| Volume 142 Number 54 |
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
Repaying student loans? Avoid scams! Many scammers will try to charge you for things that the Department of Education and its loan servicers will do for free. Click here for more.
FCC closes telemarketing loophole used by scammers
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has adopted new regulations that ban caller ID spoofing of text messages and phone calls originating outside the U.S. The measures are intended to close loopholes that allow scammers to target U.S. consumers without the government being able to take action to stop them. Legislation passed in 2009 was intended to protect consumers, but it neglected to cite text messages or international calls. Click here for more.
Your Money
The average monthly Social Security payment for retirees was $1,471 in June 2019. But many retirees receive over $2,000 per month from the Social Security Administration, and payments could be as much as $3,770 in 2019. Qualifying for payments worth $3,000 or more requires some serious career planning throughout your life. Here's what you need to do to qualify for the maximum possible Social Security payment. Click here for more.
For the Lawyers
Debt collector cannot enforce original creditors arbitration agreement. A consumer executed a credit card agreement with a creditor containing an arbitration clause. After the consumer fell behind on her payments, her account was referred to the debt collector for collection. The consumer filed suit against the debt collector, alleging that one of the collection letters violated the FDCPA by “failing to inform her whether interest would continue to accrue on her account.” The debt collector moved to compel arbitration based on the provision in the consumer’s credit card agreement with the original creditor, under a third-party beneficiary, agency, or equitable-estoppel theory. The district court rejected each theory and denied the motion, concluding that (i) the agreement did not “evince an intent to benefit” the debt collector; (ii) the FDCPA claim “did not bear a sufficient nexus to the credit-card agreement”; and (iii) the debt collector could not equitably estop the consumer from resisting arbitration under the 3rd Circuit’s previous interpretation of South Dakota law. On appeal, the 3rd Circuit agreed with the district court. Orn v. Alltran Financial Click here for more.