case study on consumer rights violation

You are using an outdated browser no longer supported by Oyez. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Zebersky Payne Shaw Lewenz is a boutique litigation and trial law firm that handles almost exclusively high-stakes litigation matters. Though its flagship office is in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Zebersky Payne Shaw Lewenz handles complex commercial litigation, class actions, consumer protection litigation, personal injury, and wrongful death matters across the United States and the world.

11 times Big Brands Violated Consumer Protection Laws

• May 2, 2018 September 21, 2022
• Jordan A. Shaw

With the recent Facebook fiasco, consumer protection and the safety of our personal information is yet again in the public spotlight.

Facebook is not the only big name brand out there who has dropped the ball on consumer’s safety in recent years.

Many brands we know, and trust, have made costly mistakes in regards to keeping their consumers safe. It just does not always hit your newsfeed.

The other problem is, most people are not even sure about what consumer protection means.

It can be fuzzy for most people at times.

That is why:  When trying to explain the scope of consumer protection laws to clients (and family members), I always find it best to use everyday examples.In this post, I will show you 11 times when brand names we all know (and trust), violated the Consumer Protection Act.

But, first…

What is consumer protection?

Consumer protection relates to a specific area of law that ensures the ethical and fair treatment of consumers of products and services in the US and promotes a competitive marketplace for the benefit of the consumer.In the US, modern consumer protection law started as early as the 19 th century, when public crises forced the government to respond by creating a body with jurisdiction to oversee products and services offered to the public.

Since then…

Consumer protection laws have evolved to cover topics like ethical marketing and advertising, identity and privacy protection, financial services regulation, deceitful business activities, anti-trust laws and more.

All of this falls under the jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission or FTC.

What is the FTC?

Founded by President Woodrow Wilson in 1914, the FTC, or Federal Trade Commission, is a government body created to protect consumers in the US from unethical or unfair treatment and deceptive business practices.

On their website, FTC.gov , the Federal Trade Commission says that it has three goals:

• To protect consumers by preventing fraud, deception and unfair business practices in the marketplace,
• To maintain competition by preventing anti-competitive business practices, and lastly;
• To advance individual and collective organizational performance .

To achieve its goals:

The Federal Trade Commission works closely with people from all sectors, from policy and lawmakers to businesses owners and the public and focuses on three main areas of activities:

1.Advisory Board

The FTC provides research and advice to key national and international governmental agencies to help guide and shape rules that help to maintain a safe and fair marketplace

2  Law Enforcement

The FTC acts as both an investigator and an enforcer. It collects complaints from the public, conducts follow-up investigations and, if necessary, files a lawsuit against the offending entity.

(examples coming up soon)

3. Education

The FTC provides educational workshops and materials for both the general public and business communities to promote a fair and ethical free Global market while educating people on current scams and fraudulent activities of which to remain aware.

11 Times Big Household Brands Violated Consumer Protection Laws

Every year the FTC can process well over a hundred Consumer Protection Act violation lawsuits.

(You can keep an eye on all of them on the FTC’s website .)

If you were to look though, you probably wouldn’t know most of the companies, so it would be harder to relate to for your daily life.

So, to make things easier:

I grabbed 11 consumer protection cases where big brands you know (and trust), violated the consumer protection act.

Let’s take a look…

AT & T’s Misleading Marketing

Ever wonder how “unlimited” phone plans mean that after watching a certain number of videos on YouTube that your internet would still slow down?

So did the FTC in 2014…

That is when:

They brought a formal complaint against AT & T for misleading customers by marketing “Unlimited” plans that…tended to have too many limitations.

(For the FTC, This falls under what is called the Marketing Practices Division)

The FTC’s complaint was that, while AT&T was promoting “Unlimited” plans…

Once consumers passed a certain level of data usage, their service would slow down – by up to 90%.

If that does not sound unlimited to you, it didn’t to the FTC either, who considered it deceitful advertising, and in direct violation of the Consumer’s Protection Act.

Although this case is still in the courts at the date of writing, AT&T is doing their best to try and dismiss this case.  However, no luck so far.

Reference: AT & T’s Case

Lenovo Risking All With a 3 rd Party Install

All computers come with “bloatware.”

Bloatware is a nickname used to describe pre-installed applications and programs on new computers. Probably named so because of their tendency to fill up (and slow down) what should be an empty machine. Maybe because of the discomfort they cause too.

Most bloatware is harmless…

…but, that was not the case with one such program, which Lenovo pre-installed on their computers.

VisualDiscovery, a popup ad delivery program, came as part of the package when buying a Lenovo computer.

Unbeknownst to Lenovo, this made them an accomplice in violating the Consumer Protection Act, but not because of the popup ad functionality. Although annoying, it is not technically in breach of consumer protection law (yet).

The issue was:

This 3 rd party program could access whatever sensitive information it wanted on the user’s system. This included their online logins, banking details, and in some cases, their social security number.

All in all, a serious breach of the Consumer Protection Act.

(This is an example of a case which would be handled by the Privacy and Identity Protection Division of the FTC)

To remedy the situation, the courts ordered Lenovo to conduct comprehensive software security audits on any pre-installed software to ensure consumers safety.

Plus, they had to get consumers express permission before activating any such software on their new computer.

Reference: Lenovo’s Case

Dish Network Keeps Calling

Telemarketing calls can be annoying.

When you have already put your name on the national Do Not Call registry and STILL get telemarketing calls, it can be infuriating.

That is what many people felt when Dish Network – in connection with their telemarketing partners – made millions, yes, millions, of robocalls to customers on the “Do Not Call” list.

(what are “robocalls”? We talk more about that in this article)

However, regardless of whether someone is on the registry, it is still in breach of the Consumer Protection Act when you use automatic dialing systems to call people with pre-recorded messages without their express written consent.

This rule is the basis of the Telephone Consumers Protection Act (TCPA), an area of Consumer Protection law.

In the end, a class action suit has held against Dish Network, who were forced to pay 341 million dollars for their violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Reference: Dish Network’s Case

DeVry’s Deception

Here’s another example of promising something to consumers that you cannot deliver.

For years, the popular university advertised promises around the idea that their students would find jobs within six months of graduating and would make better money than their peers.

DeVry claimed that as much as 90% of students would have a job within six months of graduating, and would earn up to 15% more than their peers.

A formal investigation from the FTC proved otherwise.

Although it was found to be true that most students did have a job after graduating,  many of the jobs were not in the alumni’s field of study.

They found business graduates working as servers in restaurants, and others working in car sales. DeVry also failed to acknowledge that a number of the students who had jobs six months after graduating already had those jobs before graduating .

DeVry’s promise was misleading.

It led consumers to believe that they had a high certainty of obtaining a job within their chosen field after studying with DeVry.

The court agreed that DeVry’s advertising was in direct violation of the Consumer Protection Act.

DeVry ended up paying a $100 Million settlement and had to refrain from such promises in any and all future public communications.

Reference: DeVry’s Case

  Amazon’s Child’s play

Back in the 90s and early 00’s (known as the naughty’s), every parent’s biggest fear was getting a surprise momentous phone bill because of their kid’s shenanigans.

It is still a parent’s fear. The only difference is that now it is the App and Play Stores that makes the hairs on the back of their neck stand on their ends.

The good thing is that thanks to the FTC’s hard work, it is not as easy as it used to be for kids to buy 10,000 tokens on Candy Crush or Plants vs. Zombies.

Up until recently…

Companies like Amazon had little in place to protect parents from paying for in-app purchases made by their, less financially astute, children.

This ended up costing parents millions of dollars in app purchases they did not approve.

To remedy the situation:

The FTC stepped in, stating that Amazon must change its in-app purchase processes to protect account holders from paying for purchases they did not willingly make.

Amazon has since instated a refund policy for these occurrences and put new security measures in place to stop children from making large purchases on their parents’ accounts.

As a side note, Apple went through this exact same issue in 2014 for in-app purchases made without a parent’s consent.

Reference: Amazon’s Case

Volkswagen’s Cheated Tests

You probably heard about this example in the news.

In their monumental lawsuit, Volkswagen had to pay more than 14 Billion dollars to fix problems they had caused by deceiving consumers.

What did they do?

Volkswagen cheated emissions tests, reporting that their cars were up to the standards they should have been…

…and they deceived customers about how “eco-friendly” their vehicles were in marketing communications.

These actions put them in violation of both the Environmental Protection Act and the Consumer protection act.

As Deputy Attorney General Sally Q. Yates succinctly described it:

“By duping the regulators, Volkswagen turned nearly half a million American drivers into unwitting accomplices in an unprecedented assault on our atmosphere,”

This is a perfect example of:

How consumer protection violations not only end in costly lawsuits and damages. They also have a ripple effect that changes the market’s view of a company for years to come.

Just like a personal relationship, a consumer’s trust is hard to win back once broken.

Reference: Volkswagen’s Case

Western Union Supports Scammers

If you have ever been scammed online…

…chanced are the transaction took place through a Western Union.

In fact, many overseas scammers rely heavily on the access to international transfers that Western Unions provides.

————–

For example:

Nigerian 419 scams, otherwise known as “advance fee” scams.  These (now famous) scams are when a scammer finds a way to manipulate an individual to send them money.

This type of scam usually uses a story that creates an emotional connection with the person to build trust which then leads to favors or asking for help…

Alternatively it involves promises of large sums of money, in exchange for a small fee.

(How many Nigerian Princes have emailed you in the last 12 months?)

There are other countries from where these types of scams originate, but as over 51% of these types of scams originate from Nigeria, these scams are referred to as Nigerian scams.

The criminal code for this kind of scam is 419, explaining the number.

———–

Because so many of such scams successfully used Western Union’s services to complete their transactions, the FTC filed a suit against Western Union in 2014, issuing a 586 Million dollar fine to the company to reimburse those affected between January 2014 and 2017.

If you were affected by a scam operated through Western Union during that period, you can still (as of the time of this writing) apply for a claim in the case. See the reference below.

Reference: Western Union’s Case

Uber’s Two Strikes

Uber is often criticized for its disruptive business model and actions.

But, they crossed the Consumer Protection line with, not one, but two separate accounts of violating the consumer protection act.

The first time was back in 2017.

This is when Uber was caught making hyperbolic promises about how much new Uber drivers could make, explicitly quoting high earnings for both New York and California drivers.

When the FTC conducted their independent research, they found average yearly earnings up to $30,000 lower than claimed by Uber.

This deceitful advertising cost Uber 20 Million dollars in settlements.

The other instant was more recent when it became known that Uber employees were able to access and misuse personal data obtained from ride-sharing contractors.

Although still under investigation…

…it is apparent that an Uber employee’s access key was used to make over 100,000 Uber driver’s bank account details and social security details public.

The severity of this breach is still yet to be seen because such a thing can have lifelong repercussions for the drivers ( a social security number is with you for life)

The case continues…

Reference: Uber’s Case 1 , Uber’s Case 2

7 – Eleven Eats Competition

Consumer protection does not always have to be about deceit or unethical behavior.

It also involves protecting consumers through promoting competition.

When companies have competition, it motivates them to offer the best possible deal to consumers, to “beat” their competitors.

That is why you see many brands trying their hardest to improve quality or lower prices.

In fact, there is a point in Apple’s history where Bill Gates bailed Steve Jobs out of potential bankruptcy precisely for this reason.

Without competition, a business has fewer incentives to lower prices or strive to make better quality products for its customers.

This is why:

When 7 – Eleven announced that it was buying 1,000+ of its competitor’s stores, the FTC took notice.

By doing so, they radically reduced competition within multiple geographical marketplaces, which would lower incentives for them to provide their customers the best prices.

(This falls under the protection subcategory known as anti-trust laws)

In this case, 7-Eleven’s parent company had to agree upon restructuring its deal to maintain a fair level competition in the marketplace.

Reference: 7-Eleven’s Case

Herbalife Pays For the Wrong Reasons

If you have ever been to a seminar hosted by a Multi-level marketing company, you know how many grandiose stories of a person joining and just a few months later being able to quit their job and buy a mansion, you will hear at those events.

The problem is, this is often misleading for new “recruits” who sign up thinking the company will solve all their life’s problems.

When Herbalife, a major international Multi-Level Marketing brand with over 4 Billion dollars in revenues, actively promised new registrants that they would have the opportunity to quit their jobs, make career level incomes and potentially become rich in the process…

A Consumer Protection investigation followed, which proved their claims to be false.

In reality, less than half of all Herbalife salespeople made less than $300 in a single reporting period.

The other problem that surfaced was their benefits structure. As it turned out, Herbalife incentivized the recruiting of new people more than the purchasing of useful goods.

This incentive structure is the basic principle of a pyramid scheme, which is illegal.

All these findings led to a $200 million dollar lawsuit and a court order to restructure their business model and payment structures.

Reference: Herbalife’s Case

Lending Club’s Hidden Fees

Nobody likes hidden fees . Especially the Consumer Protection Act.

The Lending Club is a popular peer-to-peer lending platform that connects those they call investors, interested in lending money at an interest rate, with borrowers.

This peer-to-peer lending platform promoted its services as free of “hidden fees” or surprises, but this was not true.

Investigations found that the Lending Club issued hidden charges that ended up costing their customers hundreds, or even thousands, of dollars more than they thought they would have to pay.

Furthermore:

Many potential borrower clients received congratulatory emails insinuating they had passed all criteria to obtain a loan, before Lending Club’s final credit history checks, which could often result in a final rejection for the loan.

In early 2018, Lending Club was sued for deceitful marketing activities and unlawful hidden fees.

Want to know how to avoid hidden fees? Read this post.

What did you think?

In my opinion, these examples are a reminder that we, the consumers, can’t just rely on companies to do the right thing. It’s our duty to stay vigilant and keep our eyes out for unethical behavior in the marketplace. Every one of us can help to keep big corporations honest.

If you have experienced a violation of the Consumers Protection Act, leave a comment below.

