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

« January 2022 | Main | March 2022 »

Sunday, February 27, 2022

Some states charge consumers responding to debt collection suits filing fees of hundreds of dollars

So reports George Simons at Bloomberg Law. Excerpt:

California, Arizona, and Minnesota are good examples of states attempting to increase access to justice while charging defendants enormous filing fees. These fees are charged for all types of civil lawsuits, but are particularly relevant to debt lawsuits where defendants are being sued because, presumably, they don’t have any money.

Although some states provide fee waivers, this practice only helps the lowest-income people and leaves people in other income groups with onerous fees. Moreover, for defendants who can pay the fee, they still must struggle to calculate it and to file their documents with the court—a difficult challenge on its own.

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Sunday, February 27, 2022 at 12:23 PM in Consumer Litigation, Debt Collection | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, February 25, 2022

Consumer Advocates Propose New Model State Consumer Protection Act

The LA Times and Ralph Nader have already written about it. Here's the press release, which includes links:

Hacked by Big Corporations, America’s Civil Justice System Has Crashed, Consumer Advocates Say

Report Details Impact on Consumers – and Democracy – of Corporate Attack on the Rule of Law, Proposes New Protections and Legal Procedures

Contact: Harvey Rosenfield (213) 527-3757; Laura Antonini (949) 929-2612
Los Angeles, CA – February 17, 2022

America’s civil justice system has been corrupted by corporations and no longer protects average Americans from the countless non-stop thefts of their money, time, and privacy, according to a new report by two nationally recognized consumer advocates.

The 259-page study, published by #REPRESENT, a California-based non-profit, documents how business goliaths and their front groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce sponsored a fifty-year campaign to reprogram the nation’s civil laws and judicial procedures to favor corporations and the elites.

Reboot Required: The Civil Justice System Has Crashed details the most common costly and abusive tactics that consumers face in the U.S. marketplace – against which they have virtually no legal rights or remedies.

It chronicles how corporations seized control of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches beginning in the 1970s to erode landmark consumer protection laws and block the passage of badly needed new ones, crippling the class action system and stripping Americans of their cherished right to their “day in court” and trial by jury.

And it sounds an urgent call to action. The advocates present a detailed blueprint for the restoration of the civil justice system, in the form of a model state consumer protection law, The Represent Act.

“The relentless corporate assault on the rule of law has deeply damaged Americans’ confidence in the legal system, a development with dire implications for U.S. democracy,” warn Harvey Rosenfield and Laura Antonini, the authors of the report. “We have lately learned how fragile our institutions are, how quickly anger and despair can turn to violence when the rules do not apply to everyone. We must reclaim control of our civil justice system from the corporations so that it serves the American people and empowers them to meet the challenges of the 21st Century.”

Continue reading "Consumer Advocates Propose New Model State Consumer Protection Act " »

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Friday, February 25, 2022 at 06:20 PM in Consumer Legislative Policy | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, February 23, 2022

Horton article finds plaintiffs less likely to win in forced remote arbitration

David Horton of California, Davis has written Forced Remote Arbitration, 108 Cornell Law Review (2022). Here's the abstract:

Courts responded to COVID-19 by going remote. In early 2020, as lockdown orders swept through the country, virtual hearings—which once were rare—became common. This shift generated fierce debate about how video trials differ from in-person proceedings. Now, though, most courts have reopened, and the future of remote trials is unclear.

However, the pandemic also prompted a sea change in alternative dispute resolution. Arbitration providers pivoted away from in-person adjudication and heard cases online. Yet unlike virtual trials, which coexist uneasily with norms in the court system, remote hearings fit snugly within arbitration’s tradition of procedural and evidentiary informality. Thus, while virtual trials may prove to be temporary, virtual arbitration is gaining steam. Online-only arbitration startups have emerged, established providers are marketing their virtual options, and firms are mandating that plaintiffs resolve disputes without setting foot in the same room as the decision-maker. This trend threatens to make the controversial topic of forced arbitration even more fraught. Nevertheless, we do not know how remote procedures impact win rates, case length, and arbitration fees.

This Article shines light on these issues by conducting an empirical study of forced remote arbitration. It analyzes 70,150 recent filings and reaches three main conclusions. First, since July 2020, roughly 67% of all evidentiary hearings have been held virtually. Even though this figure will likely decline as the pandemic re-cedes, online arbitration has become entrenched. Second, plaintiffs who participate in virtual proceedings generally win less often and recover lower damage awards than individuals who arbitrate in person. This “remote penalty” exists in some set-tings even after controlling for variables such as claim type, pro se status, and the experience of the defendant, the lawyers, and the arbitrators. Third, even though proponents of forced remote arbitration contend that it streamlines cases, the data only partially support this claim. Some remote modes, such as documents-only proceedings, seem to save time and money, while others, like video hearings, do not. Finally, the Article explains how its findings can help lawmakers and judges regulate and monitor forced remote arbitration.

