The People's Lawyer Consumer News Alert
Center for Consumer Law
  Volume 130 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

We all know it’s important to check our credit reports regularly, but have you ever heard of a CLUE report? Your CLUE report is just as important in determining your insurance rates, but unfortunately, most consumers don’t even know it exists. Take advantage of the law and get a free report every year.  Click here for more.


Congress Passes Anti-Ticket Bot Law

On Wednesday Congress passed the Better Online Ticket Sales Act, a bill outlawing bots, or computer programs that let users buy up the best tickets and resell them at inflated prices. It would make it illegal to evade the security measures of ticketing websites and would give enforcement authority to the Federal Trade Commission. It will now go to the White House for President Obama’s signature. Click here for more.


Your Money

When we think of refinancing we likely think about it in terms of a mortgage, but refinancing student loans may also be a good option for borrowers. Some borrowers who have excellent credit may be able to refinance their existing private student loans with a new private loan at a lower rate. However there are some important things to consider. The monthly payment on your new loan might be lower, but the interest rate could be higher. Additionally, your new refinanced loan may not be considered a student loan for the purposes of the student loan interest tax deduction. Click here for more.


For the Lawyers

No enforceable arbitration agreement when six different arbitration agreements exist. The parties had six agreements that governed their business relationship. Each agreement had an arbitration agreement. But, those arbitration agreements did not provide for the same set of rules to govern the arbitration, or the same method of choosing an arbitrator, or the same notice period before arbitration, or the same opportunity to recover attorneys’ fees. The Tenth Circuit noted that “whether parties can be compelled to arbitrate given conflicting arbitration provisions” was a novel question under Colorado law, but that New Jersey, Florida, and California courts had already concluded that “irreconcilable” differences across arbitration provisions made them unenforceable. The court reasoned that the courts that have granted motions to compel in similar circumstances found “the contracts themselves provided the solution,” via a merger clause. Because the six agreements at issue did not allow one to override the others, the court found it could not “arbitrarily pick one to enforce because doing so could violate the other five.” Therefore, it concluded “there was no meeting of the minds” on arbitration, and affirmed the district court’s decision to not compel arbitration. Ragab v. Howard (10th Cir. 2016) Click here for more.

 

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