Or, better yet; give us a call. 1+ (877) 722-5943

(954) 989-7781 (954) 989-6333

Hablamos Español and Nós Falamos Portugues

RECENT NEWS

PractICE AREAS

• Commercial Litigation
• Personal Injury
• Consumer Litigation
• Class Action Litigation
• Insurance Litigation
• Healthcare Litigation
• Business Law
• Real Estate

Top 10 Case Study on Consumer Rights

We know consumer laws and courts exist, but only by reading through some case law can you understand how you as a consumer can exercise your rights!

Table of Contents

On an everyday basis, we purchase products and services. From our basic necessities like food and clothing to services like banking and education, we are dependent on companies and organisations to live comfortably in the present day, and we give them our hard-earned money in return. But sometimes, companies might fail to provide quality services or products. Many know there exist consumer courts and laws that protect consumers from consumer exploitation . But have you ever wondered who goes to these courts and what types of cases are filed? You would be surprised to know how basic these cases can be. So, here are 10 interesting case study on consumer rights curated for you.

Top 10 Case Studies on Consumer Rights

1. banks can’t always escape using ‘technical difficulties’.

We have come to rely on banks so much. A recent case study on consumer rights highlighted the need for stronger regulations. More than ever, most of our transactions are digital and heavily reliant on banks for these. Have you ever had your transaction fail due to the server being down or other errors?

Dipika Pallikal, a squash champion and Arjuna awardee found herself in an awkward situation when she used her Axis Bank Debit Card in a hotel at Netherlands’ Rotterdam failed. She had had 10 times the bill amount in her account at that time. Due to this, she faced a loss of reputation and humiliation. The bank said the incident was a case of ‘ Force Majeure’ (an act of god/ something beyond control)

Apart from that, the bank had also returned a cheque of ₹1 lakh issued to her by the government of India and blamed it on a technical error.

Dipika moved the consumer court in Chennai against Axis Bank

Court Decision

The court found that there was a deficiency of service on the part of Axis Bank and directed the bank to pay a compensation of ₹5 lakh and ₹5000 as expenses.

Key Takeaway

Banks are like any other service provider. We trust them with our money and they must perform the services we were promised. They cannot hide behind ‘technical difficulties’ or ‘ force majeure ’ and let customers suffer for it.

2. You Don’t Have to Be a Celebrity to Win a Consumer Case

A humble tea vendor, Rajesh Sakre, is an example of this. He had ₹20,000 in his State Bank of India account and had withdrawn ₹10,800. On his next visit to the ATM, however, he realized all his money was gone. When he asked the bank authorities they blamed it on him. 

So, he went to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum with his grievance. He couldn’t afford a lawyer and he argued the case himself. This case study on consumer awareness presents insights into how consumers are becoming more vigilant.

The forum ruled in his favor and ordered the State Bank of India to return the ₹9,200 with 6% interest, pay ₹10,000 as compensation for mental anguish caused by the issue, and ₹2,000 for legal expenses.

It doesn’t matter who you are, as long as you have a valid case you can approach the Consumer Cases Forum. And even big companies and government entities like the State Bank of India can be made to answer for their mistakes.

3. Not All Free Items Are Welcome

Imagine you bought a bottle of Pepsi and found a packet of gutka floating in it! It happened to Rajesh Rajan from Ahmedabad when he bought Pepsi from a local store. He sent a legal notice for defective goods to the company immediately and approached a Consumer Cases Dispute Redressal Forum. Every case study on consumer complaints tells a unique story of a consumer’s journey towards justice.

Moreover, he claimed that there was a deficiency in service that could have caused a health hazard to him. He demanded compensation of ₹5 lakh for the same.

The consumer forum passed an order in favor of Rajesh Rajan and directed the company to pay a total of ₹4008 (₹4000 for compensation and ₹8 for the Pepsi he purchased).

Rajesh moved the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, asking for higher compensation as ₹4008 was too low and he had spent ₹500 on sample testing itself. The State Commission passed an order asking the company to pay ₹20,000 as compensation and ₹2000 towards costs as it found Rajesh’s argument reasonable.

Free items are not all welcome! It is a deficiency in service on the part of the provider if you find anything in your food (packaged or otherwise) that isn’t supposed to be there. The Consumer Cases Forums are a good place to take them.

4. Paying More Than the MRP? You Shouldn’t.

It has become common to charge more than the maximum retail price (MRP) for packaged goods. Especially in places like theatres, food courts, railway stations, etc, we see this happen a lot and mostly ignore it. Among the prominent consumer cases last year, the MRP case stood out for its complexity

Mr Kondaiah from Andhra Pradesh, on the other hand, didn’t ignore it when he noticed that Sarvi Food Court charged him ₹40 for a water bottle where the MRP was ₹20. He filed a case against them in the District Consumer cases Disputes Redressal Forum for ‘unfair trade practice’. He supported his claim by producing the bill. The MRP case study on consumer rights brought to light some gaps in the existing regulations.

The court decided in favour of Mr Kondaiah and said that a practice is not justified just because it is widely common. Mr Kondaiah was awarded a compensation of ₹20,000, ₹20 (the extra money charged) and ₹5,000 in costs. 

No authority has the power to charge above the MRP for any packaged goods. It doesn’t matter where it is sold, you are not required to pay a rupee above the MRP.

5. No MRP at All on the Product?

Baglekar Akash Kumar, a 19-year-old got a book and ₹12,500 because of the book. How? He purchased the book online and when it was delivered, he noticed that there was no MRP mentioned in it. He browsed the internet and saw that the book was sold at different prices in different places.

So, he went to the consumer cases forum and filed a case against Penguin Books India Pvt. Ltd and the paper company.

The court held that not publishing MRP on the product without a valid reason is an ‘unfair trade practice’. MRP exists to ensure that a consumer is not overcharged for the product. So, it is mandatory for companies to print MRP.

The publishers were asked to print the retail price of the book and Akash was awarded ₹10,000 as compensation and ₹2,500 as costs.

It is required under law for companies to put MRP on every product. If you see a product without MRP, then it is a violation of Consumer Cases Protection Laws and you can take them to court. 

6. Medical Services Fall Within the Scope of the CPA

Do medical services fall under CPA? When there was a little confusion in this regard, the Indian Medical Association (IMA) decided to get this question resolved once and for all. The CPA case study on consumer rights brought to light some gaps in the existing regulations. The Medical Services case study on consumer complaints became a landmark case in consumer rights advocacy.

IMA approached the Supreme Court, asking them to declare that medical services are out of the scope of the CPA. They gave the following arguments to support their claim:

• Medical professionals are governed by their own code of ethics made by the Medical Council of India. 
• In the medical profession, it is hard to guarantee the end result of treatments. Many external factors which are out of the control of the professional can impact the outcome. So, allowing consumer claims will cause people to file a case whenever a treatment doesn’t work out.
• There are no medical science experts in the consumer complaints online.
• Medical service provided by government hospitals will not fall under the Act especially when the service is provided for free. 

These were decent points. After consideration, the court settled the claims in the following manner.

Medical services provided by any professional (private or government) will be covered by CPA. This means  people can file a case in a Consumer Court if the service provided is not in confirmation with the Act.

• Doctors and hospitals who treat patients for free cannot be sued by a person who availed their services for free. 
• In a government hospital, where services are provided free of charge – the Consumer Protection Act India would not apply.

Apart from these two exceptions, the Act will apply when a person gets treated in government hospitals for free, when a poor person gets treated for free, and when insurance money is used for treatment.

7. Tired of the False Claims Made by Skin and Hair Care Products Yet?

Maybe you are not tired yet or you are too tired to question. However, a 67-year-old man from Kerala’s remotest areas was tired of these consistent lies and how companies got away with them.

In 2015, K Chaathu complained against Indulekha (beauty product manufacturers) and Mammootty (an actor who was the brand ambassador of the company) for putting up misleading ads. The tagline of the soap was ‘soundaryam ningale thedi varum’ which meant ‘beauty will come in search of you. The ads also claimed that people using the soap would become ‘fair’ and ‘beautiful’ but the 67-year-old didn’t become fair or beautiful.

Funny, right?

Compensation Paid

Indulekha paid him ₹30,000 in an out of court settlement while the initial claim of Chaathu was ₹50,000. When he was asked about this, he said that this case was never about the money but about how these companies put up advertisements every day with false claims. And it is not okay to let these people get away with it.

Key Takeaways

Advertisements are made to sell the products, so exaggeration of results is too common. But this doesn’t make it okay to make false claims just for the sake of selling the products. Making false claims in violation of the CTA.

8. Homebuyers Are Consumers

Imagine you decide to buy a house (a dream come true for many). You do a lot of research, pool your hard-earned money, and pay a real estate developer to build the house for you. They promise to deliver within 42 months but 4 years later they haven’t even started construction. 

This is what happened to two people and they decided to move the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) for it. The Homebuyer’s case study on consumer rights was instrumental in changing local regulations.

NCDRC decided in favour of the homebuyers and asked the real estate developer to refund the money with a simple interest of 9% per annum. They were also awarded a compensation of ₹50,000 each.

The real estate developer challenged this in the Supreme Court, saying that the issue is covered under another Act (Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act) and therefore cannot be taken in a consumer court. But the Supreme Court denied their argument saying that as long as the other Act explicitly stops people from getting remedy under other laws, they will be allowed to do so.

Our laws are in such a way that even though there are other remedies available, in most cases where you are a buyer of a product or a service, you will have protection under the Consumer Protection Act. 

9. Insurance Claims Cannot be Rejected on Mere Technicalities

We pay the premium and get insurance to protect us from losses we can’t foresee. Sadly, many people have had bad experiences with the insurance company. Om Prakash, for example, had his truck stolen and claimed insurance for the same. The truck was stolen on 23.03.2010, the FIR was filed on 24.03.2010, and the insurance claim was filed on 31.03.2010. 

The insurance investigator was sent and he confirmed that the claim was genuine. The claim was approved for the amount of ₹7,85,000/-. But the amount was never given to Om Prakash. With the rise in consumer court cases , companies are now more cautious about their policies and practices. When he sent the insurance company a legal notice for the same, they replied saying that there was a breach of terms and conditions: 

“immediate information to the Insurer about the loss/theft of the vehicle”

Om Prakash was late to apply for insurance because he was held up by the police to try and recover his vehicle.

While the consumer courts didn’t allow his case, the Supreme Court allowed his appeal and held in favour of him. It was ruled that insurance companies cannot escape from paying the claimants on technical grounds. Especially when the claimant has valid reasons for it.

The Court directed the Respondent company to pay a sum of ₹8,35,000/- to the Appellant along with interest @ 8% per annum. He was also awarded ₹50,000 as compensation.

Over the years, many judgments have been made to ensure that insurance companies are accountable and do not escape from paying valid claims. If you experience a similar situation with your insurance provided, you can approach the consumer court.  

10. iPhone 5S Gold for ₹68 + ₹10,000

Let’s close the list with a fun one! How would it be to get an iPhone at just ₹68? In 2014, Nikhil Bansal (a student) saw this unbelievable offer on Snapdeal (a discount of ₹46,651) and ordered it immediately as any sane person would. He received an order confirmation but later he was told that the order was canceled. They claimed that the offer itself was a technical glitch. “The iPhone case study on consumer complaint showcased the challenges consumers face even in today’s digital age.

When he approached the e-commerce consumer complaints India Forum, he claimed that these kinds of offers were misleading people and it was the duty of Snapdeal to honour the order. The forum ruled in his favor and asked Snapdeal to deliver him the iPhone for ₹68 and asked him to pay a compensation of ₹2,000.

When Snapdeal appealed this order, the compensation was raised to ₹10,000! 

Key Takeaway – Case Study on Consumer Rights

E-commerce stores are just as answerable as any other shop owner under the Consumer Protection Act. So if you face any issues like this with them, consider taking it to the consumer court. Through each case study on consumer rights, we can learn more about our rights and responsibilities

Consumer forums exist to protect consumers from consumer exploitation and ensure that we are not cheated by the companies we pay for getting products or services. Knowing your rights is the first step towards becoming a conscious consumer. 

Don’t hesitate to approach the consumer court if you have a valid claim of consumer exploitation . Even if it is for an ₹ 8 product like Pepsi, a valid claim should be taken to the forum.

What is the Consumer Protection Act?

The Consumer Protection Act is a law that safeguards the interests of consumers against unfair trade practices and ensures their rights to quality goods and services.

When was the Consumer Protection Act passed?

The Consumer Protection Act was passed in 1986 and later updated with the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Who is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act?

A consumer is any individual who purchases goods or services for personal use, not for manufacturing or resale.

Who can file a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act?

A complaint can be filed by a consumer, any recognized consumer association, or the Central or State Government on behalf of a consumer.

What is a consumer rights case study?

A consumer rights case study involves analyzing a real-life scenario where a consumer faced issues with a product or service and sought legal resolution under consumer protection laws.

What are consumer cases in India?

Consumer cases in India refer to legal disputes brought by consumers against businesses for grievances related to defective goods, poor services, or unfair trade practices.

What are some examples of consumer rights?

Examples of consumer rights include the right to safety, the right to be informed, the right to choose, the right to be heard, and the right to redressal.

What is the consumer rights class 10 project?

The consumer rights class 10 project typically involves students researching and presenting on the various rights of consumers and how they are protected under the law.

Who is a consumer class 10 SST project?

In the class 10 Social Science (SST) project, a consumer is defined as an individual who purchases goods or services for personal use and is protected under consumer laws.

What is COPRA? (Consumer Operating Protection Regulation Authority)

The Consumer Protection Act (COPRA) is a significant piece of legislation in India aimed at protecting the rights of consumers.…

What is Consumer Privacy and Why is it Necessary?

Understanding Its Significance and Necessity In an era where personal data has become a valuable commodity and digital interactions are…

Consumer Protection Act, 1986: Rights and Filing a Complaint

The Consumer Protection Act, 1986, often referred to as COPRA, is a significant legislation enacted by the Government of India…

Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA): Rules, Works and Provisions

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) stands as a cornerstone of consumer protection in the United States, aiming to…

Understanding G-Secs and How to Invest in Them for Business?

