| Volume 103 Number 9 |
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 Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act requires full disclosure by sellers. If a seller intentionally withholds material information, he could be responsible for three times the consumer's damages, plus court costs and attorney's fees.
For more general information about the law, check out my website.
Click here for more.
Mother Wants Breaking Bad Toys Removed
Kids aren't the only ones who enjoy action figures. That's why Toys 'R Us sells toys for adults too. This week, the store and one series of toys came under fire after a mother found the store carrying Breaking Bad figures, like Jessie Pinkman and Walter White. The Florida mother started a petition, which has already received more than 2,000 signatures, asking the store to remove the toys.
Noting how children may mimic their action figures, she asked, "Do you want your child in an orange jumpsuit?"
Breaking Bad was a television show that aired on AMC, recommended for mature audiences. The show's main characters made and distributed methamphetamine.
Should Toys 'R Us have to remove the Breaking Bad toys from store shelves?
Click here for more.
Mortgage Lending Restrictions May Ease
Restrictions on mortgage lending may ease in the near future. Currently, most homebuyers must put down at least 5% to purchase a home. However, in a statement made at the Mortgage Bankers Association Annual Convention, the Federal Housing Finance Agency Director said an agreement between the agency and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could allow for homebuyers to get into a home with as little as 3% down.
Many of the current restrictions on buying a home are linked to the housing bubble a few years ago when lenders selling high-risk loans. Since then, there has been widespread criticism that the restrictions put in place were too harsh.
How soon could new rules be put in place? What would it mean for the housing market?
Click here for more.
Phase 2 - CVS' Plan to Eliminate Cigarettes
Recently, CVS became the first major pharmacy to stop selling tobacco products. However, the company's war on tobacco doesn't end there. According to reports, CVS' pharmacy benefits manager, Caremark, will charge consumers an extra $15 for filling prescriptions at a pharmacy that sells tobacco products. That means, if a consumer fills a prescription drug at virtually any major pharmacy (aside from CVS), the consumer will have to pay an additional $15 for each prescription.
Analysts expect that added cost could (1) move prescriptions away from other pharmacies and (2) ultimately push other pharmacies to get out of the tobacco business. Although the profits made from the sale of tobacco are significant, pharmacies make far more money selling prescription drugs.
Is it legal to charge consumers $15 extra for filling a prescription at a pharmacy that sells tobacco products?
Click here for more.
Your Money
What is the cost of raising a child?
Click here for more.
For the Lawyers
Agreement requiring before tribal panel is unenforceable.
The Eleventh Circuit held that a defendant could not compel arbitration of consumer claims before the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation in South Dakota.
The court found that arbitral forum was integral to the parties’ agreement, but unavailable, and therefore the dispute could remain in federal court. The loan agreement called for disputes to be “resolved by Arbitration, which shall be conducted by the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation by an authorized representative in accordance with its consumer dispute rules.”
The district court initially compelled arbitration and the consumer twice tried to demand arbitration. In response, the Tribe explained it did not conduct arbitration. Based on that evidence, the district court changed course and refused to compel arbitration. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed. It found the tribe was unavailable and because the agreement had many references to the Tribe the choice of that arbitral forum was “integral” to the arbitration agreement. The pervasive references to the Tribe also prevented the court from using the severability clause to “sever” the choice of forum and compel arbitration in some alternative forum.
Click here for more.