The People's Lawyer Consumer News Alert
Center for Consumer Law
  Volume 109 Number 4

Subscribe to the Newsletter
Forward this news alert to your family and friends

Helpful Links

Texas Consumer Complaint Center

Your Rights as a Tenant

Credit Reports and Identity Theft

Your Guide to Small Claims Court

Common Q & A’s

Scam Alert

Back Issues

Contact Us

http://www.peopleslawyer.net

1-713-743-2168

Unsubscribe

The People’s Lawyer’s Tip of the Day

When friends or family need help, it is not uncommon for people with better credit to co-sign loans for them. What many people don't fully understand is that if the primary borrower doesn't make the payments, it can affect the co-signer's credit report. Further, the lender can collect everything owed from the co-signer, even in situations such as car loans where the co-signer may not have title to or possession of the vehicle. The bottom line is you shouldn't co-sign a loan unless you are prepared to assume full responsibility for the debt. Click here for more.


Waiting for the new Apple Watch

The introduction of the iPhone changed the way that many people use phones. Can Apple do the same thing with watches? Today is the first day that Apple is accepting pre-orders for the new Apple Watch and it already appears to be a hit. Wait times on shipments are already extending into the Summer.
 Click here for more.


Your Money

This is your last weekend to work on those taxes unless you plan to seek an extension. Check out this link for last minute tax filing tips. Click here for more.


For the Lawyers

Board of Dental Examiners concerted action to exclude non-dentists from the market for teeth whitening services constituted an anticompetitive and unfair method of competition under the Federal Trade Commission Act. The United States Supreme Court held the Board could not assert state-action immunity and upheld the FTC’s decision that the action as anti-competitive. The Court noted that because a controlling number of the Board’s decision-makers are active market participants in the occupation being regulated, the Board could invoke immunity only if the challenged restraint was clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed as state policy, actively supervised by the state. That requirement was not met. N.C. Bd. of Dental Exam'rs v. Fed. Trade Comm'n (U.S.S.C. 2015) Click here for more.

 

To stop receiving email news alerts from the Center for Consumer Law, please click here.