Opinion
February 27, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Schenectady County.
Petitioner represented on its invoice that it had replaced a certain part with a new part when in fact the part was not new. Furthermore, other parts that were replaced later needed corrective repairs causing additional expense to the car's owner. Under these circumstances and on the basis of the record before us, there is substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt as to each of the violations including the conclusion that petitioner engaged in fraudulent and deceptive practices in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 398-e (1) (g) (see, Matter of Lyon Coram Auto Body v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 147 A.D.2d 564) and that there was a willful failure to provide quality repairs in violation of 15 NYCRR 82.5 (g) (see, Matter of Corniola v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 175 A.D.2d 283). In addition, the fines and penalties imposed do not constitute a disproportionate sanction under the circumstances (see, Matter of Eves v. Passidomo, 121 A.D.2d 538). Petitioner's remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as being without merit.
Weiss, P.J., Levine, Mercure, Mahoney and Casey, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.