| Volume 76 Number 4 |
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
The “statute of limitations” for a debt is generally four years after default. If you are sued after that, you can file a motion to have the suit dismissed. Click here for more.
Blackout: The Viacom & DirecTV Dispute
As early as midnight (this morning), DirecTV subscribers may no longer have access to MTV, Spike TV, Nickelodeon, and 23 other Viacom channels. The potential blackout is a result of a dispute between Viacom and DirecTV over the cost of the channels. According to reports, Viacom wants DirecTV to pay an additional 30% ($1 billion) for the rights to air its programming. Although DirecTV is willing to pay more, it feels that a $1 billion increase is simply too much. As a result, Viacom has begun a public campaign to encourage users to move to other providers. However, if DirecTV gives in, consumers are likely to pay significantly more for basic programming packages. Could the federal government get involved? To read about the dispute, Click here for more.
Automotive: Beware of MPG Claims
Whenever you purchase a vehicle, you'll likely notice a sticker on the car with the EPA rated fuel economy. Although dealers are required to distinguish between "highway" and "city" MPG, many consumers only focus on the "highway." Are either of the numbers trustworthy? The EPA uses a "treadmill" and mathematical adjustments to calculate fuel economy, which may not accurately reflect the true fuel economy for real road conditions. This is especially true when the EPA estimates a vehicle's "city" MPG rating. Before you buy your next car, take a moment to learn a little bit more about a vehicle's true fuel economy. Click here for more.
Your Money
Do you have too much debt? Click here for more.
For the Lawyers
Texas Supreme Court discusses standing and mootness in class actions. The Court held that not every named plaintiff must have standing at the time of suit as to every claim. As long as the plaintiffs, taken together, have standing as to each claim, the case can proceed. The Court also rejected the county’s argument that the suit was moot because all the named plaintiffs eventually obtained counsel and their criminal proceedings are complete. The Court reasoned that the claims were inherently transitory, and, thus, even though the named plaintiffs’ claims were now moot, that did not make the class action moot. Click here for more.