The Consumer’s Friend

“RoboCalls”, Auto-dialers, and Unwanted Phone Call Rule Crackdown

February 20, 2012  

The FTC has taken steps to help consumers to avoid unwanted “robocalls.”  For  decades, Congress and the Commission have recognized that consumers should have
control over the telemarketing calls that come to their homes and mobile devices, and be able to stop the ones that they don’t want to receive.  The Commission and the FTC have long had
rules to put consumers in control.  But despite these clear ground rules, too many telemarketers, aided by autodialers and prerecorded messages, have continued to call consumers who don’t want to hear from them.  Consumers by the thousands have complained about  having their privacy invaded and their time wasted by these unwanted calls.  The FTC has taken action for  consumers, providing consumers greater protection from unwanted robocalls.  First, before robocalling any consumer, telemarketers will now have to get that consumer’s written consent, which may be  electronic.  Second, telemarketers will no longer be able to robocall a consumer simply because he or she has previously done business with that telemarketer – something  data and the FTC’s record show frustrates many consumers.  Now, written consent will be necessary for all telemarketing robocalls. And
to ensure that the consumer can easily change his or her mind even when written consent has been given, the new rules give consumers instant control: each and
every telemarketing robocall will have to include an automated, interactive opt-out mechanism, so that a consumer can revoke consent by pressing just a few
keys during the call.  The telemarketer will have to automatically add the consumer to the company’s do-not-call list and immediately disconnect the call.  We
are also closing a loophole so that every single telemarketing campaign will have to comply with strict limits on the “dead-air” telemarketing calls that are so frustrating to consumers when they interrupt their dinners or other activities to answer the phone, only to hear nothing on the other end.

John Hanson | 4:23 pm | Consumer Legislation,Scams & Alerts

Comments (0)

“Virtually” Made in the USA labels legislation in California

February 18, 2012  

California law now requires “Made in the USA” to mean what it says — 100% Made in USA.  But new legislation being sponsored by manufacturers in California wants to water down that standard.  The Consumer’s Friend and other consumer groups oppose this new mislabeling rule as manufacturers need a bright line rule and consumer’s need labels to have common sense meanings.  If you know a product in violation of California’s “Made in USA” rules, let us know.

John Hanson | 11:51 am | Consumer Legislation

Comments (0)

GM overtakes Toyota as World’s Largest Carmaker

February 17, 2012  

Maybe the bailout was not such a bad idea?  Now, thanks to the Obama administration, the US is home to the world’s largest auto maker, rather than the world’s largest bankruptcy.  GM is reporting its largest profits ever now, and the US is a 500 million dollar shareholder.

John Hanson | 10:27 am | Auto Industry News

Comments (0)

Hanson Law Firm Class Action Victory: AmeriCredit Violated California Consumer Law

  

On January 31, 2012, the Hanson Law Firm’s client, Steven Aho, representing thousands of California consumers over a four year period, won partial Summary Judgment against subprime lender AmeriCredit Financial.  The United States District Court in the Southern District of California held that AmeriCredit’s Post-Repossession notices violated California consumer protection laws.  Effectively, this decision invalidates approximately $400 million of California consumer debt.  Now the Hanson Law Firm is going to trial to force AmeriCredit to cease collections, refund all amounts paid by class members, and clean class member’s credit reports.

John Hanson | 10:24 am | Hanson Law Firm News,Uncategorized

Comments (0)

Consumer Protection Bureau Looking at Debt Collectors

  
Washington Post 2-16-12
 
 
By , Thursday, February 16, 9:02 AM

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on Thursday sought to bring debt collectors and credit bureaus under its purview, marking the first time the often controversial industries would be subject to federal supervision.

Under its proposed rule, the CFPB would oversee the nation’s largest debt collectors, the primary credit reporting agencies such as Experian, Equifax and TransUnion, and other lesser-known consumer reporting agencies. It is the first attempt by the watchdog agency to define which businesses in the vast swath of nontraditional financial institutions will be subject to the same examination process as banks.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/cfpb-director-richard-cordray-speaks-at-brookings-institution/2012/01/05/gIQAGqACdP_video.html

Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Richard Cordray spoke at the Brookings Institution on Thursday, his first public speech since being named director. (Jan. 5)

 

“This oversight would help restore confidence that the federal government is standing beside the American consumer,” CFPB Director Richard Cordray said in a statement.

