Consumer Law & Policy Blog

Coordinators

  • Allison Zieve
    Public Citizen Litigation Group
  • Jeff Sovern
    St. John's University School of Law
  • Brian Wolfman
    Georgetown University Law Center and Harvard Law School

Other Contributors

  • Richard Alderman
    University of Houston Law Center
  • Paul Bland
    Public Justice
  • Stephen Gardner
    Consultant
  • Mike Landis
    US Public Interest Research Group
  • Paul Alan Levy
    Public Citizen Litigation Group
  • Scott Nelson
    Public Citizen Litigation Group
  • Ira Rheingold
    National Association of Consumer Advocates
  • Jon Sheldon
    National Consumer Law Center

About Us

www.clpblog.org

The contributors to the Consumer Law & Policy blog are lawyers and law professors who practice, teach, or write about consumer law and policy. The blog is hosted by Public Citizen Litigation Group, but the views expressed here are solely those of the individual contributors (and don't necessarily reflect the views of institutions with which they are affiliated). To view the blog's policies, please click here.

Blogs On Consumer Issues

  • Alabama Consumer Law Blog
  • Arnold & Porter Consumer Advertising Law Blog
  • CAFA Law Blog
  • Caveat Emptor
  • Citizen Vox
  • Consumer Affairs with Sheryl Harris
  • THE CONSUMERIST
  • Credit Slips
  • Home Equity Theft Reporter
  • Fair Arbitration NOW Blog
  • UCL Practitioner
  • U.S. PIRG Consumer Blog

Other Interesting Legal Blogs

  • American Constitution Society Blog
  • Balkinization
  • Concurring Opinions
  • The Conglomerate
  • Electronic Frontier Foundation DeepLinks
  • Empirical Legal Studies
  • How Appealing
  • Legal Theory Blog
  • Mass Tort Litigation Blog
  • Opinio Juris
  • PrawfsBlawg
  • Rebecca Tushnet's 43(B)log
  • SCOTUSblog
  • TortsProf Blog
  • Trademark Blog
  • Truth on the Market
  • The Volokh Conspiracy

Consumer Law & Policy Links

  • AAAP Foundation Litigation
  • American Collectors' Association
  • Americans for Financial Reform
  • American Tort Reform Association
  • American Association of Justice
  • Center for American Progress
  • Center for Justice and Democracy
  • Center for Responsible Lending
  • Center for Science in the Public Interest
  • Center for Study of Responsive Law
  • Consumer Action
  • Consumer Federation of America
  • Consumers Union
  • Electronic Frontier Foundation
  • Electronic Privacy Information Center
  • EU Consumer Policy Page
  • Fair Arbitration NOW
  • Federal Trade Commission
  • International Association of Consumer Law
  • National Association of Consumer Advocates
  • National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys
  • National Community Reinvestment Coalition
  • National Consumer Law Center
  • Public Citizen
  • State PIRGs
  • Public Justice (formerly Trial Lawyers for Public Justice)
  • Treasury Department, Regulatory Reform Agenda
  • U.S. Chamber Legal Reform
  • U.S. Public Interest Research Group

« July 2017 | Main | September 2017 »

Thursday, August 31, 2017

This is, well, sickening

Reporter Sarah Kliff is reporting at Vox  that 

The Trump administration plans to deeply cut Obamacare outreach and advertising, officials announced Thursday. They will reduce Obamacare advertising spending 90 percent, from the $100 million that the Obama administration spent last year to $10 million this year, and cut the budget for the in-person enrollment program by 41 percent. Taken together, this represents a 72 percent cut to efforts to enroll eligible Americans into health law programs.

 

Posted by Brian Wolfman on Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 07:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

DeVos deregulating for-profit colleges

Politico reports that, seven months into the Trump administration, Department of Education Secretary DeVos has:

— Moved to gut two major Obama-era regulations reviled by the industry that would have cut off funding to low-performing programs and made it easier for defrauded students to wipe out their loans;

— Appointed a former for-profit college official, Julian Schmoke Jr., to lead the team charged with policing fraud in higher education — one of a slew of industry insiders installed in key positions. Schmoke is a former dean at DeVry University, whose parent company agreed last year to pay $100 million to resolve allegations the company misled students about their job and salary prospects;

— Stopped approving new student fraud claims brought against for-profit schools. The Education Department has a backlog of more than 65,000 applications from students seeking to have their loans forgiven on the grounds they were defrauded, some of which date to the previous administration.

