as an internal directive allegedly made by a manager regarding elderly buyers:
"We can't fight the elderly. Take what we can get and move on."
According to the complaint, Mirabito objected to the alleged practices and refused to participate in them. He was later terminated, which the lawsuit alleges was retaliation for raising concerns about the dealership's finance practices.
Mirabito's allegations have triggered an absolute firestorm along Florida's Gulf Coast. After the lawsuit was filed, the law firm representing him issued a formal consumer notice urging individuals who purchased vehicles from Morgan Auto Group dealerships to carefully review their purchase documents for potentially undisclosed add-on products or charges.
The allegations also arrive amid increasing federal scrutiny of dealership pricing and finance practices.
In 2022, the Federal Trade Commission sent warning letters to Morgan Auto Group and dozens of other dealership groups reminding them of federal requirements governing deceptive advertising, pricing, and financing practices. While the warning letters were not findings of wrongdoing, they put dealerships nationwide on notice that practices such as deceptive pricing, hidden fees, and undisclosed add-on products could violate federal law.
In the letter, Christopher Mufarrige, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, warned that deceptive dealership practices can harm not only consumers but also honest competitors by making it more difficult for law-abiding businesses to compete on equal footing.
Whether by coincidence or not, the regulatory issues identified by the FTC closely mirror many of the allegations contained in Mirabito's lawsuit.
The complaint—Mirabito v. Morgan Auto Group, LLC, & Sarasota L Automotive Management, LLC (Case No. 25-CA-006252)—was filed in Hillsborough County Circuit Court in Hillsborough County, Florida. Readers who would like to review the public court record can access the case docket here: Mirabito v. Morgan Auto Group, LLC (Case Docket).
Independent operators have long argued that competing against massive franchise groups becomes increasingly difficult when aggressive F&I practices create pricing advantages that transparent dealers choose not to pursue. When advertised prices are later offset through financing tactics or undisclosed add-on products, dealers who present customers with straightforward pricing can find themselves competing against numbers that were never truly comparable.
The FTC's warning letters were part of a nationwide initiative involving 97 major dealership groups designed to remind the retail automotive industry of its obligations under federal consumer protection laws. Among the practices highlighted by regulators were:
-
Conditioning advertised vehicle prices on dealer-arranged financing.
-
Adding products or services to contracts without clear consumer consent.
-
Hiding mandatory fees through deceptive advertising or bait-and-switch pricing.
For Larry Morgan and Morgan Auto Group leadership, the case represents more than a dispute with a former executive. As the allegations move through the court system, attention will likely focus on the company's compliance systems, management oversight, and the controls designed to govern F&I operations across a large dealership network.
Regardless of how Mirabito's lawsuit is ultimately resolved, the case highlights the growing collision between aggressive F&I profit strategies and heightened federal oversight. For independent dealers who have built their businesses on transparent pricing and customer trust, the message from regulators is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore: payment transparency is no longer simply a competitive advantage—it is rapidly becoming the industry's expected standard.
