| Volume 134 Number 1 |
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
For purposes of inheritance, without a will adopted children and those naturally born are treated the same, but a stepchild is not. If you want a stepchild to inherit property you must have a will. Click here for more.
Amazon Refunding up to $70 Million for Kids’ In-App Purchases
For any parent whose kid racked up a big bill making in-app purchases on Amazon, a refund may be on the way. The FTC and internet retailing giant Amazon agreed Tuesday to set aside their appeals in a case over this very issue and set the stage for a potential $70 million in refunds for purchases made from November 2011 to May 2016. "This case demonstrates what should be a bedrock principle for all companies — you must get customers' consent before you charge them," said Thomas B. Pahl, acting director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection in a press release. "Consumers affected by Amazon's practices can now be compensated for charges they didn't expect or authorize."
Click here for more.
Your Money
Washington’s new darling: health savings accounts. As lawmakers continue to debate how to repeal Obamacare, investors would be remiss to ignore the one thing most Republicans can agree on about health care: health savings accounts. HSAs, introduced in 2003, offer you triple tax advantages: First, contributions are tax-deductible. Second, those contributions can be invested and grow tax-free. Third, withdrawals aren't taxed as long as you use them for qualified medical expenses, such as doctor's visits, prescription drugs and dental care. Click here for more.
For the Lawyers
Arbitration agreement imposed over the phone not enforceable. A putative class of New Jersey inmates sued and the Defendant moved to compel individual arbitration. The class representative who created her account through the website and actively clicked a button accepting the terms and services was dismissed. But, the Third Circuit ruled differently with respect to class representatives who had created accounts by telephone. They received an audio notice that “your account…[is] governed by the terms of use at [defendant’s website].” Telephone users were not required to take any affirmative step to indicate consent to the terms. The district court refused to compel those telephone members of the class to arbitration and the Third Circuit affirmed. The court distinguished this situation from those involving on-line services, where a link is easily accessible to terms, and from shrinkwrap cases, where consumer received physical copies of the terms when they open the product. It suggested the telephone situation may be closer to “browsewrap” agreements that do not require a manifestation of express consent, and which courts have refused to enforce if the terms are obscured. The court stated the telephone users “neither received GTL’s terms of use, nor were they informed that merely using GTL’s telephone service would constitute assent to those terms” and therefore there was no arbitration agreement to enforce. James v. Global Tellink Corp., (3d Cir. Mar. 29, 2017). Click here for more.