G-secs refer to government securities or, in other words, loans or capital issued by the government. The biggest advantage associated…

Startups to Continue Receiving a Tax Holiday

Businesses of all sizes and types have been having a tough year courtesy of the coronavirus pandemic. The Indian government…

How the Rupee Depreciation is Enticing NRIs in Real Estate?

The Indian currency has depreciated as much as 5.2% against the US dollar in 2022 so far. The rupee’s depreciation…

Subscribe to our newsletter blogs

• View All Matching Results

New York Consumer Protection Laws Gives Rise to Per-Violation Statutory Damages

Relatively few consumer class action cases reach trial; most are settled or resolved through motion practice. The paucity of cases tried to judgment makes it notable when, as in the case discussed here, one goes all the way to trial and appeal.

Premier Nutrition sold a product called Joint Juice that contained glucosamine and chondroitin, ingredients familiar to anyone who has browsed the supplement aisle. As the name suggests, the product was labeled and promoted for joint health. For example, the packaging stated "Use Daily for Healthy, Flexible Joints" and "A full day's supply of glucosamine combined with chondroitin helps keep cartilage lubricated and flexible." Montera v. Premier Nutrition Corp. , No. 22-16375, 2024 WL 3659589 (9th Cir. Aug. 6, 2024).

According to the plaintiff, the advertising and labelling of Joint Juice was deceptive because glucosamine and chondroitin have no effect on joint function or pain. The case started as a putative nationwide class, but the district court declined to certify a nationwide class. In the wake of that decision, the plaintiffs filed separate cases, each under the laws of a different state.

The first case to proceed to trial was a class consisting of New York purchasers asserting claims under New York law. Two overlapping New York consumer protection statutes prohibit, in part, "deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any business" and "false advertising in the conduct of any business." N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law §§ 349, 350.

Of importance to this case, the recovery available under these two statutes varies greatly. Although both permit recovery of actual damages, Section 349 authorizes statutory damages of $50, while Section 350 authorizes statutory damages of $500. Neither statute makes clear if statutory damages are calculated on a per-person or per-violation basis and, for reasons that will become apparent, there is no controlling precedent from the New York state courts that provides an answer.

The jury found in favor of the plaintiff class on both its Section 349 and Section 350 claims, finding in pertinent part that Premier Nutrition "engaged in an act or practice that [was] deceptive or misleading in a material way" and that the class suffered injury as a result. Slip op. at *3. It found that 166,249 units of Joint Juice had been sold in New York during the class period and that actual damages were about $1.5 million, based on the average purchase price. Statutory damages, of course, would be much greater. The class sought statutory damages of more than $91 million, which it reached by multiplying $550 by the number of units sold. Although the district court entered judgment on the jury verdict – rejecting Premier Nutrition's motions to decertify the class and for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial – it agreed with Premier Nutrition that an award of $91 million would be constitutionally excessive based on the standard developed in cases limiting the amount of punitive damages. Accordingly, it awarded damages of about $8.3 million, based on $50 per unit.

Both sides appealed. Premier Nutrition sought reversal, and the class argued that the district court erred in not awarding the full measure of statutory damages based on the measure of $550 per unit. A threshold issue was whether the measure of statutory damages under New York law should be calculated on a "per violation" basis or on a "per person" basis. Unless each member of the class made only one purchase, a per-violation basis will yield greater damages. It is also easier to determine, because one need only look to the number of purportedly offending products sold, instead of trying to figure out how many separate individuals purchased them.

In the absence of controlling precedent from the New York state courts, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had to determine if the New York courts would apply the damages provisions of Sections 349 and 350 on a per-person or per-violation basis. Although the court could have certified the question to the New York Court of Appeals (the highest court in the New York court system), it declined Premier Nutrition's request to do without elaboration in a footnote, slip op. at *16 n.15, and determined the issue itself.

The court began with the text of the statutes, which create private causes of action for persons "injured by reason of any violation" of either statute. It concluded that "the plainest reading of that phrase is that a cause of action arises for each violation." Slip op. at *14. It next reviewed the history and development of Sections 349 and 350. Originally, only the state attorney general could sue to enforce them. In 1980, the legislature amended them to add a private right of action and provide for statutory damages, in part to "encourage private enforcement" and "add a strong deterrent against deceptive business practices." In 2007, it increased the amount of statutory damages available under Section 350 to $500 because the existing limit of $50 was "too low to be effective." Id . The court's review of the history of the statutes similarly pointed toward their authorization of statutory damages calculated on a per-violation basis.

Potentially pointing in the other direction was a peculiarity of New York's code of civil procedure, which prohibits maintaining a case seeking statutory damages as a class action. N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 901(b). At least one purpose of this prohibition would seem to be a way to control a defendant's exposure to class aggregation of statutory damages, suggesting that if such a case did proceed as a class action, the intent of the statute would be best served by not permitting a different mechanism to aggregate damages, i.e., to permit a per-violation calculation. The Ninth Circuit saw things differently, concluding that the unavailability of a class action suggested that statutory damages for violations of Sections 349 and 350 should be calculated on a per-violation basis, because a per-person basis in the absence of a class action would provide only a "meager incentive" that would be inadequate to "accomplish the Legislature's express goal of deterring statutory violations." Id . at *14.

Having rejected Premier Nutrition's challenge to the district court's per-violation calculation of statutory damages, the Ninth Circuit turned to the class's argument that the district court erred by not awarding the full measure of statutory damages ($550 per unit for a total of $91 million). On this issue, the class had the benefit of the Ninth Circuit's intervening decision in Wakefield v. ViSalus, Inc. , 51 F.4th 1109 (9th Cir. 2022), which held that the familiar test to determine if punitive damages were constitutionally excessive did not apply to statutory damages. Rather, the standard for statutory damages asks if the award is " extremely disproportionate to the offense and 'obviously' unreasonable." Id . at 1122-23. Given that the intervening Wakefield decision rendered erroneous the district court's analysis based on the test for punitive damages, the Ninth Circuit remanded the case to the district court to apply the test announced in that decision to the statutory damages award based on the jury's verdict.

Readers not familiar with class action jurisprudence might wonder why the plaintiff was able to bring a class action for violation of New York consumer protection statutes as a class action in federal court in California given that the same legislature that enacted these statutes also closed the doors of the New York courthouses to class actions for their alleged violation. Those with a knack for federal civil procedure or experience in the class action field would respond with two words: Shady Grove. Specifically, the U.S. Supreme Court held in 2010 that C.P.L.R. § 901(b) is procedural for Erie purposes and, hence, had no application in federal courts exercising diversity jurisdiction. Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Co. , 559 U.S. 393 (2010) . Thus, even though this case could not have been brought as a class action in the New York state courts, Shady Grove means that it could proceed as a class action in federal court in California.

The inability to bring this type of case as a class action in New York state court explains the absence of decisions from the New York state courts addressing the per-violation versus per-person issue. Without the ability to proceed as a class, the New York state courts would be an unfavorable forum for consumer false advertising claims, and plaintiffs' counsel would surely avoid them. Hence, the seemingly odd situation in which an unsettled question of New York law of importance to consumer class action cases is unlikely to be resolved by the New York courts absent certification of the question by a federal court faced with the issue.

Related Blog

Related practices, related insights.

Please note that email communications to the firm through this website do not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the firm. Do not send any privileged or confidential information to the firm through this website. Click "accept" below to confirm that you have read and understand this notice.

Have You Seen Us on TV?  When you become a Friend of AARP Foundation today, your first monthly gift will be MATCHED!

Public benefits/senior assitance

Job Training

Legal Advocacy

You have the power to change the lives of seniors in poverty .

1 in 3 older adults struggle to meet their basic needs. Your gift can help seniors secure good jobs, get the benefits they've earned, and stay connected to their communities.

• right_container

Get Involved

News & Stories

Executive Leadership

Board Members

Financials & Governance

Our Mission

Empowering Older Workers

Work Programs and Career Support for Older Adults

AARP Foundation Litigation

Grantmaking

Ways to Give

Grant Opportunities

Donate Today

Make a Gift to Help Struggling Seniors

Partnerships

Bring Our Programs and Services to Your Community

Volunteer with Tax-Aide

Help Older Adults Prepare Taxes

Volunteer with Experience Corps

Make a Difference in a Child's Life

Our Programs & Services

Find Local Assistance

Food Security

Make Food More Affordable

Workorce Development

Build Job Training Skills and Coaching

Medicare Savings Programs

Save on Medicare

SCSEP - Paid Job Training

Senior Community Service Employment

Featured Story

After Retirement, A Newfound Career Restores Purpose

Litigation In the News

Is Your Pension Safe?

Food Security Research

Research on Food Security Among Older Adults

2023 Supreme Court Cases Preview

What's at Stake for Older Adults

You are now leaving AARP.org and going to a website that is not operated by AARP. A different privacy policy and terms of service will apply.

Looking Ahead: Consumer

The Court is likely to continue to evaluate consumers’ right to have their day in court in the coming year. In the decade since the Supreme Court decided AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion , 563 U.S. 333 (2011) , clauses requiring mandatory pre-dispute arbitration and prohibiting class actions have proliferated. In Concepcion , the Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempted a California law under which class-action bans in arbitration clauses were deemed to violate state public policy and, thus, were unenforceable . Id. at 343. As of 2018, at least half of U.S. households and 25 million employees were subject to mandatory arbitration clauses prohibiting class actions.

You have the power to change the lives of seniors in poverty

Make a Gift

The importance of arbitration clauses in civil litigation, thus, continues undiminished, and two cert petitions pending before the Court provide further opportunities for the Court to clarify the reach of arbitration. Both cases, Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (No. 20-1573) , and HRB Tax Group v. Snarr (No. 20-1570) , challenge judicial decisions holding that California laws authorizing plaintiffs to proceed in representative capacities are not preempted by the FAA.

AARP Foundation Highlights

Thanks to the support of our donors and partners in 2022, we helped older adults with low income secure more than $726 million in new income, benefits, refunds, and credits.

In Moriana , a plaintiff whose employment contract required her to waive her right to bring a private attorney general action sued her employer under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) for allegedly violating California labor law. Moriana v. Viking River Cruises, Inc ., No. B297327, 2020 WL 5584508, at *1 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 18, 2020) . Under PAGA, a plaintiff can seek damages against her employer on behalf of herself and other employees if the State declines to intervene in the case. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, at 8, Moriana (20-1573). Those employees receive a quarter of any monetary recovery, with the remaining three-quarters going to the State. Id. at 9. The California Supreme Court has held that Concepcion does not require arbitration of a PAGA claim because such claims represent a dispute between an employer and the State, whereas the aim of the FAA is to ensure efficient resolution of disputes over a litigant’s private rights. Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC , 59 Cal. 4th 348, 384 (Cal. 2014) . (The Ninth Circuit has also rejected a challenge to Iskanian , though on the grounds that PAGA actions do not raise the same efficiency concerns as class actions.) The Viking Cruises cert. petition argues that Iskanian is nearly identical to Concepcion , in that both involved the State declining to enforce an arbitration agreement pursuant to an important public interest and asks the Supreme Court to overrule Iskanian . Petition for Writ of Certiorari, at 2-3, Moriana (20-1573).

The second case, HRB Tax Group v. Snarr , involves a California rule governing “public injunctions,” which are defined as injunctions that have “‘the primary purpose and effect of’ prohibiting unlawful acts that threaten future injury to the general public.’” Snarr v. HRB Tax Group, Inc. , 839 Fed.Appx. 53, 54 (9th Cir. 2020) (quoting McGill v. Citibank, N.A. , 393 P.3d 85, 90 (Cal. 2017)). California case law makes unenforceable a contract that waives the right to seek public injunctive relief in all forums. Snarr , 389 Fed. Appx. at 54. In Snarr , the plaintiff sought a public injunction against HRB, claiming the tax preparation company misleadingly steered tax filers away from a free service and toward a paid one, in violation of California consumer protection laws. Id. at 55. The plaintiff’s arbitration agreement with HRB forbids public injunctions and so is unenforceable under California law, and the Ninth Circuit refused to compel arbitration of the plaintiff’s claim. Id. at 54

In so doing, the court relied on Blair v. Rent-A-Center, Inc. , 928 F.3d 819 (9th Cir. 2019) , a prior circuit case holding that the FAA does not preempt the public-injunction rule. Blair rests on the premises that, unlike the ban on class-action waivers at issue in Concepcion , the public-injunction rule does not single out arbitration and does not undermine the purported efficiency and informality of bilateral arbitration, given that a plaintiff can seek a public injunction in a bilateral arbitration without resort to class-certification procedures. Id .  at 827-29

In its petition seeking review of Snarr , HRB rejects these arguments, contending that the rule’s focus on the general public and the higher stakes and complexity at issue undermine the traditional benefits of bilateral arbitration. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, at 16-17, Snarr (No. 20-1573). HRB also argues that, in practice, the public-injunction rule allows plaintiffs to avoid arbitration by seeking public injunctions. Id. at 5. In opposing Supreme Court review, Snarr distinguishes substantively complex claims (like those for a public injunctions) from the procedural complexity at the heart of the Court’s arbitration jurisprudence and notes that the evasion HRB raises can occur only in the particular cases of arbitration provisions drafted as HRB’s is. Respondent’s Brief in Opposition, at 26-27, Snarr (No. 20-1573). Snarr additionally argues that, under Supreme Court precedent, the “FAA does not require enforcement of arbitration provisions that expressly waive statutory claims and remedies,” as HRB’s contract does, and that the public-injunction rule applies equally to all contracts, whether or not they contain arbitration clauses. Id. at 5-6.

If the Supreme Court takes up Viking Cruises or Snarr , we will learn how far the Court is willing to extend its arbitration jurisprudence. Any decisions will have important consequences for consumer litigation in California and other states authorizing private-attorney-general suits and public injunctions.

Ali Naini [email protected]

View the Full Supreme Court Preview

Unlock Access to AARP Members Edition

Already a Member? Login

More From Forbes

Supreme court upholds consumer rights: federal government liable for fcra violations.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

The Supreme Court affirmed consumers’ right to pursue legal action against entities, including the ... [+] federal government, that negligently or willfully neglect to address consumer complaints under the FCRA.

