| Volume 76 Number 3 |
Subscribe to the Newsletter
Forward this news alert to your family and friends
Helpful Links
Texas Consumer Complaint Center
Credit Reports and Identity Theft
Your Guide to Small Claims Court
Contact Us
1-713-743-2168
The People’s Lawyer’s Tip of the Day
A “lifetime warranty” is usually for the lifetime of the company. Carefully check out any company offering a lifetime warranty before you purchase. Click here for more.
Security Loophole: Hackers Stealing BMWs
Do you own a BMW? A loophole in your car's security system allows hackers to easily access your car without activating the alarm or immobilizer. In fact, the whole process takes less than three minutes. Although the specific method of stealing the vehicle varies, most instances involve the usage of RF jammers to block the lock signal. Once inside, the thieves connect a device to the vehicle allowing them to generate a unique key fob digital ID. How does it work? Click here for more.
Virus to Cause Internet Blackout
A malicious program, called DNSChanger, will be activated on hundreds of thousands of computers today. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the maleware will redirect infected computers to spoofed sites with malicious advertisements. Although most of the sites have already been shut down, infected computers will still be unable to reach the Internet. If you're reading this, your computer is probably OK. However, if you have a friend complaining about an Internet outage, tell him or her to check in to the "DNSChanger" maleware. Click here for more.
Your Money
What is the fastest and cheapest way to pay down your debt? Click here for more.
For the Lawyers
Defendant has right to show amount in controversy. The Tenth Circuit held that a defendant in a consumer lawsuit should have had the opportunity to show that the amount in controversy was sufficient for removal under the Class Action Fairness Act. The district court remanded the consumer’s class action lawsuit to state court, concluding from the face of the complaint that the damages at issue did not meet the Act’s $5 million jurisdictional threshold. The court held that defendant should have had the opportunity to show by the preponderance of the evidence that the amount at stake satisfied the Act’s requirements. It noted that the circuits are divided over the proper standard in this context. Click here for more.