CL&P 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

« January 2019 | Main | March 2019 »

Wednesday, February 27, 2019

Financial institutions report widespread elder financial abuse

The CFPB has released a report on financial exploitation of the elderly by people ranging from offshore scammers to family members. The report compiles information from Suspicious Activity Reports submitted by banks, credit unions, casinos, and other financial services providers. The 180,000 elder financial exploitation SARs reviewed for the report were submitted from 2013 to 2017 and involving more than $6 billion. 

The report is here.

Posted by Allison Zieve on Wednesday, February 27, 2019 at 06:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

FTC case challenges fake paid reviews on Amazon

The Federal Trade Commission announced its first case challenging a marketer’s use of fake paid reviews on an independent retail website. In a settlement announced at the same time, Cure Encapsulations and its owner resolved allegations that they made false and unsubstantiated claims for their garcinia cambogia weight-loss supplement and that they paid a third-party website to write and post fake reviews on Amazon.com, to create and maintain a a high rating.

The FTC's press release, with links to the complaint and proposed settlement, is here.

Posted by Allison Zieve on Wednesday, February 27, 2019 at 06:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Supreme Court grants review in Fair Debt Collection Practices Act statute-of-limitations case

The Supreme Court has granted review in Rotkiskie v. Klemm. The question presented in the 8-page (!) petition for a writ of certiorari is

whether the “discovery rule” applies to toll the one (1) year statute of limitations under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692, et seq., as the Fourth and Ninth Circuits have held but the Third Circuit (sua sponte en banc) has held contrarily.

So, put somewhat differently, the question is whether the statute of limitations invariably begins to run on the date that the FDCPA violation occurs or, rather, the "discovery rule" applies in FDCPA cases (in some or all circumstances). The discovery rule provides that a limitations period begins to run "when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis of the action."  Magnum v. Action Collection Serv. Inc., 575 F.3d 935, 940 (9th Cir. 2009) (applying discovery rule in FDCPA suit).

The FDCPA's statute of limitations says that “[a]n action to enforce any liability created by this subchapter may be brought in any appropriate United States district court . . . within one year from the date on which the violation occurs.” 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d). 

Posted by Brian Wolfman on Wednesday, February 27, 2019 at 08:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sunday, February 24, 2019

Hayashi Paper: Consumer Law Myopia

Andrew T. Hayashi of Virginia has written Consumer Law Myopia. Here is the abstract:

People make mistakes with debt, partly because the chance to buy now and pay later tempts them to do things that are not in their long-term interest. Lenders sell credit products that exploit this vulnerability. In this Article, I argue that critiques of these products, particularly those that draw insights from behavioral law and economics, have a blind spot: they ignore what the borrowed funds are used for. By evaluating financing transactions in isolation from the underlying purchase, the cost-benefit analysis of consumer financial regulation is truncated and misleading. I show that the same bias that causes someone to take an exploitative loan may also imply that the loan benefits them by causing them to purchase a product or service that they should, but wouldn’t otherwise, buy. I demonstrate the importance of this effect in a study of tax refund anticipation loans. I find that regulation curtailing these loans reduced the use of paid tax preparers and the takeup of the earned income tax credit, which is the second largest federal transfer to low-income households.

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Sunday, February 24, 2019 at 06:00 PM in Consumer Law Scholarship, Predatory Lending | Permalink | Comments (0)

Saturday, February 23, 2019

A Way for Consumer Agencies to Generate Thought on Issues of Interest

by Jeff Sovern

A post inspired by a question I heard Kathleen Engel ask: every year second-year students ask professors for suggestions for topics to write about for law reviews. Law professors and other lawyers also cast about for article topics.  Meanwhile, administrative agencies often confront questions about what the law is or how it should develop, questions that might benefit from some thought from outsiders. It might serve all these groups--as well as the public and the development of the law--if the CFPB, FTC, and other agencies posted on their web sites a list of possible topics about which law students, law professors, and other lawyers could fruitfully write about. The ANPR process already entails something similar, but this is somewhat different in that it isn't limited to rule-making and could simply be a list which is revised from time to time.