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Wednesday, February 23, 2022 at 09:04 PM in Arbitration, Consumer Law Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, February 21, 2022

NY Times: Navient settlement with the states does not help borrowers who are not in default

Here. Excerpt:

After years of struggling to make payments that hardly put a dent in the loans she took out to attend a now defunct arts school, Victoria Linssen saw a glimmer of hope. A deal last month between 39 states and Navient, a student lending giant accused of unfairly ensnaring borrowers like her, would wipe away $1.7 billion in private student loans.

Then she read the fine print: People like her who made their payments on time were disqualified from the relief.

And, the article continues:

Both Navient and the states have called the settlement a win: Navient did not acknowledge wrongdoing and avoided lengthy court battles, while the prosecutors trumpeted the $1.7 billion in forgiven debt.

But Navient never expected to be repaid much of that money. The true value of the debt it forgave, the company told its investors, was just $50 million.

And Navient didn’t have to compensate borrowers who stayed current on their payments. They will have to keep paying Navient, often for a decade or more, for private loans that state officials said should never have been made.

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Monday, February 21, 2022 at 03:21 PM in Consumer Litigation, Student Loans | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sunday, February 20, 2022

Consumer Law Scholars Make Wide-Ranging Proposals to CFPB

The effort was led by Berkeley's Center for Consumer Law and Economic Justice and resulted in production of a series of short memoranda available here. Topics covered include discrimination, arbitration, income share agreements, BNPL, substitution effects of regulation, disclosures, overdraft protections, and more.

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Sunday, February 20, 2022 at 04:07 PM in Arbitration, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Credit Reporting & Discrimination, Other Debt and Credit Issues, Predatory Lending, Student Loans | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, February 17, 2022

Study finds consumer medical data breaches can cause consumers to switch providers and increase gym visits

Junyuan Ke and Weiguang Wang, both of the University of Rochester - Simon Business School and Natasha Zhang Foutz, Associate Professor of Commerce at the University of Virginia, have written Heterogeneous Consumer Response and Mitigation toward Healthcare Data Breach: Insights from Location Big Data. Here is the abstract:

Data breaches pose grave dangers to consumers, brands, and society. In particular, healthcare data breaches are most costly ($7.1 million each) and damaging, as the breached data are irrevocable, and consumers face limited alternatives and daunting switching costs. Only a handful of studies have examined the immediate impact of retail data breaches. This research hence presents an initial, population-scale evidence of consumers’ heterogeneous responses to a healthcare data breach, and social disparity underlying such response heterogeneity, in both shorter- and longer-terms. Leveraging the University of Washington Medicine breach as a natural shock, novel location big data, and a multitude of methods (GIS, machine learning, DiD), the analyses of 11.4 billion location records from a quarter of the Seattle population over a year reveal profound and long-lasting impacts of the data breach on consumers. 77% reduced visitation by 18% and the impact persists even after 10 months. The strong response heterogeneity, involving brand switching (9%), diversification (20%), category withdrawal (9%), and interestingly even a shift toward a healthier lifestyle, reveals an alarmingly stronger impact on the disadvantaged, including the consumers with reduced agility, greater need for healthcare, or limited access to alternatives, hence calling for more personalized, targeted, and equitable mitigation-in-marketing.

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 04:01 PM in Consumer Law Scholarship, Privacy | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, February 16, 2022

CFPB reforms the process for submitting petitions for rulemaking

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau today announced reforms in the process for submitting citizen petitions, through which members of the public can request that the agency initiate a new rulemaking, amend an existing rule, or repeal a rule. The CFPB will post petitions on public dockets for review and comment.

The CFPB's announcement is here.

Read more about the rulemaking petitions process, including how and where to submit petitions and comments on petitions, here.

Posted by Allison Zieve on Wednesday, February 16, 2022 at 12:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sunday, February 13, 2022

SBPC's Mark Huelsman report: the student loan IDR system creates a debt trap

Mark Huelsman of the Student Borrower Protection Center has written Driving Runaway Debt: How IDR’s Current Design Buries Borrowers Under Billions of Dollars in Unaffordable Interest. Here's the abstract:

This report highlights how the design of the main protection meant to deliver affordability to federal student loan borrowers, Income-Driven Repayment (IDR), ignores the widespread effects that runaway student loan balances have across borrowers’ financial lives.

Drawing on extensive research, the report shows how IDR’s failure to consider the massive costs and consequences student loan borrowers face turns IDR into a debt trap for millions. The report calls on President Biden to take action to fix IDR by ending the phenomenon of runaway student loan balances for borrowers in IDR and making other key changes.

