The People's Lawyer Consumer News Alert | |||
|
|||
Subscribe to the Newsletter 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 DayMost negative information stays on your credit report for seven years, a bankruptcy for ten. The time is not extended, however, when the debt is sold or assigned to a new person such as a debt collector. If a debt collector tries to "re-age" a debt, tell the credit bureau and demand they correct the incorrect information. 9 Retailers With the Worst ServiceWhile overall customer service satisfaction is at an all-time high, several traditional retailers are still lagging behind. In a recent study of American Customer Satisfaction Index (ASCI) scores, 24/7 Wall St. identified the nine worst retailers for customer service. Man Convicted of Murder ExoneratedAfter spending more than eleven years in prison for murder, an Ohio man was released in 2011 after new DNA evidence and police officer misconduct was revealed. On Friday, David Ayers was awarded $13.2 million dollars for pain and suffering, effectively ending a fourteen year legal battle. Google Nears $7M Settlement Over Wi-Fi NabIn 2010, Google Street View mapping cars inadvertently nabbed passwords and personal information from nearby wireless networks across thirty countries. According to reports, a group of thirty states in the United States, led by the Connecticut Attorney General, are nearing a $7 million settlement to be shared among the participating states. Bumble Bee Recalls 51K Cases of TunaBe careful with that tuna! According to Bumble Bee, its 5oz canned tuna products could become contaminated and spoil due to a problem with the cans' seals. As a result, the company has issued a recall for 51,000 cases of tuna. Each case contains 24 to 48 cans of tuna. Your MoneyPlanning to buy a new or used car? How much will it cost you to finance the deal?
For the LawyersArbitration clause in debt adjuster’s agreement is unenforceable. The Washington Supreme Court held that a debt adjuster could not enforce a binding arbitration clause in its service contract when sued by a customer for violating state consumer protection law. The court concluded that the clause was unconscionable based on a “loser pays” provision, a 30-day time limit for requesting arbitration, and a provision designating Orange County, Calif. as the sole venue for arbitration. The court also found that its decision was consistent with the decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, 131 S. Ct. 1740) and not preempted by the FAA. In discussing why there was no preemption, the court explained that the defendant’s arbitration clause “contained numerous unconscionable provisions based on the specific facts at issue in the current case. Concepcion provides no basis for preempting our relevant case law nor does it require the enforcement of [the defendant’s] arbitration clause.”
|
||
To stop receiving email news alerts from the Center for Consumer Law, please click here. |