Britax, a top child safety seat company
headquartered in South Carolina, recently announced a recall on its
ClickTight Convertible safety seat after a report found problems with
the harness. The defect could affect over 200,000 products, rendering
them completely useless to protect infants and children.
Wednesday, August 26, 2015
Wednesday, August 19, 2015
What Driverless Cars Could Mean for Lemon Law Cases
Researchers at the University of Michigan's new M-City are beginning to test driverless cars in a city setting. Cityscapes, it turns out, are one of the most difficult parts of programming an autonomous vehicle. Errors in this programming could lead to a rash of lemon law injury cases where drivers, passengers, and pedestrians suffer from the poor decisions of an autonomous vehicle.
Wednesday, August 12, 2015
Deadline Approaching for Western Sky Predatory Lending Claims
If you are one of the 17,500
Michigan consumers paying too much for their Western Sky and CashCall
loans time is running out to file your claim and get your money back.
Claims have to be filed by September 18, 2015. Find out if you
qualify today.
On May 14, 2015, Michigan's Attorney
General's office announced a $2.2 million settlement with South
Dakota-based Western Sky Financial and California company CashCall
Inc. The claim: that the companies charged illegally high interest
and fees for their quick-fix loans.
Internet-based Western Sky charged
between 89
and 169 percent interest – well above
Michigan's legal limits. The interest and fees on a $1,000 loan could
leave borrowers paying more than $4,000 within two years. Other
short-term, 6-month loans had an APR of 350%.
Attorney
General Bill Schuette and his Corporate
Oversight Division weren't going to let the Internet lenders take
advantage of Michigan residents.
“We
will not tolerate any businesses attempting to skirt the rules at the
expense of Michigan consumers trying to make ends meet,” said
Schuette. “This settlement is a victory for the thousands of
Michigan consumers who took out Western Sky loans and serves as a
warning to only do business with licensed entities. I am grateful for
the joint efforts and hard work by the Department of Insurance and
Financial Services and my staff that secured this settlement
providing significant relief for Michigan consumers.”
After the Department of Insurance
and Financial Services (DIFS) issued a cease and desist regulatory
action against Western Sky and CashCall – demanding they stop
selling unlicensed, high-interest loans in Michigan – the two
companies agreed to negotiate. All Western Sky loans were capped at
7% annual interest, even if they had originally been set higher. This
happens automatically without the borrower needing to do anything.
But Michigan residents with active
Western Sky accounts who overpaid on high-interest loans in the past
still need to act. To get a “pro
rata refund” - your share of the excessive
fees charged by Western Sky and CashCall – you have to make a claim
with the Claim Fund Administrator, Dahl Administration, LLC.
Eligible Western Sky borrowers
should have received a notice explaining the claims process by July
20, 2015. All claims must be filed by September 18, 2015. That means
there's only about a month left to get your part of the $2.2 million
settlement fund.
The consumer
protection team at The Liblang Law Firm, P.C.
can help you prepare and file your claim with the Dahl
Administration, LLC and make sure you are compensated for the
predatory lending practices of Western Sky and CashCall. Don't wait.
If you have received a notice or believe you are entitled to
compensation, contact
The Liblang Law Firm, P.C. today to get the
process started with a free consultation.
Wednesday, August 5, 2015
Ford Announces Ignition Recall
Last month, Ford Motor Company issued a
recall for 433,000 vehicles. Hoping to avoid the same problems that
plagued General Motors and Takata, the auto-maker issued its recall
before anyone had reported accidents or injuries.
Labels:
auto accident,
auto law,
auto manufacturer,
C-Max,
Dani K. Liblang,
Dani Liblang,
Escape,
Focus,
Ford,
ignition,
recall,
The Liblang Law Firm
Wednesday, July 29, 2015
Federal Agency Says Creditors' Rights Law Firm Uses Unfair Collections Practices
Consumer advocates have known
collections company lawyers often can't prove their cases for years.
Now the Consumer Financial Protection Agency says one creditors'
rights law firm's tactics actually violate consumer protection laws
by using unfair collections practices.
The Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau has filed a lawsuit against one of Georgia's largest
“Creditors' Rights” law firms, claiming the firm's lawyers
weren't meaningfully involved in their cases and that their processes
violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the
Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA).
So-called Creditors' Rights law firms
sue consumers for past due debts on behalf of the collections
companies. In the case of the Georgia-based law firm defendant in the
lawsuit, the firm's eight to 16 attorneys had filed over 350,000
lawsuits in four years. According to the Bureau, the attorneys relied
on support staff and automated systems to do everything from
researching cases to preparing filings – spending no more than one
minute reviewing each document.