A recent Supreme Court ruling in Department of Agriculture Rural Development Rural Housing Service v. Kirtz , No. 22-846 , rebuffed the federal government’s effort to sidestep a lawsuit arising from inaccurate debt reporting, adversely affecting a Pennsylvania man’s credit. This decision paves the way for potential litigation against the federal government in connection with the Fair Credit Reporting Act .

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Housing Service (USDA RHS) provides loans to help build or improve housing and community facilities in rural areas. Reginal Kirtz took out a loan from the USDA RHS. Despite repaying the loan in full, the USDA RHS erroneously reported Kirtz’s loan status as delinquent.

Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), as amended by the Consumer Credit Reporting Reform Act of 1996, consumers retain the right to pursue legal action against lenders who knowingly or negligently furnish false information to credit reporting entities. Kirtz invoked the FCRA to sue the government for non-compliance with the law.

The government initially claimed immunity from Kirtz’s lawsuit, asserting that the FCRA applies to private entities but not the federal government. While a federal judge initially concurred, the Third Circuit overturned this ruling.

The central issue before the Supreme Court was whether the federal government, acting as a lender, could be subject to lawsuits for disseminating inaccurate information in violation of the FCRA or if it could invoke sovereign immunity.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of September 2023

Best 5% interest savings accounts of september 2023.

The FCRA regulates the gathering, disclosure, and utilization of consumer credit data. It applies to various consumer reporting agencies, encompassing credit bureaus, medical information firms, and tenant screening services.

The FCRA safeguards the accuracy and confidentiality of data collected by consumer reporting agencies , stipulating permissible reasons for accessing consumer reports and limiting access to such information. Entities providing information to consumer reporting agencies, known as data furnishers, bear legal responsibilities, including ensuring data accuracy and promptly investigating disputed information.

Sovereign immunity is a legal doctrine that shields a sovereign state, such as the United States government, from being sued without its consent. Sovereign immunity generally protects the government from legal claims seeking damages unless Congress explicitly waives that immunity.

Justice Neil Gorsuch delivered the Court’s opinion and largely upheld the Third Circuit’s decision, emphasizing the FCRA’s unequivocal waiver of sovereign immunity. The opinion noted that while initially focused on consumer reporting agencies and individuals requesting credit information, the FCRA’s definition of “person” broadly includes partnerships, corporations, cooperatives, associations, and governmental entities. The enactment was further broadened in 1996 with provisions targeting entities supplying information to consumer reporting agencies. These provisions mandate that entities correcting inaccuracies in credit reports must promptly investigate and rectify errors.

Gorsuch noted that the federal government is among the largest furnishers of credit information to consumer reporting agencies. The Court’s examination of the statute affirmed consumers’ right to pursue legal action against entities, including the federal government, that negligently or willfully neglect to address consumer complaints under the FCRA.

The Supreme Court’s ruling on the FCRA litigation against the federal government marks a significant milestone in consumer protection and legal accountability. Consumers now have a clear avenue to hold federal agencies accountable for FCRA violations, empowering individuals to seek remedies when their credit reports are inaccurately affected. Federal agencies, including the USDA, must comply with the FCRA’s provisions. They cannot seek sovereign immunity and can be subject to lawsuits if they willfully or negligently supply false information about consumers to credit bureaus.

The Kirtz case reminds all data furnishers to remain vigilant in navigating the evolving landscape of credit reporting regulations and reinforces the principles of accuracy, transparency, and accountability upheld by the FCRA.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.

Skip to main navigation

• Email Updates
• Federal Court Finder

Consumer Protection

Starbucks sued for allegedly using coffee from farms with rights abuses while touting its ‘ethical’ sourcing

A consumer advocacy group is suing Starbucks, the world’s largest coffee brand, for false advertising, alleging that it sources coffee and tea from farms with human rights and labor abuses, while touting its commitment to ethical sourcing.

The case, filed in a Washington, D.C., court on Wednesday on behalf of American consumers, alleges that the coffee giant is misleading the public by widely marketing its “100% ethical” sourcing commitment on its coffee and tea products, when it knowingly sources from suppliers with “documented, severe human rights and labor abuses.”

“On every bag of coffee and box of K-cups that Starbucks sells, Starbucks is heralding its commitment to 100% ethical sourcing,” said Sally Greenberg, CEO of the National Consumers League, the legal advocacy group bringing the case. “But it’s pretty clear that there are significant human rights and labor abuses across Starbucks’ supply chain.”

The lawsuit cites reporting about human rights and labor abuses on specific coffee and tea farms in Guatemala , Kenya and Brazil , and alleges that Starbucks has continued to purchase from these suppliers in spite of the documented violations.

"We are aware of the lawsuit, and plan to aggressively   defend against the asserted claims that Starbucks has misrepresented its ethical sourcing commitments to customers," said a spokesperson for Starbucks.

In an earlier statement they said, “We take allegations like these extremely seriously and are actively engaged with farms to ensure they adhere to our standards. Each supply chain is required to undergo reverification regularly and we remain committed to working with our business partners to meet the expectations detailed in our Global Human Rights Statement ."

In Brazil, labor officials have cracked down on several reported Starbucks suppliers over abusive and unsafe labor practices in recent years, including garnishing the cost of harvesting equipment from farm workers wages, not providing clean drinking water, personal protective equipment and bathrooms, and employing underaged workers. In 2022, 17 workers, including three minors, were rescued by Brazilian inspectors from “modern slavery,” according to Reporter Brasil , at a coffee farm managed by a man whose coffee roaster company received Starbucks’ seal of certification a month earlier.

In response to the Reporter Brasil stories and reported labor abuses in Kenya and Guatemala cited in the lawsuit, Starbucks issued statements at the time that the company was “deeply concerned,” and that it would “thoroughly investigate” claims of labor violations, “take immediate action” to suspend purchases or “ensure corrective action” occurred.

Starbucks told NBC News it has since taken corrective action in both Guatemala and Kenya.

In a promotional video on its coffee academy website, a Starbucks coffee buyer says the company’s ethical sourcing stamp “means that we are buying coffee, making sure that it’s good for the planet and good for the people who produce it.”

Greenberg said the suit aims to prevent Starbucks from making claims like those — particularly its “Committed to 100% Ethical Coffee Sourcing” advertising — unless the company improves labor practices within its supply chain.

Starbucks, like many companies, uses third-party certification programs to ensure the integrity of its supply chains for tea and cocoa. The company launched its own sourcing standards, called C.A.F.E. Practices, in 2004 to oversee its coffee sourcing in more than 30 countries. The verification program is administered by a company called SCS Global Services in collaboration with Conservation International.

The verification program holds Starbucks coffee suppliers to more than 200 environmental, labor and quality standards. Farms that fail to meet those can be barred from supplying the company until corrective action is confirmed.

But there have long been issues with how effective such programs are, according to experts.

In 2021, Rainforest Alliance, the third-party that certifies Starbucks’ supply chains for tea and cocoa, was sued in D.C. court by another consumer advocacy group over “false and deceptive marketing” of Hershey’s cocoa as “100 percent certified and sustainable.” A judge ruled last year that the case could move forward only against Hershey, as the manufacturer of the products. 

Rainforest Alliance did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

“There is this huge pile of evidence that shows that the mechanisms that [certifiers are] relying on to address problems like forced labor, child labor, gender based violence, are extremely flawed and not working very well,” said Genevieve LeBaron, director of the School of Public Policy at Canada’s Simon Fraser University.

“We have incident after incident that’s uncovered in these supply chains. And still, companies go around and make these kinds of claims that they have 100% sustainable or ethical sourcing” said LeBaron, whose research into cocoa and tea has shown that the prevalence and severity of labor violations on certified and uncertified farms was “basically identical."

LeBaron, who has consulted for the United Nations on global supply chain ethics, said the issue is not unique to Starbucks, but ethical commitments from large purchasing players like Starbucks can have an outsize impact on the integrity of supply chains if they are backed up.

Starbucks has 10 “farmer support centers ” in coffee-producing regions around the globe, including Brazil and Guatemala, but does not release public lists of certified suppliers, making it difficult to track how often its suppliers are found to be engaging in labor abuses.

“I think it is really hard to have an ethical supply chain. And I would say, you know, a lot of the reason for that is that, especially in agriculture, there’s a sort of status quo of sourcing goods way below the cost of actually producing them. And as long as you have that, you’re gonna have problems,” LeBaron said.

Kenzi Abou-Sabe is a reporter and producer in the NBC News Investigative Unit.

Adiel Kaplan is a reporter with the NBC News Investigative Unit.

• 608.784.5678

• Alternative Dispute Resolution
• Banking Law
• Business & Corporate Law
• Criminal Defense
• Divorce & Family Law
• Employment & Labor Law
• Estate Planning & Elder Law
• Insurance Law
• Municipal & School Law
• Personal Injury
• Real Estate
• Robert P. Smyth
• Maureen L. Kinney
• Terence R. Collins
• Brent P. Smith
• Ellen M. Frantz
• Steven P. Doyle
• Sonja C. Davig
• Brian G. Weber
• Joseph G. Veenstra
• Brandon J. Prinsen
• Anthony R. Gingrasso
• Justin W. Peterson
• James M. Burrows
• David A. Pierce Jr.
• Katelyn K. Doyle
• Napela Shim
• Insights & Events
• Pay My Bill

Consumer protection cases headline Supreme Court cases in 2021

4 years ago by Joe Veenstra, Consumer Rights Attorney

Supreme Court poised to make some decisions on consumer protection issues

The year before us looks interesting when it comes to several consumer protection matters such as FTC penalties, automatic telephone dialing systems, COVID-19-related class-action lawsuits and other consumer protection issues. Let's take a closer look at the consumer protection-related trends and cases we're keeping an eye on in 2021. 

Consumer protection issues at the forefront in 2021

Covid-19 and the possibility of class-action lawsuits.

From masks to hand sanitizer and other PPE meant to stem the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, consumer goods and services have gone under the microscope. We're watching for a potential spike in complaints and allegations about these items and potential class-action lawsuits. 

This comes in the wake of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration easing regulation regarding PPE and related products during the pandemic. As manufacturers attempt to rise to the top, claims of these products' effectiveness could prompt legal action if they don't perform as promised, don't protect consumers as advertised or, in some cases, actually lead to consumer harm. 

We're keeping our eyes on several cases, including Archer et al. v. Carnival Corp. et al., as well as Juishan Hsu et al. v. Princess Cruise Lines Ltd., suits that aim to hold luxury cruise providers accountable for passenger exposure to COVID-19 and resulting harm.

Monetary FTC penalties considered by the Supreme Court

Under Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the FTC can seek the return of what are known as ill-gotten funds through disgorgement. At issue is whether payday loan companies engaged in predatory practices in the case of AMG Capital Management LLC et al. v. FTC. Critics say Section 13(b) is too expansive, leading companies to settle instead of paying steep penalties. If the FTC should lose the case, they could be significantly limited in their efforts to seek monetary remedies via Section 13(b) as an enforcement tool. 

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act

Another case before the Supreme Court in 2021 could impact protections under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), which restricts automated telephone dialing systems. In the case of Facebook v. Duguid, Supreme Court justices are considering whether equipment that dials consumer telephone numbers from a preexisting list is legal under the act. If Facebook comes out on top, the number of cases considered under the TCPA would be reduced by the newly-limited scope of protections. 

Harm standard for class actions under consideration

The Supreme Court is examining a class action suit that could narrow the scope of consumer classes that can sue for damages. The suit, TransUnion LLC v. Sergio L. Ramirez, dating back to 2012, stems from a claim against TransUnion, a credit reporting agency. Class representative Sergio L. Ramirez claimed TransUnion told lenders he may have matched entries in the national database of criminals and terrorists, and as a result, he was not able to purchase a car. TransUnion maintains there is no proof other class members were injured as Ramirez was, and there is no proof a third party ever saw the inaccurate credit reports on them. 

Automatic renewal laws

Automatic renewal laws are also in the spotlight in 2021; these regulations control subscription renewal terms to eliminate unwanted charges. New York state is considering a strict ARL, following California's enactment of similar regulations ten years ago. The change would require affirmative consent from a customer before an automatic renewal is in place for products such as recurring shipments of goods, printed publications and weight loss programs. If New York does enact the regulation, other states may follow suit. 

2021: The year in consumer law and trends

In short, 2021 is poised to be an interesting year for consumer laws and trends. The legal implications of the decisions related to these issues can impact the lives of many consumers, regardless of whether they find themselves involved in individual or class action lawsuits of their own. It's worthwhile to stay informed to know where your rights as a consumer begin and end and when it's time to pursue justice with a trusted attorney for consumer issues you encounter. 

Select a tag below to view all posts with that subject.

• consumer protection
• consumer law
• class-action
• supreme court

Please Share Me On

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Pin on Pinterest

Latest Posts

• Kreyòl Ayisyen

Enforcement actions

When we take an enforcement action against an entity or person we believe has violated the law, we will post court documents and other related materials here.

The Bureau may enforce the law by filing an action in federal district court or by initiating an administrative adjudication proceeding. Administrative proceedings are conducted by an Administrative Law Judge, who holds hearings and issues a recommended decision. Proceedings are conducted in accordance with the Rules of Practice for Adjudication Proceedings .

• Get definitions for enforcement action terms

Acima Holdings, LLC; Acima Digital, LLC; and Aaron Allred

Fifth third bank, n.a., sutherland global services, inc., sutherland mortgage services, inc., and sutherland government solutions, inc., novad management consulting, llc, pennsylvania higher education assistance agency (pheaa) d/b/a american education services or aes, western benefits group, llc, solo funds, inc., chime financial, inc., pennsylvania higher education assistance agency, and national collegiate student loan trusts, bloomtech inc., d/b/a bloom institute of technology or bloomtech, f/k/a lambda, inc.; and austen allred, stratfs, llc f/k/a strategic financial solutions, llc, et al., colony ridge development, llc; colony ridge bv, llc; colony ridge land, llc; and loan originator services, llc, u.s. bank national association, commonwealth financial systems, inc., atlantic union bank, bank of america, n.a., toyota motor credit corporation, enova international, inc., citibank, n.a., chime, inc. d/b/a sendwave, transunion rental screening solutions, inc. and trans union llc, transunion, trans union llc, and transunion interactive, inc., freedom mortgage corporation, tempoe, llc, heights finance holding co. f/k/a southern management corporation, et al..

