| Volume 109 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
Don't forget to register for the People's Law School scheduled for this Saturday, April 4!Click here for more.
The People’s Lawyer’s Tip of the Day
Many offers for a "free" copy of your credit report are actually for subscriptions to paid services. Below is the link to the only source for the free credit reports the law allows. You are entitled to one free report from each agency each year. To prevent identity theft and protect your credit, a good practice is to get a free credit report from one agency, and rotate requests to each of the three credit reporting agencies over the course of a year. For example, today you could order the Experian report, then in four months you could get the Trans Union report, and then four months after that you could get the Equifax report. You should repeat this cycle every year, and it may be helpful to make a note on your calendar every four months as a reminder.
Click here for more.
GNC to Test Supplements it Sells
As a result of a settlement with the New York Attorney General, GNC has agreed to test the nutritional supplements it offers for sale. GNC has agreed to tests for the authenticity and purity of the products which go well beyond what is currently required by the FDA. Click here for more.
Your Money
April 15 is nearing! Here are five tips to help you file your tax return on time. Click here for more.
For the Lawyers
Individual differences in treatment or potential damages with respect to the various vehicle contracts does not defeat commonality in putative class action. The Supreme Court or North Dakota reversed and remanded the district court's order denying certification of a usury class action. Among other things, the court noted, “Each putative plaintiff signed the same standard form contract, albeit with varying price terms written in for each respective vehicle. The district court noted the potential class members were not all charged the same usurious rates or excessive fees or subject to varying inaccurate or incomplete disclosures. However, these variations speak more to the issue of damages, and it is well established that differences in the degree of injury or damages will not bar a finding of commonality.” Baker v. Autos, Inc., Supreme Court of North Dakota, 2015. Click here for more.