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Sunday, February 13, 2022 at 07:28 PM in Consumer Law Scholarship, Student Loans | Permalink | Comments (0)

Saturday, February 12, 2022

Anita Allen Article on Race and Online Privacy

Anita L. Allen of Penn has written Dismantling the Black Opticon: Race Equity and Online Privacy and Data Protection Reform, forthcoming in the Yale Law Journal. Here's the abstract:

In the opening decades of the 21st century popular online platforms rapidly transformed the world. These platforms have come with benefits, but a heavy price to information privacy and data protection. I propose a new framework for describing African Americans' multifaceted situation of risk and harm relating to wrongful data collection, use, analysis and sharing online: the Black Opticon. African Americans online face three distinguishable but related categories of vulnerability to bias and discrimination that I dub the “Black Opticon”: discriminatory oversurveillance (panoptic vulnerabilities to, for example AI empowered facial recognition and geolocation technologies); discriminatory exclusion (ban-optic vulnerabilities to, for example, unequal access to goods, services and public accommodations advertised or offered online); and discriminatory predation (con-optic vulnerabilities to, for example, con-jobs, scams and exploitation relating to credit, employment, business and educational opportunities). Escaping the Black Opticon is unlikely without acknowledgement of privacy’s unequal distribution and privacy law’s outmoded and unduly race-neutral façade. African Americans could benefit from race-conscious efforts to shape a more equitable digital public sphere through improved laws and legal institutions. This essay critically elaborates the Black Opticon triad and considers whether the Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act (2021), the federal Data Protection Act (2021), and new resources for the Federal Trade Commission proposed in 2021 possibly meet imperatives of a race-conscious African American Online Equity Agenda, specifically designed to help dismantle the Black Opticon. The 2021 enacted Virginia law and the bill proposing a new federal data protection agency include civil rights and non-discrimination provisions; and the Federal Trade Commission has an impressive stated commitment to marginalized peoples within the bounds of its authority. Nonetheless the limited scope and pro-business orientation of the Virginia law, and barriers to follow-through on federal measures, are substantial hurdles in the road to true platform equity. The path forward requires jumping those hurdles, regulating platforms, and indeed all of the digital economy, in the interests of nondiscrimination, anti-racism and anti-subordination. Toward escaping the Black Opticon’s pernicious gaze, African Americans and their allies will continue the pursuit of viable strategies for justice and equity in the digital economy.

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Saturday, February 12, 2022 at 10:53 AM in Consumer Law Scholarship, Internet Issues, Privacy | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, February 09, 2022

New report on adverse impact of forced arbitration on historically marginalized communities

The Center for Progressive Reform has issued a report titled "Private Courts, Biased Outcomes: The Adverse Impact of Forced Arbitration on People of Color, Women, Low-Income Americans, and Nursing Home Residents." Read the summary and access the report here.

Posted by Allison Zieve on Wednesday, February 09, 2022 at 01:08 PM | 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

  • Consumer Federation of America is looking for a Communications Director
  • FTC: Not enough baby formula means plenty of scammers
  • Some comments on Alan Kaplinsky's comments on my comments
  • Attend a panel discussion on the FTC's monetary authority in the wake of the Supreme Court's AMG decision
  • Nielson Paper Asks What Happens If the FTC Becomes a Serious Rulemaker?
  • CFP: Symposium on AI, Consumer Credit, and Discrimination
  • CFP for Hybrid International Consumer Protection Law Conference
  • Virtual Conference: Multilevel Marketing: The Consumer Protection Challenge 2022
  • Watch Tower Drops Its Effort to Identify a Dissident Blogger Based on Spurious Copyright Claims
  • Whither Arbitration Regulation?
  • CLASS Network Directorship Position Deadline for Applications Extended to 5/22
  • Report: "Consumers Lured Into Predatory Car Repair Loans"
  • CFPB advisory opinion on coverage of fair lending laws
  • CFP: Beyond Fresh Start: Fixing the Broken Student Loan Default and Collection System
  • FTC says credit repair operation was a scam
  • CFPB orders Bank of America to pay $10 million penalty for illegal garnishments
  • En Banc Fifth Circuit "Express[es] No View" in CFPB v. All American Check Cashing
  • Why the CFPB is right that it can act against discrimination using its unfairness power
  • Dept of Education approves $238 million group discharge for 28,000 Marinello Schools of Beauty borrowers
  • FTC seeks comment on combatting tech-support scams and adding click-to-cancel requirements
  • Republicans complaining about lack of accountability of CFPB director who serves at the pleasure of the president
  • Biden considering options for forgiving federal student loan debt
  • The American retirement system is built for the rich
  • Forced arbitration backfires on Uber
  • Inaugural episode of Consumer Law and Economic Justice Podcast now available
  • Newsday essay calls for amending NY's UDAP law to give NY consumers the protections many red state consumers have
  • Study finds borrower race does not affect appraiser valuation
  • Some clothing retailers make more than half their income from their overpriced credit cards
  • Meirav Furth's important article: Retail Race Discrimination
  • John Oliver tackles consumer privacy
  • Lawyer who created use of arbitration clauses to prevent class actions doesn't read consumer contracts
  • "We don't talk about claims rates," in case you don't want to talk about something besides Bruno

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

  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021

May 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