| Volume 123 Number 3 |
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
Watch out for scams that involve a site that says it pre-screens people for big employers by scheduling you for an “interview” that is really a call designed to get you to enroll in specific colleges or career training programs. Click here for more.
Aeropostale Files for Bankruptcy
Yet another retailer has cracked under the weight of teen’s changing shopping habits. Aeropostale filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on Wednesday, seeking approval to immediately close 154 of its more than 800 stores. The news didn’t come as much of a surprise on Wall Street: Sales have been in a long-term slide at the troubled retailer, and the company had said back in March that it was “exploring strategic alternatives,” including finding a buyer. Click here for more.
Your Money
Under the Labor Department’s new conflict-of-interest rule, which goes into effect next April, brokers are required to discuss with their clients what meets their best interests: keeping assets in a commission-based account or switching to a fee-based account, where the typical fee is 1% of assets under management or AUM. Click on the link for advice from experts. Click here for more.
For the Lawyers
Debt buyers are strictly liable for the FDCPA violations of their attorneys and other vendors. In this case, a debt buyer hired a law firm to collect on accounts where the debt buyer had already obtained a judgment. The initial demand letters sent out by the law firm failed to clearly identify the current creditor or owner of the debt, as required by 15 U.S.C. §1692g(a)(2). Consumers then filed suit against both the law firm and the debt buyer under the FDCPA and alleged that the debt buyer was vicariously liable for the acts of its lawyers. The Seventh Circuit agreed, holding that because the debt buyer was itself a debt collector subject to the FDCPA, it is responsible for FDCPA violations committed by others acting on its behalf. In its opinion, the Court expressly rejects any argument requiring a show of control by the debt collector over the specific activity alleged to violate the FDCPA. Janetos v. Fulton Friedman & Gullace, LLP, No. 15-1859 (7th Cir. Apr. 7, 2016) Click here for more.