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Saturday, February 23, 2019 at 08:27 PM in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Consumer Law Scholarship, Federal Trade Commission | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, February 22, 2019

2018 FTC annual report on refunds to consumers

According to a report issued by the Federal Trade Commission last week, between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018, the agency’s law enforcement actions yielded more than $2.3 billion in refunds to defrauded consumers, including $122 million mailed directly by the FTC to 2.2 million people.

The report is here.

Posted by Allison Zieve on Friday, February 22, 2019 at 11:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, February 19, 2019

"Google reaped millions in tax breaks as it secretly expanded its real estate footprint across the U.S."

That's the name of this story by Elizabeth Dwoskin. Here's an excerpt:

Last May, officials in Midlothian, Texas, a city near Dallas, approved more than $10 million in tax breaks for a huge, mysterious new development across from a shuttered Toys R Us warehouse. ... The developer, which incorporated with the state four months earlier, went by the name Sharka. City officials declined at the time to say who was behind Sharka. The mystery company was Google — a fact the city revealed two months later, after the project was formally approved. Larry Barnett, president of Midlothian Economic Development, one of the agencies that negotiated the data center deal, said he knew at the time the tech giant was the one seeking a decade of tax giveaways for the project, but he was prohibited from disclosing it because the company had demanded secrecy. “I'm confident that had the community known this project was under the direction of Google, people would have spoken out, but we were never given the chance to speak,” said Travis Smith, managing editor of the Waxahachie Daily Light, the local paper. “We didn't know that it was Google until after it passed.” After the deal went through, Sharka changed its main address to that of Google's headquarters in Mountain View, Calif. Site work began last fall.

Posted by Brian Wolfman on Tuesday, February 19, 2019 at 11:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, February 18, 2019

A study on the relationship, if any, between Texas medical-malpractice "reform" legislation and litigation, doctor supply, and patient safety

Law profs Charlie Silver, David Hyman, and Bernard Black have published Fictions and Facts: Medical Malpractice Litigation, Physician Supply, and Health Care Spending in Texas Before and after HB 4. Note the study's findings in the abstract below:

This article, written for a symposium issue of the Texas Tech Law Review, summarizes our research on the impact of Texas’ 2003 medical malpractice (“med mal”) reform. Our central findings include: 

(1) there were no major changes in the frequency of med mal claims, payout per claim, total payouts, defense costs, or jury verdicts that can explain the spike in premiums for med mal liability insurance that occurred in Texas in the years before the 2003 reforms; 

(2) Texas’ supply of direct patient care physicians grew steadily, at similar rates, in both the pre- and post-reform periods, despite politician’s claims that physicians fled Texas before reform and flocked back thereafter; 

(3) although the damage caps adopted in Texas and other states greatly reduced the volume of malpractice litigation and payouts to patients, neither in Texas nor in other states have damage caps moderated the growth of health care spending; 

(4) the savings in liability costs generated by the Texas reforms were shared between physicians and their insurers, with the former paying lower premiums and the latter collecting more premium dollars relative to dollars paid out on claims; and 

(5) there is evidence that when liability rules are relaxed, hospital safety records gradually deteriorate.

Posted by Brian Wolfman on Monday, February 18, 2019 at 12:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Should the U.S. impose greater inheritance taxes to alleviate student-loan debt?

That's the topic of a bluntly-titled article -- Taxing Rich Dead People to Tackle Student Loan Debt -- by law prof Victoria J. Haneman. The abstract follows. (Note in particular the stats in the second paragraph of the abstract concerning Millennials' financial situation.)

Once upon a time, there was a generation of indentured servants called Millennials. They were ambitious and mysterious and clever and feckless, in the way that all young people can sometimes be. Droves of Millennials applied to universities, believing that a diploma was a barrier for entry to advance the careers of which they dreamt. Most were confronted with a conundrum: borrow to subsidize the dream career, with decades of (potentially unaffordable) payments when they were finally employed. The Generation Who Stole the World, commonly referred to as the Baby Boomers, had decided that unlimited access to debt in the United States was the most economically sound approach by which to offer equal opportunity in higher education, and the delectable irony of this tale is that the availability of debt accompanied the skyrocketing of costs. A vicious cycle resulted in an entire generation of educated American Millennials having mortgaged their futures — visibly sagging under the weight of the chains of their debt. The average student loan debt for the Class of 2017 graduate in the United States was $39,400.

