Consumer Rights

CFPB’s Latest News on the Complaints Database

This is a direct communication from the CFPB Press Releases– see CFPB’s website for more!

“FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
September 18, 2019

MEDIA CONTACT:
Office of Communications
Tel: (202) 435-7170

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU TO ENHANCE CONSUMER COMPLAINT DATABASE

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) announced that it will continue the publication of consumer complaints, data fields and narrative descriptions through the Bureau’s Consumer Complaint Database while making several enhancements to the information available to users of the database. The enhancements include: modified disclaimers to provide better context to the published data; integrating financial information and resources into the complaint process to help address questions and better inform consumers before they submit a complaint; and information to assist consumers who wish to contact the financial company to get answers to their specific questions. Additionally, the Bureau will work to provide enhanced features for the database that include dynamic visualization tools on recent complaint data.

“Since its inception, the Consumer Complaint Database has not been without controversy. When the Bureau asked for feedback in 2018, we received nearly 26,000 comments from a wide array of stakeholders including government officials, consumer groups, companies, academics, and individual consumers. After carefully examining and considering all stakeholder and public input, we are announcing the continued publication of complaints with enhanced data and context that will benefit consumers and users of the database while addressing many of the concerns raised,” said CFPB Director Kathleen L. Kraninger. “The continued publication of the database, along with the enhancements, empowers consumers and informs the public.”

The Bureau is making changes to its website to provide disclosures on the nature of complaints as well as resources to consumers, including:

  • More prominently display disclosures making it clear that the Consumer Complaint Database is not a statistical sample of consumers’ experiences in the marketplace;
  • Highlighting the availability of answers to common financial questions for consumers to help inform them before they submit a complaint; and
  • Highlighting consumers ability to contact the financial company directly to get answers to their specific questions.

The Bureau will continue to publish all previously disclosed fields, including consumers’ narrative descriptions of their complaints. To further enhance the database in the coming months, the Bureau will:

  • Build and launch dynamic visualization tools including geospatial and trend views based on recent complaint data to help users of the database understand current and recent marketplace conditions;
  • Emphasize features for aggregation and analysis while continuing to make all the underlying data available for analysis;
  • Explore expansion of a company’s ability to respond publically to individual complaints listed in the database; and
  • Continue to explore ways to put the complaint data in context of other data, such as by incorporating product or service market share and company size.

To date, the Bureau has handled more than 1.9 million complaints. More than 5,000 financial companies have responded through this process, providing timely responses to 97 percent of the more than 1.3 million complaints sent to them for response.

The Consumer Complaint Database is available at: https://www.consumerfinance.gov/data-research/consumer-complaints/

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a 21st century agency that helps consumer finance markets work by regularly identifying and addressing outdated, unnecessary, or unduly burdensome regulations, by making rules more effective, by consistently enforcing federal consumer financial law, and by empowering consumers to take more control over their economic lives. For more information, visit consumerfinance.gov.”

Uber’s No-Call Zone!

Uber has no allowance for one to call customer service, and the in-app responses appear to be bots or cut/paste from a list of ready answers that may or may not respond to the concern raised.  This is very concerning from a consumer protection perspective.  One may even be in a dangerous situation, or learn that someone at Uber compromised their personal data and credit…..but Uber still will not call the consumer or respond to emails with substantive attention.  Even the “emergency number” (one finds after diligent research) provides only a recorded message and no live person to answer in most of the country!

This means that if Uber charges too much or there is another issue, the consumer is often left with no remedy if the online system provides the old “we think we are right” wrote answer through the app.  Indeed, Uber may simply ignore multiple messages and send a cut/paste/bot answer:  “we are still researching” — which can go on for eternity.  With no number to call or supervisor to contact……the consumer is literally left with no remedy.  Furthermore, if one’s online account is inaccurate and failing to show the actual amounts charged, there is again no remedy.

It reminds one of being bullied, and leaves one feeling helpless.

It seems there should be a consumer protection law that requires that all companies must have a customer help line!  Perhaps the FTC act should be read to classify lack of customer support as a “deceptive trade practice”?

As a consumer law professor, and a victim of Uber’s “no-call zone” and lack of customer assistance, I am deeply troubled.

Tools in Missouri to Submit Your Consumer Complaint

This presentation outlines resources for consumers in Missouri to submit their consumer complaints. It also walks the consumer through the various steps a complaint goes through when it is submitted to the Better Business Bureau and the Missouri Attorney General’s Office. Finally, the presentation concludes with a brief overview of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act, which is a statute that empowers consumers to bring fraudulent businesses to justice. [embeddoc url=”http://myconsumertips.info/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Consumer-Protection-Laws.pptx” download=”all” viewer=”microsoft”]

Top Ten Ways the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act Protects You Against Collection Agencies

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is the main law that regulates how a collector collects on a debt. By knowing your rights under this law you can empower yourself and protect yourself from harassment or misleading practices by collectors.