The full article is here.

Posted by Allison Zieve on Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 10:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wells Fargo reports up to 1.4 million more fake accounts

Wells Fargo now says it has found a total of up to 3.5 million potentially fake bank and credit card accounts, up from its earlier tally of approximately 2.1 million. The additional fake accounts were discovered by a previously-announced analysis that went back to January 2009 and that reviewed the original May 2011 to mid-2015 period.

CNN's report is here. The New York Times reports here.

Posted by Allison Zieve on Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 10:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Will he stay or will he go? (Cordray, I mean)

Will he stay or will he go? (Okay, it's poor analogy, but I like the song.)

This article by C. Ryan Barber (possibly behind a paywall) explains that Rep. Jeb Hensarling keeps asking Consumer Financial Protection Bureau head Richard Cordray whether he's going to serve out his term or resign to run for Ohio governor:

U.S. Rep. Jeb Hensarling can ask, and ask, and ask again. But Richard Cordray, director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, has no plans of telling the Texas Republican whether he plans to resign anytime soon to pursue his rumored interest in the Ohio governorship. Hensarling, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, sent Cordray a letter Mondaysetting a Wednesday deadline for the CFPB chief to state whether he plans to resign to run for governor before his five-year term expires in July 2018. Cordray, a former attorney general of Ohio, responded Wednesday—“in accordance with [Hensarling’s] stated deadline,” he wrote—but his answer was the same one that has so frustrated Hensarling in the past. [That is, he just won't say.]

 



Posted by Brian Wolfman on Thursday, August 31, 2017 at 08:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, August 30, 2017

Last chance to weigh in on FCC's net neutrality roll-back

A Washington Post column reminds us: "Today marks your final opportunity to submit comments to federal regulators who want to undo the government's net neutrality rules for Internet providers, in a move that could have sweeping implications for the future of the Web. The push to weaken or eliminate the rules has been met with praise from industry officials who argue that deregulation will support renewed investments in America's Internet networks, while consumer groups have slammed the proposal as a handout to big businesses and a potential threat to consumer choice. The looming deadline reflects the end of the Federal Communications Commission's public comment period — a weeks-long window during which regular Americans can weigh in on agency proposals — on the issue."

What is net neutrality, again? It is the idea that Internet providers (Comcast, Verizon, etc.) shouldn't be allowed to arbitrarily manipulate Internet content traveling across their networks. Instead, all websites, applications, and services should be equally accessible to the consumer and not slowed down, blocked or subjected to extra fees before it reaches your screen.

The full piece, including a primer on what the issue is and why it matters, is here.

Posted by Allison Zieve on Wednesday, August 30, 2017 at 11:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

City settles consumer protection case, secures injunction to ensure consumers' consent to recurring payments

Beachbody, one of the world’s largest sellers of exercise videos, supplements, and weight-loss programs, has agreed to change its website and sales practices to better protect consumers. The Santa Monica-based company, which claims over 23 million customers, also will pay $3.6 million in penalties and restitution as part of a final court judgment. The judgment was negotiated with the Santa Monica City Attorney’s Office after lengthy discussions, which followed the prosecutors’ investigation of consumer complaints.

The Santa Monica City Attorney’s Office learned that Beachbody was charging its customers’ credit cards on an automatic, recurring basis for renewals of products and services, without their express prior consent as required by law.

The judgment includes a permanent injunction requiring full transparency with consumers. Before automatically renewing charges, Beachbody now must:

  • Clearly and conspicuously disclose the renewal terms
  • Get consumers’ consent, through a separate check-box (or similar mechanism) that does not include other terms and conditions
  • Send a clear summary of the renewal terms after consumers pay
  • Allow consumers to cancel easily, both online and by phone
  • Send reminders of upcoming renewals for all subscriptions 6 months or longer

The City's full press release is here.

