The People's Lawyer Consumer News Alert
Center for Consumer Law
  Volume 126 Number 5

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

Students take note. Consumers under age 21 who can't prove an independent means of income or provide the signature of a co-signer aged 21 or older will not be approved for a credit card. In addition, colleges are prohibited from offering students gifts as inducements to apply for credit. The schools must also disclose their financial relationships with credit card issuers. Click here for more.


FTC Sues 1-800 Contacts for Online Advertising

The Federal Trade Commission alleges that 1-800 Contacts entered into agreements with other online contact lens retailers to prevent direct competition. In the agreements the retailers would not advertise to consumers who searched online for 1-800 Contacts. In return, 1-800 Contacts agreed not to advertise to customers who searched for its rivals online. The FTC filed suit in its own administrative court on Monday.  Click here for more.


Your Money

If you have student loans and are looking to consolidate, there are benefits and drawbacks to know first. When you consolidate loans you will have a new interest rate that is the weighted average of your previous rates. You won't get a lower interest rate. Make sure to review the numbers and multiple scenarios before you decide to consolidate. You can also consider other strategic tactics to repayment, such as paying off the smallest balance first.  Click here for more.


For the Lawyers

There is no assent to a mandatory arbitration clause if there is no "reasonably conspicous notice" of the terms and conditions of the agreement. Plaintiff brought suit against Kalanick and Uber for orchestrating and participating in an antitrust conspiracy arising from an algorithm Uber uses to set ride prices. Uber filed a motion to compel arbitration with the court. Uber argued that Plaintiff was required to arbitrate his claims pursuant to a contract formed when he signed up to use Uber. Applying California law, the New York District Court rejected the arbitration clause, because there was no adequate assent to a license agreement by the plaintiff containing a mandatory arbitration clause. Meyer v. Kalanick & Uber (S.D. NY 2016). Click here for more.

 

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