The People's Lawyer Consumer News Alert | |||
![]() |
|||
|
|||
Subscribe to the Newsletter 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 DayEarn UNLIMITED income! Quit your job! Change your life! Do we have your attention? Good! Click here for more. Dangerous coronavirus spreads to four U.S. statesCases of a potentially deadly outbreak of coronavirus are continuing to spread around the world and across the U.S. Your MoneyOnce you turn 50, and especially after age 65, you can qualify for extra tax breaks. Older people get a bigger standard deduction, and they can earn more before they have to file a tax return at all. Workers over 50 can also defer or avoid taxes on more money using retirement and health savings accounts. Here are some ways to save money on taxes as you age. Click here for more. For the LawyersThe Fifth Circuit held a lower court erred in certifying a class of more than 7,600 recipients of medical debt collection letters from Medicredit. The court found that the named plaintiff hadn't shown Medicredit threatened legal action while also not actually intending to sue. Plaintiff said in her underlying suit that the debt collector had sent her a letter that led her to believe she was going to be sued over her debt. Following receipt of the letter and a subsequent conversation with the medical center, Flecha filed suit under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, claiming Medicredit's letter made a false threat of legal action. A Texas federal court later certified a class of an estimated 7,650 individuals who had received the same letter. On appeal, the Fifth Circuit vacated certification, saying plaintiff hadn't provided "any evidence concerning the medical center's intent to sue (or lack thereof) — let alone any evidence of class-wide intent." "This lack of evidence concerning Seton's class-wide intent is fatal to class certification…." Nina Flecha v. Medicredit Inc. et al., case number 18-50551, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Click here for more. |
||
To stop receiving email news alerts from the Center for Consumer Law, please click here. |