The Bureau's complaint also claimed
that the lawyers for the collections companies knew the debts they
were suing to collect had been purchased by debt buyers, so no one at
the companies had personal knowledge of how the debts came to be.
According to the Bureau, this means the lawyers knew or should have
known that they wouldn't be able to prove their cases when they were
filed. This could explain why the firm voluntarily dismisses about
155 collections cases every week.
This month, the federal judge refused a
request to dismiss the Bureau's lawsuit. That means that the
creditor's rights firm could be financially liable for filing
lawsuits it knew couldn't win and misrepresenting their lawyers'
involvement in the cases they file. It could fundamentally change how
collections law works across the country.
The single best way to defend against
these kinds of collections harassment lawsuits is to hire a lawyer as
soon as you are contacted by a collections firm. Consumer advocates
like the attorneys at The Liblang Law Firm, P.C., know the tactics of
creditor's rights attorneys, and they know how to fight them. The
Bureau has found, “consumers who retained attorneys were almost
four times more likely to have their cases dismissed.”
According to Michigan consumer
protection attorney Dani K. Liblang:
“It is great to see the CFPB taking an interest in cleaning up these practices. These days, when one’s credit history is used not only to judge creditworthiness but, also, to determine such other life necessities as insurance rates and employment eligibility, protecting the integrity of the system is even more important than ever.”
The consumer protection attorneys at
The Liblang Law Firm, P.C. are ready to defend you against the
harassing tactics of creditors' rights firms trying to collect on
your debt. If you have been the victim of collections harassment,
contact The Liblang Law Firm, P.C., for a free consultation.
Wednesday, July 22, 2015
Ally Financial to Pay $98 Million For Discriminatory Auto Loans
In the largest settlement of any
auto-loan discrimination case, Detroit-based Ally Financial has
agreed to pay $98 million in fines and damages after regulators
discovered discriminatory auto loan practices by its dealerships.
Ally Financial, formerly GMAC, has
settled
regulatory claims by the Department of Justice
and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The claims said
African-American borrowers were being charged an average of $300 more
than their non-Hispanic white counterparts for their auto loans.
Hispanics paid about $200
more.
In March 2015, the CFPB
announced it would begin regulating non-bank
auto lenders like Ally. These lenders make up 40 percent of the
auto-loan market, lending to over 7 million consumers every year. The
goal of the regulation was to crack down on “dealer financing” -
where the car dealers act as middlemen between the buyer and the
lender.
In Ally's case, the lender arranged
loans through its dealers who were allowed to
quote higher rates to their customers beyond what their credit
history would indicate. Because Ally Financial did nothing to keep
its dealers from charging minority buyers higher rates, it was
responsible for the costs charged to its 235,000 minority consumers.
Because of its discriminatory auto
loan policies, Ally Financial has agreed to pay $98
million in fines and consumer costs. Of that
amount, $80 million will go to African-American, Hispanic, and Asian
Americans, and Pacific Islanders who got auto financing through Ally
Financial between April 2011 and December 2013.
The team at The Liblang Law Firm,
P.C., are ready to take your calls about Ally Financial's
discriminatory lending practices. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act
(ECOA) prohibits creditors from discriminating against minorities in
its loan applications and lending rates. Consumers whose rights are
violated can sue the lender directly.
The Liblang Law Firm, P.C., has also
represented consumers in “yo-yo lending” cases – where a dealer
delivers a vehicle to the consumer, leading him or her to believe
their loan has been approved, only to demand it back a week or so
later because the “financing fell through.” Michigan law requires
dealers to honor a consumer's written contract, even if they are
later unable to sell the financing contract to the anticipated
lender. If the dealer cancels the contract or tries to raise the
rate, the consumer may have a case against the lender.
Dani K. Liblang at The Liblang Law
Firm, P.C., is a consumer
protection attorney with over 30 years'
experience. If you have been harmed by Ally Financial's
discriminatory lending policies, she may be able to help you file
your claim. Contact
the Liblang Law Firm, P.C., to find out if you
you qualify.
Wednesday, July 15, 2015
FCC Tightens Protection Against Robocalls
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission is tightening restrictions that prevent telemarketers from using robocalls and automatic dialers to reach consumers. This could open the door for class action lawsuits against auto-dialing companies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)