1. Collectors can only call between 8 A.M. and 9 P.M. in YOUR time zone. c(a)(1)

The FDCPA directly states that collection agencies can’t call at a place or time which is obviously inconvenient to the consumer. The law sets out 8 A.M. to 9 P.M. as an assumed acceptable time to contact the debtor. However, you can tell the collector if there’s a different time range that works best for you!

 

2. Collectors can’t call you at work if you tell them not to. c(a)(3)

Collectors are within their rights to attempt to contact a debtor at their place of work. However, if you aren’t able to receive phone calls of that nature at work and tell the collector that, then they can no longer contact you there!

 

3. Collectors can’t call family members or friends more than once. b(a)(3)

Typically a collector may call a friend of family member of a debtor in order to receive contact information for the debtor. However, the FDCPA states that the collector may only call the family member or friend once, and cannot mention anything about the debtor owing money. Essentially, the FDCPA protects from collectors harassing family and friends to attempt to force the debtor into paying.

 

4. Collectors can’t threaten to sue or repossess if they don’t mean it. e(a)(4)

It is against the FDCPA for a collector to imply that not paying a debt will result in the repossession or lawsuit against the debtor if the repossession or lawsuit is unlawful or if the collector has no intention to take such action.

 

5. Collectors can’t lie about what you owe. e(a)(2)(A)

Harassing collectors may try to pressure a debtor into paying by saying the debtor owes more than they do. This action is also strictly prohibited by the FDCPA.

 

6. Collectors can’t call you repeatedly in one day (d)(a)(5)

Incessant calling is one of the main complaints against collection agencies. Which is why the FDCPA states that “causing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any person at the called number” is harassment.

 

7. Collectors must send you a letter with information of your debt (g)(a)

The FDCPA states that within five days of initial communication with a debtor the collector must send a “validation letter” which states the amount of the debt, the original creditor the debt came from, how to dispute the debt, and how to pay the debt.

 

8. Collector’s can’t call you if you have a lawyer for your debts b(a)(6), c(a)(2)

If a debt collector knows that the debtor is represented by an attorney regarding the debt and has or can easily obtain the attorney’s contact information, then, under the FDCPA, the collector can no longer contact the debtor.

 

9. Collector’s can’t threaten to have you arrested (e)(a)(4)

It is directly against the FDCPA if the collector threatens to have the debtor arrested for not paying their debt.

 

10. Collector’s can’t claim to be a lawyer e(a)(3)

The FDCPA explicitly states that collectors are not allowed to imply that they are an attorney or are conveying information from an attorney.

 

Final tip: You can negotiate paying your debt with collectors! At the end of the day collection agencies want to be paid. This is why some FDCPA compliant collectors are willing to negotiate with debtors to allow them to pay a lower amount that is feasible for the debtor.

Current Events and Future Possibilities of Consumer Protection

Over the past several months, many newsrooms have been covering the sexual abuse allegations within the Catholic Church. On March 19, the West Virginia Attorney General filed a lawsuit against the state’s Roman Catholic diocese claiming that the diocese “knowingly employed pedophiles.” You may be thinking, “What does this have to do with consumer protection?”

In line with a new trend, the lawsuit in question claims that the diocese violated consumer protection laws when they did not disclose to parents the potential dangers of sending kids to Catholic schools and camps. According to the lawsuit, the diocese hired pedophiles and then subsequently advertised safe environments for the children. Furthermore, the suit goes on to claim that the diocese didn’t conduct proper background checks of its employees at these schools and camps. The lawsuit claims that the parents in this case were “purchasers” that were purchasing services, here that would be schooling and church camp, for their children.

Like many states, West Virginia has consumer protection laws in place that the Attorney General can bring lawsuits under. The West Virginia code states that “Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful.” Here, the parents or purchases purchased a service from the diocese. Allegedly, these services were then given under unfair or deceptive acts or practices, i.e. not informing the purchasers of the potential dangers presented by the staff hired by the diocese to work at the schools or camps.
Later, the New York Times article that discusses the lawsuit mentions that consumer protection laws are beginning to be used more frequently, with consumer protection laws being cited in cases involving everything from the opioid epidemic to cases involving environmental issues.

This case and the others mentioned above are beginning to show a trend towards applying consumer protection laws to out of the box cases. Oftentimes, when we think of cases involving consumer protection, we conjure up pictures in our head of angry calls with credit card companies or cars that turn out to be lemons. However, consumer protection laws can cover more aspects of life than one may think. Realizing that deceptive practices can cover an array of topics or issues that one may experience in his her life is a great step forward in becoming an empowered consumer.