Celebrating 20 Years of IP Excellence

Latest Consumer Protection Cases in 2021 – Part 1

The bombay dyeing and … vs ashok narang and anr.

In this case, the Appellant, The Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Company Ltd was the builder-promoter whereas Mr. Ashok Narang and others were the allotees/buyers of the flats. It was agreed by the Parties that the possession would be delivered by 2017 at a 20:80 scheme consideration (20% initially and 80% at the time of delivery), in which the Respondents had already made payment of 20% in 2012-13 inclusive of tax and premium. The appellants failed to deliver the flats for possession on the stipulated time and extended it by 2 years. Thus, the Respondents filed a complaint u/s 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (“2016 Act”) before the Authority citing breach u/s 12 read with S. 18 of the 2016 Act seeking cancellation of the allotment and also a refund of the amount they had paid. The Authority did not pass any order regarding the refund stating that S. 12 did not apply retrospectively, and also that the cancellation should be done as per the allotment agreement. Further when appealed before the Appellate authority, it found that S. 12 of the 2016 Act had a retroactive operation and directed the respondent to refund with due interest and also ordered cancellation of the allotments. Consequently, the Appellants approached the Bombay High Court wherein the Appellant-counsel submitted that the provisions of the 2016 Act were prospective in operation and that the written agreement for sale was also absent due to which no liabilities could be imposed upon it as u/s 18. To this, the Respondent-counsel contended that the application of the 2016 Act to an ongoing project itself indicated that the provisions were quasi-retroactive in nature. Also, regarding the absence of a written agreement, it was argued that the Appellant could not be permitted to raise a new contention for the first time in the second appeal, thus it had waived the right to raise any such claims and that could not be allowed to approbate and then reprobate later on. The Court pointed out that no one should be made to wait indefinitely for delivery of possession and thereby held that there was a deficiency of service and disposed of the appeals with no order as to costs.

Citation : The Bombay Dyeing and … vs Ashok Narang and Anr., Decided by Bombay High Court on 30th August, 2021, available at : The Bombay Dyeing and … vs Ashok Narang and Anr , visited on 9th September 2021.

PUNIT JAIN VS M/S. IREO GRACE REALTECH PVT. LTD.

Mr. Punit Jain, the Complainant, filed a consumer complaint against Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. for making him sign a one-sided agreement concerning the sale of a 1483.28 sq. ft. apartment at 9200/ – per sq. ft. instead of the previously agreed rate of 8750/ – per sq. ft on 16.03.2013. The company also agreed to make the apartment available to the Complainant within 42 months of execution of the agreement 03.04.2014. The Agreement also mentioned a 180 days’ grace period. The Complainant made full payment of the agreed amount of 1,55,17,716/ – Rupees before filing the present complaint against the builder when it failed to complete the construction within the stipulated time period. The Counsel for the builder contended that the Complainant would not be considered as a ‘Consumer’ under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as he had bought the apartment for a commercial purpose and had also made a similar booking in another project by the builder. It was also argued that there was an arbitration clause in the agreement signed by the complainant. The builder’s counsel further contended that the Complainant was bound by the terms of the agreement on the Basic Sale Price. The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum held that the present agreement was a one-sided agreement and was an unfair contract. It was stated that the Developer could not compel the apartment buyers to be bound by the one-sided contractual terms contained in the Buyer’s Agreement. The court also directed the builder to pay interest @ 9% S.I. per annum from 27.11.2018 till the date of payment of the entire amount. The court also directed interest @ 12% S.I. p.a. should be paid in case of a default.

Citation: Punit Jain vs M/S. Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd., Decided by The Consumer Disputes Redressal on 31st August, 2021, available at: Punit Jain vs M/S. Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. , visited on 9th September, 2021.

KHATEMA FIBRES LTD. V. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

The Appellant, Khatema Fibres Ltd., took out a “Standard Fire and Social Perils” insurance policy from Respondent-Insurance Company New Assurance Co. Ltd. for a sum of approx. 42 crores from 7/5/2007 to 6/5/2008, but a fire broke out on its factory premises on 15/11/2007. The firm, M/s Adarsh Associates, appointed by the Respondent ascertained the value of loss as approx. 2 crores upon their investigation. The Appellants felt the assessment of was loss was approx. 13 crores, but the Insurance Company stated that it could give a maximum claim only up to the amount quoted by the firm. The Appellant filed a consumer complaint under Section 21 (a)(i) of the CPA, 1986 before the NCDRC seeking various types of compensation from the insurance company, for loss caused due to fire, financial stress, legal fees, and so on. The Commission allowed payment to the Appellant for 2 crores, which was original amount assessed by Respondents. The present case was an appeal under Section 23, where the Appellant contended that the net weight of the damaged material was not correct. The Respondents made the counter-argument that the surveyor was an expert at his field and did the assessment in a scientific manner. The Supreme Court observed that there were many discrepancies found by the surveyor with respect to documents submitted, wherein one document showed a certain amount of waste paper stock, and the other showed a huge increase in the stock. The Court agreed with the National Commission’s finding that the Appellant was not able to establish deficiency in service under Section 2(1)(g). Thus, the Court upheld the previous judgement because there was no arbitrariness or unjustness exercised by the Commission in granting claim to the extent of 2 crores.

Citation: Khatema Fibres Ltd. vs New India Assurance Company Ltd. & Anr. , Decided by The Supreme Court on 28th September, 2021, available at:  Khatema Fibres Ltd. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2021) /, last visited on 4th October, 2021.

This post is brought to you by BananaIP’s IP Consulting & Strategy Department.

About BananaIP’s IP Consulting & Strategy Department

BananaIP’s IP Consulting & Strategy Department has the experience of helping companies use IP for business and competitive advantage. Companies regularly seek their assistance, advise and opinions on identifying/mining inventions and creations, conducting IP audits, protecting IP assets appropriately, launching risk free products, managing litigation for business benefit, resolving disputes out of Court, making money out of IP, enforcing IP, and licensing transactions.

Updates on recent orders and judgments are brought to you jointly by the Entertainment Law and Consulting/Strategy Divisions of BananaIP Counsels, a Top ranked IP Firm in India. If you have any questions, or need any clarifications, please write to [email protected]    with the subject: Trademark Judgements

Please note that these case updates have been put together from different sources, primary and secondary, and BananaIP’s reporters may not have verified all the decisions published in the bulletin. You may write to [email protected]   for corrections and take down.

You May Also Like

Value of IP for Small and Medium Enterprises

Choosing the Right IP Name/Business Representation

Leave a comment cancel reply.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

• Law of torts – Complete Reading Material
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – September 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 2 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 3 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 5 October 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 2 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 3 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 4 – November 2019
• Weekly Competition – Week 1 – December 2019
• Sign in / Join

Top Ten cases on Consumer Disputes

This article is written by Deepanshi of JGLS. The article discusses ten cases of Consumer Disputes.

Introduction

Purchase or hire of good and services has become an inevitable part of our daily lives. This decision to effectuate such purchase or hire such service is essentially based on trust, failing which can cause, more often than not to the consumers, anything from a monetary loss to physical harm. Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as CPA) aims to provide speedy relief to such breach of trust or negligence. A hierarchy of three tribunals has been set up for this purpose —

• The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (DCDRF),
• The State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (SCDRC), and
• The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) .

Over the years, these tribunals, along with the apex court, have developed a better understanding of the CPA, meanwhile making sure to strike a perfect balance between the demands of both sides.

Following are ten important cases that hold relevance in case of consumer disputes:

Corporate Bodies can be sued under CPA

Karnataka power transmission corporation v ashok iron works private limited.

The Supreme court, in this case, held that a corporate body is included in the meaning of ‘person’ in section 2(1)(m) of the CPA. It reiterated the position of Lord Watson in Dilworth v. Commissioner of Stamps that the word “includes” is generally used to enlarge the meaning of the word but can alternatively be used to say “mean and include”, in which case what follows is an exhaustive explanation. The interpretation depends on the text, context, and objective of the Act. It was held that the section never intended to exclude juristic persons from its purview and the definition is inclusive in nature.

It also reiterated its own position in Southern Petrochemical Industries that the word “supply” is not the same as “sale” and in the context of electricity, it would be a provision of service as under section 2 (1)(d)(ii) of the Act.

Professional services fall within the scope of the Act

Indian medical association v v.p. shantha and others.

In deciding this case of deficiency of medical service, the court held that the services rendered by a medical professional fall within the ambit of ‘services’ under the section 2(1)(o) of the Act. It rejected the contention that a medical practitioner, being a professional and falling under the scope of Indian Medical Council Act, stands excluded from the CPA.

Moreover, it held that provision of a token fee (for the hospital administrative purposes) would not include an otherwise free service within the ambit of the definition of services. Also, the cost of the services paid by the employer or the insurance company would be deemed similar to paying for the service by the consumer itself.

Services have to be rendered with due care and in accordance with the Law

Arvind shah (dr.) v kamlaben kushwaha.

In this case, the complainant alleged that his son died due to the administration of a wrong treatment by the doctor. The State Commission upholding negligence provided a compensation of five lakh rupees.

In appeal, the National Commission observed that the two prescriptions that were available on record neither contained any description of the symptoms that the patient was experiencing nor did it have any preliminary vital information that a doctor is mandated to check, as per the guidelines and regulation of the Medical Council of India or the concerned State Medical Council, like body temperature, blood pressure, pulse rate, prior medical history et cetera. If further tests were required for the diagnosis, such was also mandated to be mentioned. The commission, following the case of Samira Kohli v Dr Prabha Manchanda [I (2008) CPJ 56 (SC)], held that failure to put such essentials in the prescription amounted to medical negligence. The Commission also noted that availability of such essentials, clinical observations and consent of the patient, point towards the care and diligence of the doctor and act as evidence against frivolous cases of medical negligence.

However, due to lack of available evidence that attributed the death of the patient directly to the negligence, the National Commission reduced the compensation to two and a half lakhs along with the interest thereon.

Poonam Verma v Ashwin Patel & Ors

In this case, the respondent, a homoeopathic doctor, prescribed allopathic medicines for the treatment of a patient who did not respond to the medicine and subsequently died. The Supreme Court held that the right to practice the allopathic system of medicine was restricted by the Central and State Acts which prohibit such practice unless the person possesses requisite qualification and is registered according to the Acts. Based on the fact that the respondent was qualified and registered to practice Homeopathy only, he was found to be in violation of the statutory duty not to practice Allopathy given under the section 15(3) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. Respondent’s act was held to be actionable negligence and he was ordered to pay a compensation of three lakhs.

Educational institutions must refund extra fee paid

Sehgal school of competition v dalbir singh.

To seek admission in a medical coaching center, the petitioner, in this case, was made to deposit a lump sum fee for two years within the first six months. When the petitioner left the course midway on account of deficiency in the services, the coaching center refused to refund the remaining amount. The State Tribunal, following the view of the apex court and the National Commission, held that no educational institution shall collect lump sum fee for the duration of the entire course and if one does, such extra fee should be returned in case the student drops out due to deficiency. It noted that any clause in a contract contrary to this is invalid due to lack of equal bargaining power and contravention of the principles of natural justice.

The court was also of the opinion that additional compensation should be granted for the mental agony caused due to approaching the legal forum. However, since such was not asked in the petition, it could not be granted.

Sympathy should not influence compensation

Nizam institute of medical sciences v prasanth s. dhananka & ors ..

In this case, the complainant claimed for compensation due to alleged medical negligence before, during and after a medical procedure that led to a partial paralysis of the patient. The National Tribunal ruled medical negligence stating various lapses in all three phases mentioned including on the ground that consent of the patient was taken only for the examination of the tumor and not for its removal.

In the appeal, the Supreme Court confirmed the findings of the Commission and stated that the removal of the tumor was deferred through discussion on record and therefore an implied consent cannot be inferred.

The court recognised that a balance has to be struck between the inflated demands of the victim and the unreasonable claim of the opposition party that on compensation needs to be paid. It recognised that sympathy for the victim should not come in the way while deciding compensation but the court should not refuse to provide “adequate compensation”. In light of this and the peculiar facts of the case, it increased the sum of compensation to twenty-five lakhs each for the continuous medical expenses that need to be borne and the loss of employment that the petitioner had suffered. Additionally, compensation for the pain and suffering that the appellant had undergone amounting to ten lakhs, for the expenses of a driver-cum-attendant for thirty years amounting to seven lakhs and twenty thousand, for nursing care amounting of fourteen lakhs and forty thousand and physiotherapy expenses of thirty years amounting to ten lakhs and eighty thousand  along with interest of 6% was also granted.

Discovery rule for medical negligence

V.n.shrikhande vs anita sena fernandes.

The petitioner alleged negligence by a medical practitioner, claiming that he left a mass of gauge in her abdomen during a procedure to remove stones from the gallbladder. However, the petition was raised nine years after the procedure when the petitioner underwent a second operation, in another hospital, to remove the mass.

The Supreme Court recognized that in cases of medical negligence no straightforward formulae is present to determine when the cause of action has accrued. The court, following ‘Discovery Rule’ evolved by the courts in the United States, stated that in the case where the effect of the negligence is obvious, the cause of action is deemed to have arisen at the time of negligence. However, in case the effect of negligence is dormant, the cause of action arises when the patient figures out about the negligence with reasonable diligence. The court noted that the petitioner had been experiencing pain and discomfort since the time of the operation for which she continued to take painkillers for nine years without consulting the doctor. In the light of this and the fact that she herself was an experienced nurse who can reasonably be expected to possess more knowledge than a layman, the court set aside the Commission’s order and dismissed the complaint.

