| Volume 141 Number 51 |
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
The FTC has been hearing about a new scam targeting people who are selling their cars online. They’re getting calls or texts from people who claim to be interested in buying the car – but first want to see a car history report. Click here for more.
Is Costco's Same-Day Fresh Food Delivery Worth It?
Costco recently added produce, meats, fish, dairy and other fresh groceries—including its popular rotisserie chicken—to the roster of items available for same-day delivery. If you're a member and order at least $35 worth of groceries, there is no additional charge—unless you opt to tip the delivery person. Non-members can enjoy this service, too, by ordering Costco items through Instacart, the grocery delivery company. Costco scored highly for value in our most recent ratings of grocery stores. But does that same value extend to its delivery customers? And how does it stack up against other chains that offer grocery delivery? Click here for more.
Your Money
The way credit scores are determined is about to change, but it may not affect the average credit score very much. The Wall Street Journal reports that Fair Isaac Corporation, the company that formulates the FICO credit score, will offer a new scoring system early next year that considers more data than the current scoring system. Today, your credit score is determined mostly by how you manage credit. You get the most points for paying your bills on time. Under the current system, you get no credit for having money in the bank, but that's about to change. Presumably, consumers will see a positive benefit to their credit score if they have a hefty bank account. Click here for more.
For the Lawyers
Child who used mobile app not bound by arbitration clause. A California federal judge shot down Viacom's bid to send to arbitration a proposed class action accusing it of unlawfully collecting and selling personal information belonging to children who used one of its mobile apps. The court ruled that there was no evidence that the users had ever seen or agreed to the arbitration requirement. Amanda Rushing and her minor daughter, identified as L.L., sued Viacom in August 2017 for allegedly violating child privacy laws by secretly gathering kids' personal information as they played the mobile game "Llama Spit Spit" and selling that data to advertising networks that used it to target ads. Viacom countered that the suit should be shipped off to arbitration because users of its apps are repeatedly reminded while downloading and installing the software about a clause in the end user license agreement that requires the use of arbitration to resolve such disputes. In a four-page order issued Monday, U.S. District Judge James Donato refused to grant Viacom's request to stay the case pending arbitration, finding that an agreement to arbitrate such disagreements had never been formed between the parties because the plaintiffs had not received adequate notice of the existence of the arbitration clause, which app users did not have to explicitly consent to in order to download and play the game. "Arbitration is a matter of contract, and there can be no contract without an offer and an acceptance," Judge Donato wrote. "A user cannot accept an offer through silence and inaction where she could not reasonably have known that an offer was ever made to her. That is the situation here, and consequently Viacom's motion is denied." Rushing et al. v. Viacom Inc. et al., case number 3:17-cv-04492, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Click here for more.