The showrooms of Morgan Auto Group appear to be polished and precise at first glance. The vehicles shine. It’s fresh coffee. The smoothness of the service is outstanding. However, a careful examination, now enlarged by court documents, points to something very different—something less organized, messier.
The shine has begun to fade due to a string of lawsuits filed in 2025 and early 2026. Anthony Mirabito, a former finance manager turned whistleblower, made one of the most serious claims, alleging a pervasive pattern of dishonest financial practices at many MAG dealerships. He asserts that the business routinely “packed” payments, covertly combining superfluous items into loans, frequently without the full knowledge of the borrowers. It’s possible that several of such services, such as windshield and surface protection, were never offered at all.
Key Facts: Morgan Auto Group Lawsuit (2025–2026)
| Category | Details |
|---|---|
| Company Name | Morgan Auto Group (MAG) |
| Location | Florida-based, with multiple dealerships across the state |
| Whistleblower | Anthony Mirabito, former finance director |
| Main Allegations | Payment packing, unprovided vehicle services, accounting manipulation |
| Related Lawsuits | Unpaid commissions, TCPA class actions |
| Company’s Position | CEO Brett Morgan denies claims, pledges to defend firm’s integrity |
| Consumer Advice | Check finance contracts for GAP, VSC, AutoPayPlus, Permaplate charges |
| Key Dealerships Involved | Audi Tampa, BMW Sarasota, Jaguar Land Rover Sarasota, Honda Sarasota |
It’s not a little dealership that is making mistakes. With a high volume strategy that combines luxury and familiarity, MAG operates at scale, spanning throughout Florida. Mirabito’s charges are especially concerning because of their scale. He claims that thousands of cars were sold with fictitious charges hidden in financing documents, such as “Permaplate,” “Crystal Fusion,” and “factory wrap VSC.” They might appear authentic on paper. They apparently only existed in reality to increase margins.
Internal conversations contain even more disturbing language. A manager allegedly told employees, “We can’t fight the elderly,” in one of the messages referenced in the lawsuit. We take what we can and move on to the remaining 98%. I was interrupted in the middle of a sentence. It was striking because it mirrored the kind of casual nastiness that is frequently concealed under corporate language, not because it was unexpected.
According to the whistleblower report, a management made repeated attempts to raise concerns. According to Mirabito, he presented the Morgan Auto Group’s executives with accounting anomalies and dubious practices, such as charges that weren’t in line with the services provided. He claims he was fired with little justification in August 2024 after advocating for a store-wide audit of chargebacks. His legal team claimed that the termination was an act of retribution.
There are other suits circling MAG except this one. In December 2025, Gabriel Moncada, another former employee, filed a separate claim alleging that the business had falsified financial documents in order to evade paying his commissions, which were purportedly up to $100,000. The complaint claims that the dealership significantly decreased Moncada’s earned salary by manipulating accounting line items. It’s a well-known business ploy disguised as financial software.
In addition to staff conflicts, MAG is facing legal action for TCPA (Telephone Consumer Protection Act) violations. The corporation is accused in a number of class-action lawsuits of contacting people who had put their numbers on federal Do Not Call lists by employing automated dialing systems. At first look, these could appear to be minor irritations. However, taken as a whole, they show a tendency to disregard moral and legal limits.
The business hasn’t kept quiet. In a statement, CEO Brett Morgan described the accusations as untrue and deceptive and expressed his belief that MAG would “set the record straight.” If comprehensible, the response is predictable. However, it can seem a little hollow to people who are currently going through their car documents and looking for mysterious “GAP+” or “AutoPayPlus” expenses.
A broader discussion over dealership finance models—especially those that rely significantly on upselling protection plans and warranties—is beginning to take shape. These extras are frequently presented as advantageous, and in certain situations, they actually are. However, they turn into systemic fraud when they are promised without complete information or, worse, when they are never delivered.
Mirabito’s attorneys have released public advice advising new purchasers at MAG dealerships to thoroughly examine their purchase agreements. In particular, they advise looking for line items marked with coverage types such as “Equity Shield,” “Factory Wrap,” or extended service agreements. The complaint claims that many of these might never have been added to cars. If that’s the case, it’s not just unethical; it’s against the law.
MAG operates a variety of dealerships, such as Jaguar Land Rover of Sarasota, BMW Sarasota, and Audi Tampa. There is a certain level of trust and sophistication associated with each of these. These stores aren’t cheap and nasty. They aim to attract affluent consumers who frequently believe that luxury brands are associated with more environmentally friendly operations.
However, that illusion is dissolving as this lawsuit cycle intensifies. Managers, front-line employees, and finance directors are all being drawn into a discussion about the corporate culture that MAG has developed over the last ten years, rather than legalese.
Stories like these have a subtle tension between the more brittle mechanisms that underlie the professional images that businesses attempt to create. Trust begins to erode in subtle but permanent ways when commissions are allegedly denied through spreadsheet manipulation and customers are billed for services that were never rendered.
It’s unclear if MAG’s defense will succeed. The legal process is a slow one. Patience is necessary in courtrooms. However, the damage to one’s reputation has already started to lessen as cases make their way through the system. Consumers are asking questions. Workers are talking. Attorneys are circling.
If there is a benefit to this examination, it might be that consumers are become more knowledgeable. In a process that has historically tended toward complexity, consumers can regain some agency by closely examining financing documentation, particularly for hidden line items. When transparency is ultimately pushed into the open, it has a very powerful effect.