Both parents and minor can claim for compensation under Consumer Protection Act

Spring meadows hospital & anr v harjol ahluwalia.

This appeal was filed before the Supreme Court by a hospital defending the negligence of its nurses and a doctor which resulted in a minor being in a permanent vegetative state subsequent to a brain haemorrhage. The issues revolved around whether the parents of the child, not being the patient themselves, can ask for compensation for mental agony caused to them. The court held that the definition of services in the CPA is wide enough to include both the parents who pay for the services and the child who is the beneficiary of the services. The National Commission was found correct in its approach as it granted compensation to the child for the cost of equipments and recurring expenses that he would have to bear owing to his vegetative state, whereas the compensation provided to the parents was for the agony caused and the lifetime care that the parents would have to provide.

Imposition of penalty for frivolous consumer claims

Sapient corporation employees provident fund trust v hdfc & ors..

In a complaint against HDFC for debiting money without the permission of the holder, the National Commission noted that payment was done in compliances with the order of a statutory authority and only after giving the complainant due notice of the same. The Commission stated that there is a need to guard against the possibility of frivolous complaints from being filed due to the absence of any court fees. For this reason, holding that the complaint lacked seriousness and was filed without sufficient grounds, the Commission imposed a fine of twenty-five thousand on the complainant under section 26 of the Act.

Compensation to the complainants for frivolous appeals

Delhi development authority v d.c. sharma.

In the case of an accidental double allotment of a plot by the Delhi Development Authority, the State Commission refused to accept the defence that the plot had not been provided to the complainant only for his failure to pay the cost. It was found from the records that the plot had been allocated to another person. It, therefore, ordered the Delhi Development Authority to either provide another plot of the same description to the appellant under the same conditions or pay the escalated price of the plot.

The National Commission dismissed the revision petition for lack of infirmity in the State Commission’s judgment and ordered the payment of five lakhs for indulging in unfair trade practices and unduly harassing the respondent for more than eighteen years.

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/joinchat/J_ 0YrBa4IBSHdpuTfQO_sA

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

Jagmohan singh vs. state of up (1972), prafulla kumar mukherjee vs. bank of commerce, ltd. (1947), right against exploitation.

It is satisfactory but please give the dates of when these happened.

Do Make it user friendly.. Good job tho..

LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

How to kickstart your career as a corporate lawyer

Participants from more than 85 countries have attended our bootcamps so far

Register now

Thank you for registering with us, you made the right choice.

Congratulations! You have successfully registered for the webinar. See you there.

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Take action

• Report an antitrust violation
• File adjudicative documents
• Find banned debt collectors
• View competition guidance
• Competition Matters Blog

Slow the Roll-up: Help Shine a Light on Serial Acquisitions

View all Competition Matters Blog posts

We work to advance government policies that protect consumers and promote competition.

View Policy

Search or browse the Legal Library

Find legal resources and guidance to understand your business responsibilities and comply with the law.

Browse legal resources

• Find policy statements
• Submit a public comment

Vision and Priorities

Memo from Chair Lina M. Khan to commission staff and commissioners regarding the vision and priorities for the FTC.

Technology Blog

Avoiding outages and preventing widespread system failures.

View all Technology Blog posts

Advice and Guidance

Learn more about your rights as a consumer and how to spot and avoid scams. Find the resources you need to understand how consumer protection law impacts your business.

• Report fraud
• Report identity theft
• Register for Do Not Call
• Sign up for consumer alerts
• Get Business Blog updates
• Get your free credit report
• Find refund cases
• Order bulk publications
• Consumer Advice
• Shopping and Donating
• Credit, Loans, and Debt
• Jobs and Making Money
• Unwanted Calls, Emails, and Texts
• Identity Theft and Online Security
• Business Guidance
• Advertising and Marketing
• Credit and Finance
• Privacy and Security
• By Industry
• For Small Businesses
• Browse Business Guidance Resources
• Business Blog

Servicemembers: Your tool for financial readiness

Visit militaryconsumer.gov

Get consumer protection basics, plain and simple

Visit consumer.gov

Learn how the FTC protects free enterprise and consumers

Visit Competition Counts

Looking for competition guidance?

• Competition Guidance

News and Events

Latest news, ftc, state of arizona take action against coulter motor company for deceptive pricing and discriminatory practices.

View News and Events

Upcoming Event

Horseracing integrity and safety authority evidentiary hearing before administrative law judge dania l. ayoubi.

View more Events

Sign up for the latest news

Follow us on social media

Playing it Safe: Explore the FTC's Top Video Game Cases

Learn about the FTC's notable video game cases and what our agency is doing to keep the public safe.

Latest Data Visualization

FTC Refunds to Consumers

Explore refund statistics including where refunds were sent and the dollar amounts refunded with this visualization.

About the FTC

Our mission is protecting the public from deceptive or unfair business practices and from unfair methods of competition through law enforcement, advocacy, research, and education.

Learn more about the FTC

Meet the Chair

Lina M. Khan was sworn in as Chair of the Federal Trade Commission on June 15, 2021.

Chair Lina M. Khan

Looking for legal documents or records? Search the Legal Library instead.

• Cases and Proceedings
• Premerger Notification Program
• Merger Review
• Anticompetitive Practices
• Competition and Consumer Protection Guidance Documents
• Warning Letters
• Consumer Sentinel Network
• Criminal Liaison Unit
• FTC Refund Programs
• Notices of Penalty Offenses
• Advocacy and Research
• Advisory Opinions
• Cooperation Agreements
• Federal Register Notices
• Public Comments
• Policy Statements
• International
• Office of Technology Blog
• Military Consumer
• Consumer.gov
• Bulk Publications
• Data and Visualizations
• Stay Connected
• Commissioners and Staff
• Bureaus and Offices
• Budget and Strategy
• Office of Inspector General
• Careers at the FTC

FTC Outlines Remedy Concerns in Amicus Brief After Jury Finds Google Illegally Monopolized App Store

• Competition
• Bureau of Competition

The Federal Trade Commission filed an amicus brief in a case brought by online video game maker Epic Games Inc. against Google LLC’s app store, which outlines how the court should consider potential remedies when determining effective relief to restore competition after Google was found liable for illegal monopolization.

The FTC filed its amicus brief in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in an ongoing antitrust case where a jury found Google liable for multiple antitrust violations related to its Google App Store, including finding that Google monopolized the Android App Distribution and Android In-App Payment Solutions markets for digital goods and services transactions. Google’s App Store serves as an essential platform used by developers, which includes Epic, to market their software. Google’s App Store is also critical for users that seek to purchase applications, such as Epic’s online game Fortnite.

In its amicus brief, the FTC encourages the court to use its broad power to order a remedy that stops the illegal conduct, prevents its recurrence, and restores competition. Injunctive relief should also restore lost competition in a forward-looking way and should ensure a monopolist is not continuing to reap the advantages and benefits obtained through the antitrust violation, the FTC’s brief stated. Looking forward in cases like Epic v. Google often requires the consideration of network effects, data feedback loops, and other key features of digital markets. This could help ensure that potential competitors can overcome the advantages established digital platforms often gain, which include network effects and data incumbency. These advantages allow established digital platforms to lock-in users, advertisers, and other stakeholders, which create barriers to entry for future competition.

In the Epic case, Google has raised several concerns about the administrability of potential injunctions that impose duties to deal with competitors and the implications of any requirement that Google provide access to its Application Programming Interfaces to non-customers for free. Despite these concerns, courts still have wide latitude to impose these sorts of requirements on monopolists when crafting remedies to restore competition, the FTC stated in its brief.

Google also has expressed concern that the cost of complying with Epic’s proposed remedy may be overly burdensome. Complaints about the burdens of compliance are no excuse, the FTC stated in its brief. Google’s monopolistic behavior has significantly harmed millions of users in the United States. Allowing monopolists to reap the rewards of illegal monopolization while avoiding the costs of restoring the competition that they unlawfully eliminated would undermine deterrence, the FTC stated in its brief.

The Commission vote approving the filing of the amicus brief was 3-0-2, with Commissioners Melissa Holyoak and Andrew N. Ferguson recused. Commissioner Holyoak is recused due to her work on behalf of Utah in Utah v Google. Commissioner Ferguson recused himself in light of Virginia’s participation in Epic v. Google when he was Solicitor General.

The Federal Trade Commission works to  promote competition , and protect and educate consumers.  The FTC will never demand money, make threats, tell you to transfer money, or promise you a prize. You can learn more about  how competition benefits consumers  or  file an antitrust complaint .  For the latest news and resources,  follow the FTC on social media ,  subscribe to press releases  and  read our blog .

Contact Information

Media contact.

Victoria Graham Office of Public Affairs 415-848-5121

• Truth Brigade
• Overseas Nightmare
• Medical Negligence
• Become A Member
• Human Rights
• Public Health
• Environment
• Science & Technology
• Podumentary
• Mindblowing

Consumer rights: How Indian consumers made system accountable despite long court battles

Some consumers in India fought for as little as one rupee and won their case despite the wheels of justice in consumer courts grinding slowly. Other consumers continue to fight long-drawn court battles to make companies and the government accountable.

A One-Rupee Fight : Consumer Rights In India

Consumer Rights In India: Bhagwan Karia, a senior citizen and an RTI activist, fought a one-rupee case with a consumer court in Mumbai and won against the Indian Railways and a private limited company. What started as a mere exercise of checking weight on a weighing scale in a railway station in Mumbai later turned out to be a pitched battle that exposed an enormous scandal and lurking corruption within the system.

Dr MS Kamath, General Secretary of the Consumer Guidance Society of India speaks to The Probe on the state of consumer rights in India.

"Around eight years ago, I went to the Mulund station in Mumbai, used the weighing machine there, and put in a two rupee coin to check my weight. I didn't even get a ticket or reading in one machine; my weight was shown as 15 kgs more in the second weighing machine. Then I went to the Mulund station master and told him, "sir, pls give my 4 rupees back". So, he called me a "madman". I told him, "I am not a madman. I am a common man. Today, you may think of me as a madman, but tomorrow you will know the power of this common man whom you identify as a madman," reminisces Karia speaking to The Probe about Consumer Rights In India.

Karia notes that he immediately filed an RTI petition and found out that the railways had a 60 per cent margin in the income from the weighing scales installed in the railway stations, and the private limited company had a 40 per cent share. "I later learned that even part of this margin used to be grabbed by the Station Masters and the private limited company's agents, causing a huge revenue loss to the Indian Railways. I went to consumer court in Bandra and lodged a one-rupee case. Do you know that these one or two rupee machines give a turnover of one to two crores all over India, and this money is tax-free? There is a monopoly related to the company involved in providing this service," claims Karia.

Finally, when the consumer court's verdict came in, Karia said the company was slammed with a 50 lakh rupees penalty for not displaying their licence number on the weighing machines. "All this happened because of my one-rupee case. People always ask me why I fought a one-rupee case. It is not a question of one rupee. I spent more money from my pocket and fought for one rupee. The reason is not to get back the amount. The reason is to make the system more transparent and accountable to the common man."

Man Who Brought An Insurance Company To Its Knees

Like Karia, another consumer KR Srinivas from Bangalore, filed a case against an insurance company after they refused to give him the assured sum after he had a severe heart ailment. “I had taken an insurance policy from the Syndicate Bank, and the insurance company was United India Insurance Company. Then the Syndicate Bank merged with the Canara Bank, and my insurance was forcibly shifted to Bajaj Allianz. This was not my choice. I had chest pain and was admitted to Sagar hospital in Bangalore. The doctors did an angiogram on me and said a stent had to be placed. The hospital authorities gave me the documents, but Bajaj Allianz refused to give cashless approval and I wasn’t paid anything,” states Srinivas.

Srinivas, too, like Karia, went to the consumer court and filed an application and argued his own case and won against the insurance firm. “My bill was 1,62,000 rupees. I went to the consumer court in Bangalore. I produced all the papers to the court, and I argued on my own. Judgement came in my favour. I finally got my money and was also given a compensation of 25,000 rupees for the mental agony that I went through and 10,000 rupees for legal expenses with 12 per cent interest per annum for the entire amount from the date of discharge from the hospital to the final settlement day,” adds Srinivas.

While World Consumer Rights Day was observed on March 15, many consumer rights activists say India’s record for delivering justice to consumers is abysmally poor. Speaking to The Probe, Dr MS Kamath, General Secretary of the Consumer Guidance Society of India, says that consumer courts do not redress grievances on a fast-track basis, because of which the consumers’ faith in the justice delivery system has taken a beating.

“Every consumer knows that he has rights, but the implementation is not that great. That is why the number of people escalating their complaints is not as high as it should be. A consumer in India is always at the receiving end when he buys some goods or services. Until he buys the product or uses the services, sellers are always after him. But after he buys, then he has to run after them. That’s because our country’s consumer rights regulatory mechanism is not strong enough. On average, a consumer court takes three to five years to give orders. The implementation of consumer rights is abysmally low in our country,” affirms Dr Kamath.

A 5000-Rupee Fight For Nine Long Years

Neelam Palkar's long and tireless battle bears testament to Dr Kamath's statements on India's poor justice delivery mechanism. Neelam, a makeup artist in Vile Parle in Mumbai, bought a phone in 2014 from a showroom in the city for 5000 rupees, and the phone stopped working within a month. Neelam claims the company refused to keep up their assurances, and she filed a case before the consumer court. For nine years, Neelam has been fiercely contesting her case in the consumer court, hoping that one day she would be able to make the company accountable.

"In 2014, I bought a phone from Vijay Sales showroom for 5000 rupees. They also gave me papers that said that the phone would be repaired if it got damaged within a year. But within a month, the phone got damaged. The battery used to get constantly discharged. I approached the repair centre many times, but they refused to change the battery. They also started misbehaving with me when I told them about the warranty and the promises they made to me, which were in the documents. Then I decided they needed to be taught a lesson and shouldn't take consumers for a ride. That's when I took them to the court," asserts Neelam.