The umbrella of consumer protection laws is large and as time goes on it seems that it will only get larger. As recognition of the opioid epidemic and environmental issues, as well as the Me Too movement increases, consumer protection laws as a way to receive a remedy may also increase. Right now, we will have to wait and see how these current cases unfold. However, the door has been opened to a whole new world of consumers making a statement and taking charge.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/19/us/west-virginia-pedophiles-church.html

https://essentialhospitals.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Opiod-Brief-2018.pdf

https://law.justia.com/codes/west-virginia/2010/chapter46a/article6/46A-6-104.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/west-virginia-accuses-catholic-diocese-violating-consumer-protection-law-hiring-n984961

Disputing a Fraudulent Transaction on a Credit Card

It is not uncommon to hear that a family member, friend, or a colleague was a victim of credit card fraud. In 2017, the Federal Trade Commission received more than one million fraud reports.[1]The report separates individuals by age groups.  Individuals between the age of 20-29 account for 40% of fraud reports while individuals between 60-69 account for 20 % of fraud reports. While these percentages account for reported frauds, there are many that go unreported. One possible explanation for higher report rates in the 20-29 age group is the digitalization of banking resources. These resources include notifications of suspicious bank activity and so on. These positive aspects of the digitalization of banking are a step towards consumer empowerment. However, digital trends resonate more heavily with newer generations than that of previous generations.

Under the Fair Credit Billing Act (FCBA), a fraudulent transaction that appears on the account can be disputed. What qualifies as a fraudulent transaction?  A transaction is fraudulent if the card holder had no knowledge of the transaction and did not approve the charge. For instance, a transaction that appears on the account that was not authorized by the card holder is fraudulent. The FCBA grants consumers various protections: (1) If the card was lost or stolen and reported before any unauthorized charges were made, the liability is $0; (2) Within 2 business days after you learn about the loss or theft, the liability might be $50; (3) More than 2 business days after you learn about the loss or theft, but less than 60 calendar days after your statement is sent to you, the liability might be $500; or, (4) More than 60 calendar days after your statement is sent to you all the money taken from your ATM/debit card account, and possibly more; for example, money in accounts linked to your debit account.[2]

It is important to know that if you are victim of fraud you have rights. It is also important to note that time is critical to limit your liability. Once you discover the fraudulent transaction, contact your bank immediately. While banks and credit card companies might expand a customer’s rights, you are provided basic protection under the FCBA.

For further information about disputing fraudulent credit card transactions, please visit https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0219-disputing-credit-card-charges

[1]https://www.ftc.gov/policy/reports/policy-reports/commission-staff-reports/consumer-sentinel-network-data-book-2017/fraud-by-amount-lost

[2]https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0213-lost-or-stolen-credit-atm-and-debit-cards

Legislation to Curtail Robocalls!

Amy

Recently, I was interviewed by KOMU, local NBC affiliate, on Robocalls.  In the full interview, I discussed new legislation — but that part did not end up in the broadcast.  I nonetheless wanted to follow up and share the information.

A bipartisan bill has been introduced and reintroduced in Congress to address the growing problem of “spoofed” robocalls that use fraudulent caller identification information to disguise the caller’s true identity.

As the National Consumer Law Center announced:  “Led by Senators Thune (R-S.D.) and Markey (D-Mass.), the Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence (TRACED) Act (S. 151) would direct the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to develop rules requiring providers of telephone voice services to implement an effective framework for authenticating calls to better enable them to identify and stop unwanted calls before they reach the consumer. It would also increase potential civil forfeitures and criminal fines for intentional violations of the Telephone Consumer Privacy Act (TCPA).

Consumer Reports, the National Consumer Law Center, Consumer Federation of America, and Consumer Action welcomed the progress in the effort against unwanted robocalls.

“Unwanted robocalls harass Americans every day, too often with scams that take advantage of consumers, and yet phone companies drag their feet and fail to truly solve the problem,” said Maureen Mahoney, policy analyst for Consumer Reports. “The TRACED Act takes an important step in ensuring that all phone companies implement technology that will help stop “spoofed” calls, a technique employed by scammers to foil robocall mitigation efforts. Consumer Reports supports this bipartisan effort to address the robocall problem.”

“Once passed, this bill will help tens of millions of Americans reclaim the use of their telephones from the scourge of unwanted and fraudulent robocalls,” said Margot Saunders, senior policy counsel for the National Consumer Law Center. “On behalf of our low-income clients, we strongly support this bill and very much appreciate the efforts of Chairman Thune and Senator Markey to address the serious problem of caller-id spoofing.”

“Authenticating that a call is coming from the source that it purports to be is crucial in the fight against illegal robocalls, which often fraudulently spoof their caller ID,” said Susan Grant, Director of Consumer Protection and Privacy at the Consumer Federation of America. “This bill will move carriers forward to implement call authentication and provide stronger enforcement tools to use against robocallers who flout the law.”

“Spoofed robocalls are the reason that consumers are unwilling to answer their phones these days,” said Consumer Action’s Deputy Director of National Priorities Ruth Susswein. “The TRACED Act is the kind of legislation that consumers have been waiting for – with tools to curb invasive robocalls, hold abusers accountable and help consumers block bad actors from their phone lines.””

See the Press Release at https://www.nclc.org/media-center/pr-consumer-groups-urge-action-on-bipartisan-legislation-to-stop-misleading-spoofed-robocalls.html.