Posted by Allison Zieve on Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 01:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Court holds that plainitff can't win a false advertising case unless all experts agree about falsity

Professor Rebecca Tushnet on her 43(B)log has an interesting and thorough discussion today of a recent court decision in a false advertising case, Korolshteyn v. Costco Wholesale Corp. (S.D. Cal. Aug. 23, 2017):

Costco’s TruNature Gingko labels represent that the product “supports alertness & memory,” that “Gingko biloba can help with mental clarity and memory,” and that “[i]t also helps maintain healthy blood flow to the brain to assist mental clarity and memory, especially occasional mild memory problems associated with aging.” Plaintiff alleged that these were false or misleading under the UCL and CLRA. Relying on In re GNC Corp., 789 F.3d 505 (4th Cir. 2015), the court here found that this was an impermissible lack-of-substantiation claim, and that therefore a private plaintiff can never prove falsity “when a defendant offers scientific evidence and admissible expert testimony supporting an advertising claim about the efficacy of the product in question.” To prove falsity, all reasonable experts in the field must agree that the representations are false. The court found that California would follow GNC, because no state court cases have rejected it, but I doubt that....

She concludes:

What the GNC line of cases is really saying is that courts will not engage in the very process they’re constituted to engage in if a consumer protection case requires a factfinder, as the court makes clear when it says “under California law a Plaintiff cannot maintain a false advertising claim when the defendant offers admissible expert testimony and scientific evidence supporting the advertisement in question.”  That is, the court will only look at one side of the evidence; I would call that not very judicious. And by the way, this formulation means that in fact there is a substantiation requirement under California law—just one in which the quality of the substantiation is judged by a minimal standard, that of admissibility. When a rationale for a rule makes the rule a failure on its own terms, there is something deeply wrong.

The full blog post is here.

Posted by Allison Zieve on Tuesday, August 29, 2017 at 11:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, August 28, 2017

Ware Article: The Centrist Case for Enforcing Adhesive Arbitration Agreements

Stephen J. Ware of Kansas has written The Centrist Case for Enforcing Adhesive Arbitration Agreements, Forthcoming in the Harvard Negotiation Law Review.  Here is the abstract:

"The Politics of Arbitration Law and Centrist Proposals for Reform", 53 Harvard J. on Legislation 711 (2016), explained how issues surrounding consumer, and other adhesive, arbitration agreements became divisive along predictable political lines (progressive vs. conservative) and proposed an intermediate (centrist) position to resolve those issues. However, "The Politics of Arbitration Law" did not argue the case for this centrist position. It left those arguments for two more articles: (1) "The Centrist Case against Current (Conservative) Arbitration Law", 68 Florida Law Review 1227 (2016), which argued against the overly-conservative parts of current arbitration law; and (2) this Article, which argues against progressive proposals to repeal, not only the overly-conservative parts of current arbitration law, but also the parts of current arbitration law that should be retained. While progressives would prohibit enforcement of individuals’ adhesive arbitration agreements, this Article argues that such agreements generally should be enforced.

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Monday, August 28, 2017 at 01:39 PM in Arbitration, Consumer Law Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Usury, predatory lending, and a supposed "fix" for Madden v. Midland Funding

Georgetown law prof Adam Levitin has penned this article in American Banker (and a similar piece for Credit Slips). (The American Banker version may be behind a paywall.) State usury laws generally are preempted by the National Bank Act when a loan is held by a national bank. But, as Levitin notes, "[o]nce the note leaves the hands of a national bank, the state usury law applies as it always would."  Thus, in 2015, the Second Circuit ruled in Madden v. Midland Funding "that National Bank Act preemption of state usury laws applies only to a national bank, and not to a debt collector assignee of the national bank." Levitin explains that any other rule would be a very bad deal for consumers and why pending legislation to undo the general rule (and Madden), called the Protecting Consumers Access to Credit Act of 2017, should be rejected.