Neelam contends that the long court battle caused her huge mental agony, but she refused an out-of-court settlement with the company and promised to fight until she got justice. "I gave an application to the consumer court. The court sent notices to the company, but they did not answer the court at least twice. The case is still in court. The case is not moving forward. Whenever I approached the court, they kept saying that there was a dearth of professionals in the court, including judges. Then they said there were issues because of the pandemic, and that's why the case is not being heard. I have been fighting for nine long years. In between, someone from the company approached me and said they would pay me 5000 rupees and asked me to stop my fight. I refused and told them that now that I had chosen the legal route, I wanted to take this fight to its logical end. I don't want to give up my fight. I want them to know even a commoner like me can fight for her rights."

Dr Kamath notes that most consumer cases do not reach a logical end because of a lack of unity among consumers. He says that justice cannot be delivered to the Consumer Rights In India until those who are unaffected are as outraged as consumers who have been cheated off or victimised.

“Raising the voice for wrongdoing is a citizen’s fundamental duty. For instance, if I am travelling by train and someone is carrying petrol, kerosene, or some other inflammatory material, I must call the nearby authorities and alert them. Like how consumers have rights, they also have their duties. But we can only bring about change by focusing on consumer unity. If consumers can get together and stop using a bad product, then they can bring the company to its knees. I know of cases where, for even two rupees, people fought and won cases. Consumer fights can be pretty taxing. It will drain your time, energy and resources, but in the long run, you are doing a great favour to society,” maintains Dr Kamath.

Recent Post :

Case Studies: High-Profile Cases of Privacy Violation

Contributor.

Case Studies: Recent FTC Enforcement Actions - High-Profile Cases of Privacy Violation: Uber, Emp Media, Lenovo, Vizio, VTech, LabMD

Uber Technologies

The scenario: In August 2018, the FTC announced an expanded settlement with Uber Technologies for its alleged failure to reasonably secure sensitive data in the cloud, resulting in a data breach of 600,000 names and driver's license numbers, 22 million names and phone numbers, and more than 25 million names and email addresses.

The settlement: The expanded settlement is a result of Uber's failure to disclose a significant data breach that occurred in 2016 while the FTC was conducting its investigation that led to the original settlement. The revised proposed order includes provisions requiring Uber to disclose any future consumer data breaches, submit all reports for third-party audits of Uber's privacy policy and retain reports on unauthorized access to consumer data. 2

Emp Media Inc. (Myex.com)

The scenario: The FTC joined forces with the State of Nevada to address privacy issues arising from the "revenge" pornography website, Myex.com, run by Emp Media Inc. The website allowed individuals to submit intimate photos of the victims, including personal information such as name, address, phone number and social media accounts. If a victim wanted their photos and information removed from the website, the defendants reportedly charged fees of $499 to $2,800 to do so.

The settlement: On June 15, 2018, the enforcement action brought by the FTC led to a shutdown of the website and permanently prohibited the defendants from posting intimate photos and personal information of other individuals without their consent. The defendants were also ordered to pay more than $2 million. 3

Lenovo and Vizio

The scenario: In 2018, FTC enforcement actions led to large settlements with technology manufacturers Lenovo and Vizio. The Lenovo settlement related to allegations the company sold computers in the U.S. with pre-installed software that sent consumer information to third parties without the knowledge of the users. With the New Jersey Office of Attorney General, the FTC also brought an enforcement action against Vizio, a manufacturer of "smart" televisions. Vizio entered into a settlement to resolve allegations it installed software on its televisions to collect consumer data without the knowledge or consent of consumers and sold the data to third parties.

The settlement: Lenovo entered into a consent agreement to resolve the allegations through a decision and order issued by the FTC. The company was ordered to obtain affirmative consent from consumers before running the software on their computers and implement a software security program on preloaded software for the next 20 years. 4 Vizio agreed to pay $2.2 million, delete the collected data, disclose all data collection and sharing practices, obtain express consent from consumers to collect or share their data, and implement a data security program. 5

The scenario: The FTC's action against toy manufacturer VTech was the first time the FTC became involved in a children's privacy and security matter. The settlement: In January 2018, the company entered into a settlement to pay $650,000 to resolve allegations it collected personal information from children without obtaining parental consent, in violation of COPPA. VTech was also required to implement a data security program that is subject to audits for the next 20 years. 6

The scenario: LabMD, a cancer-screening company, was accused by the FTC of failing to reasonably protect consumers' medical information and other personal data. Identity thieves allegedly obtained sensitive data on LabMD consumers due to the company's failure to properly safeguard it. The billing information of 9,000 consumers was also compromised. The settlement: After years of litigation, the case was heard before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. LabMD argued, in part, that data security falls outside of the FTC's mandate over unfair practices. The Eleventh Circuit issued a decision in June 2018 that, while not stripping the FTC of authority to police data security, did challenge the remedy imposed by the FTC. 7 The court ruled that the cease-and-desist order issued by the FTC against LabMD was unenforceable because the order required the company to implement a data security program that needed to adhere to a standard of "reasonableness" that was too vague. 8

The ruling points to the need for the FTC to provide greater specificity in its cease-and-desist orders about what is required by companies that allegedly fail to safeguard consumer data.

1 15 U.S.C. § 45(a)(1)

2 www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2018/04/uber-agrees-expanded-settlement-ftc-related-privacy-security

3 www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/emp_order_granting_default_judgment_6-22-18.pdf

4 www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2018/01/ftc-gives-final-approval-lenovo-settlement

5 www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2017/02/vizio-pay-22-million-ftc-state-newjersey-settle-charges-it

6 www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2018/01/electronic-toy-maker-vtech-settlesftc-allegations-it-violated

7 The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has rejected this argument. See FTC v. Wyndham Worldwide Corp., 799 F.3d 236, 247-49 (2015).

8 www.media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201616270.pdf

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

United States

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

• Consumer Guides

13 Consumer Rights Violations You Need to Know

Looking for help with a consumer rights violation?

Emails from nigerian princes are such a common scam, they’ve become a meme..

The details change from email to email, but the basics are the same: You get an email from someone in Nigeria (or another foreign country) who claims to be royalty and offers you a huge sum of money from their royal coffers. There’s one small catch, though. You have to provide your banking details so they know where to send the cash. Tempting, right?

Most people know by now that that’s a scam with a capital “S.” But in the early days of email, it roped in a lot of hopeful (if naive) new internet users. So many that the U.S. government actually took action against Western Union, a company that was used for so many of the money transfers for this kind of scam. They argued that Western Union owed its customers better protection than to ship their money overseas to a scammer.

And that’s just one example of a common consumer rights violation. There are plenty more. For-profit colleges. Internet, TV, and phone companies . Food and beverage producers. They’ve all come under fire just in the last for years for failing to protect their customers like the law says they should.

If you live in the U.S., you probably think your consumer rights are pretty well protected.

And that’s true — to an extent. In the U.S., there’s a large number of laws at both the federal and state levels that are designed to protect consumers from companies that might take advantage of them.

But do companies always follow those laws?

The short answer is no. You can never be sure that a company will be perfectly scrupulous and do business with your rights as a consumer in mind. A lot of businesses are willing to cut corners in the name of profits, which is just one reason why it’s important for consumers to know how to protect themselves. 

You can’t always trust companies to look out for your interests, but you can trust yourself — if you know what to watch for when it comes to common consumer rights violations. This is not an exhaustive list, but just some of the more common consumer rights violations everyone should be able to identify. It’s the best way to protect yourself, after all. Ready to learn more? Read on.

What Are Consumer Rights?

The phrase “consumer rights” gets thrown around quite a bit. What does it actually mean?

Broadly speaking, “consumer rights” refers to a body of law at federal, state, and local levels, that dictates the things producers and sellers of goods must do to protect consumers from harm. 

In general, there are four rights that consumers should have in any transaction:

• The right to safety, meaning the consumer should be able to assume that products they buy are safe when used as directed for their intended purpose.
• The right to be informed, meaning the consumer should have access to enough information about a product to compare it to other options, and that information should be fair and accurate.
• The right to choose, meaning the consumer should be able to choose among competing goods and services at different prices and qualities. Antitrust laws protect consumers’ right to choose.
• The right to be heard, meaning the consumer should be able to report violations of their rights to the appropriate governing agency (often the Federal Trade Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, or the Securities and Exchange Commission), who will then investigate to see whether a violation actually took place.

What Are the Most Common Consumer Rights Violations?

Any law made to protect consumer rights can be broken. But there are some general rules and common violations that all consumers should learn to look out for.

Deceptive Advertising

Deceptive advertising is when the images and words used in print, digital format, audio, or video advertisements make claims about products that are untrue, misleading, or omit important information. Companies that mislead their customers are in violation of deceptive advertising laws whether they do so on purpose, or unintentionally.

Deceptive advertising laws are enforced by the FTC and outlined mostly in Section 5 of the FTC Act . The Act outlines a lot of different types of deceptive advertising, but the basic rule is that merchants cannot mislead their customers in any way.

Here’s an example of deceptive advertising you might recognize: In 2014, Red Bull agreed to pay $13 million in a settlement to customers who were disappointed that the drink didn’t actually give them wings, as the brand’s slogan implies. Lawyers argued that the “Red Bull gives you wings” slogan implied the drink gave consumers a lift or physical enhancement, without any scientific evidence to back that up. Technically, they were right, and Red Bull paid for years of deceptive advertising.

False Product Information

Another type of deceptive advertising that’s fairly common is false product information, or when companies make false or misleading claims on the packaging or labeling for their products. 

Here’s an example of this: An ice cream company releases a line of desserts that it claims on the packaging are “dairy free.” While they aren’t traditional ice creams made with heavy cream, they do have ingredients that are derived from dairy products. That would make the “dairy free” claim on the packaging false and violate consumer rights.

“Made in USA” Claims

Another part of false advertising laws that’s commonly broken is that if a company claims its product is made in the U.S., it must actually be made in the U.S. And that doesn’t mean just assembled within American borders. According to the FTC, a business that makes a “Made in USA” claim must be able to prove that “all or virtually all” of the product is made in America, including all significant parts, processing, and labor that go into the product.

As an example, say a company claims its shoes are made in the U.S. In reality, though, while the shoes are assembled at a U.S. factory, the fabrics, soles, and laces are made in other countries. This would violate consumer rights.

Undisclosed Fees

And finally, another common type of false advertising consumers are likely to encounter at some point is undisclosed, or “hidden” fees. Consumer protection laws state that companies need to be clear and upfront about charges and fees, particularly when consumers are signing contracts (for example, for cell phone or internet service). That means all fees need to be clear and explained, and not hidden in fine print.

Telecom companies are particularly known for violating this rule. In just the last year, AT&T , CenturyLink , and Spectrum have all faced lawsuits over hidden fees for their services.

Telemarketing Rules

The Telephone Consumer’s Protection Act, or TCPA, has strict rules about when and how telemarketers can contact consumers and push for sales. The laws forbid telemarketers from engaging in any activity that harasses, deceives, or mistreats consumers, and covers robocalls, automated dialing systems, automated text messages, and the national “Do Not Call” registry.

According to the law, if you’ve been harassed by automated phone calls or text messages, or if you receive calls from telemarketers after putting your number on the “Do Not Call” registry, you could be entitled to up to $1,000 per instance.

Fake Contests and Sweepstakes

With the rise of the internet and email, scams involving fake contests and sweepstakes have become common. The FTC warns about these types of scams, which usually involve a letter or email notifying a consumer that they’ve won a prize, but requiring them to send in a form with a small fee to retrieve their prize. Some of these are also “phishing” scams, in which the scammer uses the promise of a won prize to get personal information such as banking details or a social security number.

The FTC warns that if a contest, sweepstakes, or offer seems too good to be true, it often is. And it’s important for consumers to remember that it’s highly unlikely you’ll win a prize from a contest you never entered.

Auto Dealer Fraud

Car sellers, and in particular used car dealers, have a bad reputation for taking advantage of customers. Some common consumer rights violations that come up when dealing with auto dealers are:

• Bait and switch scams
• Hidden fees
• Selling used cars as new cars
• Claiming cars have features they don’t have
• Hiding information about a car, including damage or defects
• Not disclosing the full terms of auto financing

These are all prohibited, and consumers should be on the lookout for this kind of treatment whenever they buy a new or used car.

Mortgage Fraud

It should come as no surprise that mortgages are carefully regulated by consumer protection laws. But that doesn’t stop some predatory lenders from targeting homeowners. Some common consumer rights violations to look out for when buying a home include:

• Lenders who require unaffordable loans
• Misrepresenting a loan or its terms
• Encouraging a buyer to refinance a loan so the lender can collect extra fees

It’s also important to look out for mortgage-related scams that come not from the lender, but from third parties. A common scam that targets homeowners in foreclosure says they can save their home by selling it to a third party and then buying it back. Other scammers may promise to negotiate a loan modification (for a fee, of course), but never take any action, causing the homeowner to go into foreclosure. 

Home Construction and Repair Fraud

Similarly, when constructing a home or contracting repairs, homeowners need to be on the lookout for even more common consumer rights violations. Some of the most common include:

• Contractors who attempt to charge clients for materials or services that weren’t covered in the contract
• Attempts to deceive consumers about permits or materials
• Fraudulent mechanic’s liens
• Scams that target homeowners who have been the victims of natural disasters

Credit Card Fraud

In many cases, credit card fraud involves theft of your personal or banking information. Thieves can steal your physical credit card, or they can hack digital payment information.

But consumer protection laws also protect consumers from shady practices by their financial institutions. For example, the law says banks and financial institutions must be upfront about credit card interest and fees. They must also clearly state, in writing, how they will keep your personal information safe from hackers and scammers.

Broker and Securities Fraud

Consumers who invest their money may hire a broker to help them. Consumer protection laws prevent brokers from:

• “Churning” your investments to generate more commissions for themselves (making more frequent trades so they can collect the commission on each one)
• Making unauthorized trades
• Recommending bad or unsuitable investments

Franchise and Business Opportunity Rules

Everyone wants to get rich quick, but when a franchising or business opportunity promises to help you do just that, it’s likely too good to be true. Still, there are a ton of business opportunity-related scams — so many that the FTC and Consumer Protection Bureau now require what’s called a “disclosure document” detailing 23 specific business points , to be given to consumers before they purchase a franchise or a business system.