Cordray said a reason why they are targeting these firms is because they have expanded their reach into consumers’ lives during the recession. More people are now being pursued by debt collectors and have watched their credit scores slip.

Those scores have become crucial in the aftermath of the financial crisis. Some employers are even looking at credit scores as criteria for jobs. A car, a home, a college education are all financed by lenders that rely on the score to determine who gets credit and how much they pay for it.

For most consumers, those scores are based on records of loans they have taken out in the past and how well they have paid them off. This information is housed in the Big Three national credit bureaus — Experian, Equifax and TransUnion. Lenders use formulas developed by companies such as FICO and VantageScore to analyze the data and determine how likely each person is to repay.

Government regulators, financial firms and consumer advocates have launched extensive education campaigns in recent years to make sure that consumers understand what goes into their Big Three credit reports and how that affects the cost of a loan.

But little attention has been paid to the so-called “Fourth Bureau” firms that target the 30 million consumers outside the mainstream financial system. Often they are students, immigrants or low-income consumers who do not qualify for traditional loans or choose not to use them. Instead, they rely on a makeshift system of payday lenders, check cashers and prepaid cards — none of which show up in the Big Three. Without a paper trail of credit, these consumers are virtually shut out of the traditional banking system.

As a result, fourth bureau firms are increasingly using non-traditional and, at times, unreliable data, including auto warranties, cellphone bills and magazine subscriptions to come up with credit scores.

Yet federal regulations do not always require these companies to disclose when they share your financial history or with whom, and there is no way to opt out when they do. No one is even tracking the accuracy of these reports. That has left the most vulnerable consumers with little insight into the forces determining their financial futures.

The CFPB agency became the first federal agency to oversee so-called “nonbanks” after President Obama appointed Cordray as director late last year. But before it can use its power, the CFPB must set standards for which companies make the cut.

The proposed rule sets the bar for debt collection agencies at $10 million in annual receipts. The CFPB estimated that would encompass about 175 firms that account for about 63 percent of the debt collected from consumers each year.

For consumer reporting agencies, the CFPB proposed a standard of $7 million in annual receipts. That includes not only the three major credit bureaus but also roughly 30 smaller firms in the Fourth Bureau. The rule would give the CFPB authority over about 94 percent of the industry by receipts.

The power to oversee such firms and other nonbanks was a key component of the new agency’s design, and the CFPB has quickly flexed its muscle. It has already convened hearings on payday lending and plans to propose new rules for mortgage servicers.

The agency said it will continue to roll out guidelines employing a variety of criteria to define businesses that will be subject to supervision.

“This is going to be a very important way for us to interact with industry participants to know exactly what they’re doing,” Cordray said. He added that the power could be more efficient than using the “blunt instrument of lawsuits.”

 

John Hanson | 10:16 am | Consumer Legislation

Comments (0)

New Data on Auto Reliability from JD Power

February 16, 2012  

JD Power indicates the number of lemons hitting California streets is decreasing.  25 of 32 brands improved their reliability scores.  Toyota Yaris is the most reliable subcompact, the Prius was the most reliable compact, and the Toyota Tundra was the best pickup.  Toyota’s recalls of more than 10 million cars for unintended acceleration began in 2009 and that data has not made the survey yet.  JD Power gave Toyota its worst rating in 2010 for problems in first 90 days.  On this survey Lexus was the top performer.

John Hanson | 11:51 am | Auto Industry News

Comments (0)

Auto Lenders Worried about Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

February 15, 2012  

An auto lenders trade group says it’s somewhat reassured by what staffers from the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau are telling it. But they’re still anxious about how the new regulatory body will carry out its mandate.

Last week, members of the American Financial Services Association met privately with bureau representatives during the AFSA Vehicle Finance Conference here. Association members who attended those meetings said the bureau assured them that it will base decisions about regulations on data, taking industry input into account, and will not “shoot from the hip” based on anecdotal evidence.

Auto dealers — excepting buy-here, pay-here stores — are exempt from direct supervision by the bureau. But any new requirements for auto lenders are bound to affect dealers, too.

What might the Bureau be looking at?  Based on questions raised in other forums and the bureau’s dealings with other types of lenders, the bureau is interested in creating new and more transparent loan documents. In auto lending, that could include disclosures about dealers’ taking a slice of the profits on interest rates.