In the U.S., Millennials are the first generation in modern history to enter adulthood far poorer than the immediately preceding generation. It is a generation that has taken on 300% more student loan debt than their parents, with Millennials between the ages of 25 and 34 each having an average of $42,000 in student loan debt. They are about half as likely to own a home as comparably-aged adults in 1976. Fifteen percent of people aged 25 to 34 live with their parents, as compared to 10% roughly thirty years ago. More than 75% of Millennials have less than $5,000 in savings, and more than 62% have more debt than savings. While wages for Millennials are stagnating, the Baby Boomers are living longer, retiring later, and hoarding jobs that should have long since been passed onto the younger generation. Baby Boomers reaped the benefits of a soaring market and robust safety net programs, whereas Millennials are bearing the brunt of the cost of three fundamental rights skyrocketing in cost — education, housing, and health care. It has been asserted that Baby Boomers have   “. . . turned the economy into a miserable hellscape and [Millennials are] just going to have to deal with it.”

 

 

Continue reading "Should the U.S. impose greater inheritance taxes to alleviate student-loan debt?" »

Posted by Brian Wolfman on Monday, February 18, 2019 at 12:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sunday, February 17, 2019

Michigan Conference: Consumer Protection in an Age of Uncertainty

The University of Michigan Center for Finance, Law and Policy is holding a conference titled Consumer Protection in an Age of Uncertainty on March 21 and 22.  It's great that there will be two excellent consumer law academic conferences in so short a span!

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 03:30 PM in Conferences | 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

  • Harvard Law Review to publish Wilf-Townsend article: Assembly-Line Plaintiffs
  • (Slow) Progress on nomination of Chopra for CFPB director
  • Hawkins & Penner essay about advertising, racial steering, and lending
  • In consumer class action against Walmart, Eighth Circuit holds that right to enforce arbitration agreement was waived by Walmart's litigation conduct
  • Finance Professor McNulty paper on consumer protection settlements
  • John Oliver on Housing Discrimination
  • New Ninth Circuit ruling on Federal Arbitration Act preemption
  • More on Alavaro Bedoya's nomination as an FTC commissioner
  • Bloomberg: Biden to nominate Georgetown prof and privacy expert Alvaro Bedoya for FTC
  • Webinar: The Rise in Debt Collections Litigation and What States can Do
  • Markup Study finds "loan applicants of color were 40%–80% more likely to be denied than their White counterparts"
  • Becher & Benoliel article: Dark Contracts
  • Tschider article on consent and privacy
  • Dep't of Education announces student-loan forgiveness of disabled borrowers
  • Zimmerman article on appeals courts hearing class actions
  • Covid-related tort claims against nursing homes
  • Zoom settles lawsuit alleging privacy violations and "zoombombing"
  • Amazon adopts new policy for injuries caused by products of third-party sellers
  • American Prospect: lawyer offered $2K to get consumer client to sign already-written op-ed supporting arbitration
  • FTC announcements this week
  • CFPB: Financial protections during the pandemic
  • Two elite law reviews sneer at consumer law
  • New article on the right of access to court records
  • Learn about the enhanced child tax credit and its enormous benefits for consumers
  • Sixth Circuit says that the Center for Disease Control's eviction moratorium is unlawful
  • US PIRG report on CFPB's first 10 years
  • FTC actions this week
  • Reuters: Former CFPB Director Kraninger to join crypto firm
  • Vijay Raghavan article on Consumer Law's Equity Gap
  • Teaching Consumer Law Conference
  • Second Circuit holds that private student loans may be discharged in bankruptcy
  • Am. Banker: What to expect from Chopra's CFPB

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

  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020

September 2021

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