This prevents sellers from making false or misleading claims about income or the work or money that’s required to build a successful franchise or business.

Deceptive Practices in Healthcare

Of course, there are consumer protection laws in place to govern how healthcare workers and institutions can treat consumers, especially when they’re at their most vulnerable. Healthcare entities are required to follow false advertising laws, which means they can’t mislead consumers to boost their sales or justify high prices for procedures.

Consumers must also look out for health insurance fraud, particularly extra charges for procedures or services they didn’t receive, or fraudulent denial of claims under a policy.

What Do You Do When Your Consumer Rights Are Violated?

Maybe reading this list made you realize you’ve already been targeted by an unscrupulous business. Or maybe you already knew, and you’re looking for answers as to what you should do next.

Different types of consumer rights are governed by different laws (at local, state, and federal levels) and different government agencies. Depending on how you were wronged, a little research can point you toward the right government agency for filing a complaint. If all else fails, calling your local Attorney General and explaining the situation may help you find out about what options you have for your next step.

One potential avenue for justice is consumer arbitration , an independent legal process that helps many consumers claim the justice and compensation they deserve. Want to learn more ? Check out FairShake to see if arbitration can help.

A Resource for Consumer Rights Information

• Publications
• Issue 45/Winter 2019

Case Studies: High-Profile Cases of Privacy Violation

Case Studies: Recent FTC Enforcement Actions - High-Profile Cases of Privacy Violation: Uber, Emp Media, Lenovo, Vizio, VTech, LabMD

Uber Technologies

The scenario: In August 2018, the FTC announced an expanded settlement with Uber Technologies for its alleged failure to reasonably secure sensitive data in the cloud, resulting in a data breach of 600,000 names and driver’s license numbers, 22 million names and phone numbers, and more than 25 million names and email addresses.

The settlement: The expanded settlement is a result of Uber’s failure to disclose a significant data breach that occurred in 2016 while the FTC was conducting its investigation that led to the original settlement. The revised proposed order includes provisions requiring Uber to disclose any future consumer data breaches, submit all reports for third-party audits of Uber’s privacy policy and retain reports on unauthorized access to consumer data. 2

Emp Media Inc. (Myex.com)

The scenario: The FTC joined forces with the State of Nevada to address privacy issues arising from the “revenge” pornography website, Myex.com, run by Emp Media Inc. The website allowed individuals to submit intimate photos of the victims, including personal information such as name, address, phone number and social media accounts. If a victim wanted their photos and information removed from the website, the defendants reportedly charged fees of $499 to $2,800 to do so.

The settlement: On June 15, 2018, the enforcement action brought by the FTC led to a shutdown of the website and permanently prohibited the defendants from posting intimate photos and personal information of other individuals without their consent. The defendants were also ordered to pay more than $2 million. 3

Lenovo and Vizio

The scenario: In 2018, FTC enforcement actions led to large settlements with technology manufacturers Lenovo and Vizio. The Lenovo settlement related to allegations the company sold computers in the U.S. with pre-installed software that sent consumer information to third parties without the knowledge of the users. With the New Jersey Office of Attorney General, the FTC also brought an enforcement action against Vizio, a manufacturer of “smart” televisions. Vizio entered into a settlement to resolve allegations it installed software on its televisions to collect consumer data without the knowledge or consent of consumers and sold the data to third parties.

The settlement: Lenovo entered into a consent agreement to resolve the allegations through a decision and order issued by the FTC. The company was ordered to obtain affirmative consent from consumers before running the software on their computers and implement a software security program on preloaded software for the next 20 years. 4 Vizio agreed to pay $2.2 million, delete the collected data, disclose all data collection and sharing practices, obtain express consent from consumers to collect or share their data, and implement a data security program. 5

The scenario: The FTC’s action against toy manufacturer VTech was the first time the FTC became involved in a children’s privacy and security matter. The settlement: In January 2018, the company entered into a settlement to pay $650,000 to resolve allegations it collected personal information from children without obtaining parental consent, in violation of COPPA. VTech was also required to implement a data security program that is subject to audits for the next 20 years. 6

The scenario: LabMD, a cancer-screening company, was accused by the FTC of failing to reasonably protect consumers’ medical information and other personal data. Identity thieves allegedly obtained sensitive data on LabMD consumers due to the company’s failure to properly safeguard it. The billing information of 9,000 consumers was also compromised. The settlement: After years of litigation, the case was heard before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. LabMD argued, in part, that data security falls outside of the FTC’s mandate over unfair practices. The Eleventh Circuit issued a decision in June 2018 that, while not stripping the FTC of authority to police data security, did challenge the remedy imposed by the FTC. 7 The court ruled that the cease-and-desist order issued by the FTC against LabMD was unenforceable because the order required the company to implement a data security program that needed to adhere to a standard of “reasonableness” that was too vague. 8

The ruling points to the need for the FTC to provide greater specificity in its cease-and-desist orders about what is required by companies that allegedly fail to safeguard consumer data.

• 15 U.S.C. § 45(a)(1)
• www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2018/04/uber-agrees-expanded-settlement-ftc-related-privacy-security
• www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/emp_order_granting_default_judgment_6-22-18.pdf
• www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2018/01/ftc-gives-final-approval-lenovo-settlement
• www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2017/02/vizio-pay-22-million-ftc-state-newjersey-settle-charges-it
• www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2018/01/electronic-toy-maker-vtech-settlesftc-allegations-it-violated
• The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has rejected this argument. See FTC v. Wyndham Worldwide Corp., 799 F.3d 236, 247-49 (2015).
• www.media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201616270.pdf
• More Networks

• Sustainability
• Agriculture
• Brand Campaigns
• Watch inspiring videos
• Advertise With Us
• Press Coverage

Follow Us On

Download App

Cheated as a Consumer? 8 Important Consumer Court Judgements You Should Know About

From Supriyo Ranjan Mahapatra's complaint against Amazon for a cancelled order to Dinesh Prasad Raturi's legal action against Bata India for bag charges, here are 8 cases that highlight the importance of consumer rights and awareness. #WorldConsumerRightsDay

1. Supriyo Ranjan Mahapatra

Similar story.

How Jyothi Yarraji Raced Against Odds To Become The 1st Indian Female 100m Hurdler at the Olympics

2. Bhaskar Jadhav

3. rohit patel.

A Champion, Always: Wrestler Vinesh Phogat’s Incredible Journey to Olympics

4. Vijay Gopal

5. sardool singh ghumman.

6. Dev Kant

7. dinesh prasad raturi.

Be a part of The Better India Community

Please register to post your message

Check what other members are talking about -

Hey there , I have been working on bioenzymes ,I have made few combinations works great.

Bridal Gold Choker Necklace

Be confident on your wedding day with a stunning bridal gold choker necklace from Zevarly. These exquisite pieces, whether classic, layered, Kundan, customized, temple-inspired, or antique, offer a perfect blend of tradition and elegance, making them the ideal choice for brides. Each choker is designed to complement your bridal attire, enhancing your beauty and radiating a royal charm. With Zevarly’s wide range of designs, you can find the perfect necklace to make your special day even more memorable. Shop now and make your wedding day truly unforgettable.

Shop Now – https://zevarly.com/collections/necklace-set

Education Website Design Domain Name Registration Domain Space Web Hosting Net Working software training institute in Tiruvottiyur. software training institute in Chennai. Software Training Institute IUC Computers Offer Top notch quality software training and placement in evergreen and modern technologies like Database Developer Training, DBA Training, Web Designing Training, C & C++ training, Java Training, Software Testing Training, Microsoft Training, Oracle Applications Training, Android training, iOS training Mobile Applications Training, Oracle Training, Cloud Computing Training, Other Training and more to the students. IUC Net IUC Stands for -institute of united computers gives training for Web based and Mobile App and Domain Registration, Domain Space to improve your future in the field of Business.

Sounds Interesting? Share it now!

The Top 10 Consumer Court cases and Trails in India – Complete List

Buying goods and services is an inevitable part of our daily lives and problems might occur from the vendors who deliver these goods and services. Below are the top 10 consumer court cases curated for the readers:

Top 10 Consumer Court Cases and Trials in India

1. Dipika Pallikal , a squash champion, and an Arjuna awardee found used her Axis Bank Debit Card in a hotel at Netherlands’ Rotterdam which failed. She had 10 times the bill amount in her account at that time. The bank said the incident was a case of ‘Force Majeure’ (an act of God/ something beyond the control) and returned a cheque of ₹1 lakh issued to her by the government of. Dipika approached the consumer court in Chennai against Axis Bank

Court judgment:

The court found that there was a deficiency of service on the part of the Axis Bank and directed the bank to pay a compensation of ₹5 lakh and ₹5000 as expenses.

2. Poonam Verma v Ashwin Patel & Ors: In this case, the respondent who is a homeopathic doctor, prescribed allopathic medicines for the treatment of a patient who did not respond to the medicine well and subsequently died. Based on the fact that the respondent was qualified and registered to practice under Homeopathy only,

It was found to be in violation of the statutory duty not to practice Allopathy under section 15(3) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. Respondent’s act was held to be actionable negligence was ordered to pay a compensation of three lakhs.

3. A tea vendor, Rajesh Sakre , is an example of this who had ₹20,000 in his State Bank of India account and he withdrew ₹10,800. On his next visit to the ATM, he realized all his money was gone. When he asked the bank authorities they blamed it on him for the fault.

So, he went to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum with his grievance and as he couldn’t afford a lawyer he argued the case himself.

Court Judgement:

The forum ruled in his favor and ordered the State Bank of India to return the ₹9,200 with 6% interest also to pay ₹10,000 as compensation for mental anguish and ₹2,000 for the legal expenses.

4. Baglekar Akash Kumar who was a 19-year-old got a book online and when it was delivered, he noticed that there was no MRP printed on it. He browsed the internet and saw that the book was sold at different prices at different places after which he went to the consumer forum and filed a case against Penguin Books India Pvt. Ltd and the paper company.

The court held non-publishing MRP on the product without a valid reason is ‘unfair trade practice’. MRP ensures that a consumer is not overcharged for the product. So, it is mandatory for companies to print MRP and the publishers were asked to print the retail price on the book Akash was awarded ₹10,000 as compensation and ₹2,500 as costs.

In any consumer court case, the bills and similar legal paperwork are the most powerful and useful weapons for lawsuits. This is why it’s important that you keep hold of the bills carefully. For this you can ask for our agents’ help who are experts in preparing, managing, and overtaking legal paperwork. At DailyFiling, we have consultants who are experienced with all sorts of lawsuits like income tax consultants , GST consultants , company registration agents, and more.

5. Mr. Kondaiah from Andhra Pradesh noticed that Sarvi Food Court charged him ₹40 for a water bottle where the MRP was actually ₹20. He filed his case against them in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum for ‘unfair trade practice’. He supported his claim by producing the bill of the bottle.

The court decided in favor of Mr. Kondaiah and said that the practice is unjustified and Mr. Kondaiah was paid a compensation of ₹20,000, ₹20, and ₹5,000 for the costs.

6. Rajesh Rajan from Ahmedabad bought a Pepsi from a local store and found a gutka floating in it. He sent a legal notice to the Pepsi company immediately and approached a Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum and demanded compensation of ₹5 lakh for the same.

Court Decision

The consumer forum passed an order in favor of Rajesh Rajan and directed the company to pay a total of ₹4008 which on being low was later paid ₹20,000 as compensation and ₹2000 towards costs.

7. In the year 2015, K Chaathu complained against Indulekha (beauty product manufacturers) and Mammootty (an actor who was the brand ambassador of the company) for displaying misleading ads. The ads claimed that people using the soap will become ‘fair’ and ‘beautiful but the 67-year-old didn’t become fair or beautiful.

Indulekha paid Chaathu ₹30,000 in an out-of-the-court settlement while the initial claim of Chaathu was ₹50,000.

8. A person bought a house after researching and pooling hard-earned money and paid to the developer who promised to deliver within 42 months but even after 4 years the construction wasn’t started. So the two people decided to move the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) for it.

The real estate developer was asked to refund the money with a simple interest of 9% per annum. They were awarded a compensation of ₹50,000 each.

You might also read “ How to have a mutual divorce in India ?”

9. 10 iPhone 5S Gold for ₹68 + ₹10,000 LIn 2014, Nikhil Bansal (a student) saw this unbelievable offer on the Snapdeal on iPhone which was quoted for Rs68000 (a discount of ₹46,651) and ordered it immediately. Upon receiving an order confirmation later the order was canceled stating it to be a technical glitch.

The court ruled in his favor and asked Snapdeal to deliver him the iPhone for ₹68 and asked to pay a compensation of ₹2,000 and when Snapdeal appealed this order, the compensation got raised to ₹10,000.

10. Om Prakash’s truck was stolen , and he filed a claim for compensation. The truck was taken on March 23, 2010, the police report was submitted on March 24, 2010, and the insurance claim was filed on March 31, 2010.

The insurance investigator was dispatched to verify the authenticity. The claim for Rs. 7,85,000/- was approved, however the money was never provided to Om Prakash. When he inquired about it, the insurance company responded that there had been a breach of terms and conditions:

“immediate notification of the vehicle’s loss or theft to the insurer”

While the consumer courts rejected his claim, the Supreme Court ruled in his favour. It was decided that insurance companies cannot avoid paying claimants if they have a valid justification for doing so, and the company was ordered to pay the Appellant a payment of Rs. 8,35,000/- plus interest at 8% per annum, as well as a compensation of Rs. 50,000.

These were a few cases to educate us to get rid away of the hesitation of approaching the court for a wrongful act and avail for our right as informed consumers.

Related Post

GST Filing Made Easy: Several Ways to Get It Done Right

How Do I Register a Trademark or Service Mark Internationally?

Income Tax on a Salary between 8 and 10 Lakh

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.