Read more: http://www.autonews.com/article/20120208/FINANCE_AND_INSURANCE/120209820#ixzz1m5Jhbpdn

John Hanson | 10:46 am | Auto Industry News,Consumer Legislation

Comments (0)

Extended Warranties: Consumer Beware

February 13, 2012  

Extended warranties, extended service contracts, maintenance agreements are a huge profit center for car dealerships.  For consumers, however, it is like buying soda and popcorn at the movie theatre to take home: a great way to overpay!  (Keep in mind that you can usually buy the same or similar products elsewhere for FAR less.)  Now, one of the nations largest chains says it is hungry for more consumer overcharges.  According to Automotive News, AutoNation Inc., the nation’s largest dealership group, will push even harder to sell extended-service contracts and prepaid maintenance in 2012, on top of record F&I [Finance and Insurance]revenues per vehicle in 2011.”There’s going to be a continued or an even stronger focus on [F&I] products, and we’ve done a good job on products in the past,” said COO Mike Maroone, to Automotive News. AutoNation averaged $1,223 per vehicle in F&I revenues in the fourth quarter, up about 5 percent from a year ago. The figure represents profits from F&I product sales as well as from finance reserves — the dealer’s share of interest-rate profits. For the full year, AutoNation averaged $1,201 per vehicle in F&I revenues. That was the first time the group topped $1,200 for a full year.

John Hanson | 10:16 am | Uncategorized

Comments (0)

Downpayment Fraud: Dealers Can’t List Unmade Payments

February 12, 2012  

If the dealership says on the purchase contract that you paid money down when you didn’t, the dealership has violated the Truth-in-Lending Act, among other laws.   A Connecticut dealership that listed a fictional down payment on a customer’s sales contract has recently been found to owe the consumer damages.  Don Mallon Chevrolet Inc. in Norwich, Conn., must pay plaintiff Agdaliz Negron $1,000 plus attorney fees for violating the Truth in Lending Act, U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas Smith said. After a nonjury trial, Smith rejected the store’s argument that it had merely made an inadvertent, “bona fide error.” The case involved the May 2007 purchase of a 2004 Chevrolet Impala, including a service contract, VIN etching and a GAP policy. With financing, the total sale price was $27,580.Documents listed a $250 down payment. In his decision, Smith said the $250 “fictitious down payment” resulted in assessing sales tax on that amount, making the extra sales tax “in reality part of the finance charge.” The award was a $1,000 statutory amount,  the maximum statutory award under the Truth in Lending Act.

John Hanson | 10:00 am | Uncategorized

Comments (0)

Ford Lease Turn-in Charge Scam

February 11, 2012  

Automotive News reports on an alleged scam regarding lease turn-in charges for consumer vehicles and an ongoing court case.  The case started with Ford Credit’s assessment of $2,658 for excess wear and use on a Windstar that a consumer leased from 2000 to 2003 through Ford Credit’s Red Carpet program.  Ford Dealerships conducted lease-end inspections until 2006, when the lender switched to third-party inspectors.  When the consuymer contested the charge, the lender sued to collect the full amount without disclosing that a second “verifying inspection” had appraised the Windstar’s excess use and wear at only $194.  The consumer, in turn, counterclaimed for breach of contract, violation of the federal Consumer Leasing Act and other allegations. In part, he asserts that the standard leases required inspections “based on our standards for normal use,” with no charge for vehicles returned with “average” use. However, Ford Credit’s dealer handbook and templates applied a stricter “clean” criterion, meaning “the vehicle is in great condition with only minor dents and chips.”  The counterclaims also assert that the lender’s operating procedure that held dealerships financially responsible for underestimates created incentives for inspections “biased towards an overcharge.” The result, the consumer contends, was a systematic overcharge of lessees.  A judge certified a national class of lessees. In addition, a certified subclass of Ohio lessees seeks punitive damages for fraud or misrepresentation under state law.  If a jury holds Ford Credit liable for breach of contract, the lender would be required to refund all excess wear and use charges collected from its lessees. Ford Credit could also be liable for statutory damages if a jury finds its wear and use standards were unreasonable.

Read more: http://www.autonews.com/article/20120125/LEGALFILE/301269999#ixzz1m54DG3QY

John Hanson | 9:54 am | Auto Industry News,Scams & Alerts

Comments (0)




San Diego lemon lawyer, warranty repair lemon, California lemon law, used car lemon law, lemon law attorney, auto lemon law, lemon law lawyer, California lemon law information, car lemon law, California lemon lawyer, SUV lemon law, minivan lemon, lemon car, lemon van, lemon truck, lemon problem, lemon law help