 

Posted by Brian Wolfman on Monday, August 28, 2017 at 12:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Consumer protection at risk from regulatory "reform"

The president of KidsandCars.org, Janette Fennell, explains: "Under the guise of 'reform,' a bill called the Regulatory Accountability Act (RAA) would add a maze of additional bureaucracy to the life-saving protections. Instead of making it easier to implement protections, the RAA is a recipe for more red tape and additional layers of bureaucracy in a process meant to protect our health and safety. But it’s not just vehicle safety at risk, it’s consumer protections across the board, from those governing dangerous chemicals, to workers’ protections, to food safety."

The full op-ed it here.

Posted by Allison Zieve on Monday, August 28, 2017 at 11:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Older »

Subscribe to CL&P

RSS/Atom Feed

To receive a daily email of Consumer Law & Policy content, enter your email address here:

Search CL&P Blog

Recent Posts

  • My latest paper: Not-So-Smartphone Disclosures
  • Maryland seeking applications for consumer law endowed faculty position
  • FTC issues ANPR on consumer privacy and data security
  • Today at the CFPB
  • Cal Chief Judge calls for stronger oversight of "private judging," after scandal involving JAMS
  • Maybe it's the Chamber that needs to be held accountable: comments on their ad attacking the CFPB
  • Bruckner & Ryan paper compares complaints about fintech and traditional student loan lenders & servicers
  • GOP legislators accuse CFPB of colluding with states, as Kraninger did
  • WSJ: Equifax Sent Lenders Inaccurate Credit Scores on Millions of Consumers
  • Unfairness and Disparate Effects
  • CFPB analysis of potential impacts of medical debt credit reporting changes
  • OCC CFP: THE IMPLICATIONS OF FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGY FOR BANKING
  • Dan Solove gives the pending privacy bill a B+ but pans preemption
  • Paper responds to Wilf-Townsend's Assembly-Line Plaintiffs
  • CFP: Berkeley Consumer Law Conference
  • The National Consumer Law Center is hiring a LITIGATION DIRECTOR
  • WSJ: CFPB working on guidance to force banks to cover more scams on Zelle and similar apps
  • Consumer law and the "major questions" doctrine
  • Will Congress pass an online privacy bill?
  • Distracted driving kills thousands of people every year
  • Chao paper suggests unjust enrichment claims confer standing, even after TransUnion
  • CFPB issues advisory to protect privacy when companies compile personal data
  • Regulators fine BofA $225 million over botched disbursement of unemployment benefits
  • Consumer protection and the Supreme Court's new "major questions doctrine"
  • CFPB moves to reduce fees charged by debt collectors
  • Vijay Raghavan Essay: Shifting Burdens at the Fringe
  • FTC sues Walmart for facilitating money transfer fraud
  • CFPB affirms states' ability to police credit reporting markets
  • Can you solve the mystery of why the Credit CARD Act treats penalty fees differently from penalty interest rates and other fees?
  • CFPB Spring Regulatory Agenda is up and arbitration isn't on it
  • CFP: CFPB consumer finance research conference
  • My Daughter’s @Delta Disaster Story: The Last Chapter (I hope)

Categories

  • Advertising
  • Arbitration
  • Auto Issues
  • Book & Movie Reviews
  • Books
  • CL&P Blog
  • CL&P Roundups
  • Class Actions
  • Conferences
  • Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
  • Consumer History
  • Consumer Law Scholarship
  • Consumer Legislative Policy
  • Consumer Litigation
  • Consumer Product Safety
  • Credit Cards
  • Credit Reporting & Discrimination
  • Debt Collection
  • Federal Trade Commission
  • Food and Nutrition
  • Foreclosure Crisis
  • Free Speech, Intellectual Property & Consumer Issues
  • Global Consumer Protection
  • Identity Theft
  • Internet Issues
  • Law & Economics
  • Other Debt and Credit Issues
  • Predatory Lending
  • Preemption
  • Privacy
  • Student Loans
  • Teaching Consumer Law
  • Television
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • Unfair & Deceptive Acts & Practices (UDAP)
  • Web/Tech
  • Weblogs

Archives

  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021

August 2022

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31