Articles Tagged with consumer rights lawyer

A internal report from executives at Wells Fargo has determined more than 800,000 people who took out loans for their vehicles were forced into buying unnecessary auto insurance. Some of those people are still paying for the coverage, and the expense has pushed a quarter million of them into delinquency. Additionally, some 25,000 people suffered wrongful vehicle possessions as a result of this practice. debt defense lawyer

The 60-page report was obtained by New York Times reporters, who noted that some of those affected included members of the U.S. military who were on active duty.

As our debt defense lawyers know well, this is not the first time Wells Fargo has landed in hot water for strong-arming customers into coverage or accounts they did not need. Most recently, the company incurred millions of dollars in fines when it was revealed employees generated millions of bank accounts and credit cards for which customers never asked. The fines were imposed on the bank just last year.  Continue reading

Target Corp. recently lost a $4.6 million personal injury lawsuit after a South Carolina woman alleged she was hurt when swatting a hypodermic needle away from her young daughter, who had picked up the dangerous device in the store parking lot. needle1

According to court records, the incident occurred in 2016 at a store in Anderson. The woman testified she was getting out of her car when she spotted her 8-year-old daughter picking up the needle. Instinctively, the mother knocked the needle from her daughter’s grasp. As she did so, the needle stuck her in the right palm. She walked right into the store and reported what had happened to an employee. That worker jotted down in an incident report that the woman “seemed worried.”

She was later transported to a local hospital, where she was tested for both HIV and hepatitis. Although she tested negative for both, she did undergo treatment that involved consuming a powerful medication that would prevent her from contracting HIV. This made her extremely ill, which prompted her husband to take an extensive period of time off work. She has thus far continued to test negative for these diseases.  Continue reading

For at least five years, Wells Fargo was engaged in a practice of secretly opening some 2 million phony credit card and deposit accounts in an effort to put multiple banking products in customers’ hands. That kind of growth strategy was central to the bank’s business, and employees were pressured to meet demanding quotas calling for each customer to have eight accounts with the bank. This prompted employees to cut corners. They started opening up accounts without customers’ Ok or knowledge.moneytower

This practice started at least as far back as 2011, but there is evidence to indicate it may have been going on even back in 2009. As a result, the bank was able to rake in at least $2.6 million in additional fees on accounts customers never wanted to begin with. In many cases, customers didn’t even know they existed, and the fees were simply being deducted from other legitimate accounts. Federal regulators got involved this month, and the bank quickly agreed to settle the case for $185 million. Thousands have been fired (though not the company CEO) and U.S. Attorneys have begun investigations. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D, Mass.) lambasted CEO John Stumpf during a Senate Banking Committee. Although he apologized, Warren told him he was personally responsible, should resign and be criminally investigated.

But the question of why this took so long to uncover goes back to another practice that isn’t unique to Wells Fargo. It’s called an arbitration clause.  Continue reading

The U.S. Senate recently took one major step toward protecting the rights of consumers and the integrity of capitalism in the 21st Century with its passage of the Consumer Review Freedom Act (S. 2044, H.R. 2110). The bill targets so-called “gag clauses” or “non-disparagement agreements,” which some companies use to curb criticism online.enterkey

Although many companies have argued that competitors or others are unfairly using online tools to spread falsehoods or maliciously damaging their reputation without cause, the flip side is that consumers have been penalized thousands of dollars for posting negative – but honest – online reviews. These reviews are widely used by prospective customers to determine whether to buy a service or patronize a location, so there is a lot at stake on both sides.

These dubious non-disparagement clauses are often tucked into the fine print of the purchase agreement, and have been found on even the most seemingly inane purchases, such as cellphone accessories. Others have been found in rental agreements with landlords, wedding contractors or sellers of weight loss products. Continue reading