SEATTLE -- This week, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau announced a rule that consumer groups say is a big win for Americans who want to settle corporate wrongdoing in court.
The rule bans companies from using forced-arbitration clauses in order to avoid lawsuits, meaning consumers can once again band together in class action suits. Members of Congress already are looking to dismantle the rule. But Larry Shannon, government affairs director at the Washington State Association for Justice, said the rule is necessary.
"This rule restores consumer protection,” Shannon said. “It ensures real accountability for these companies and it acts as a deterrent to keep them from engaging in this kind of behavior in the first place."
Shannon used the example of a cell phone company in Washington that was taking a $35 fee without explanation. A single consumer would have a hard time justifying paying thousands of dollars in legal fees to recoup the money. But a class action lawsuit would make the case more affordable.
Opponents of the rule say arbitration is a cheaper and faster way for consumers to get justice.
Shannon said forced arbitration clauses also keep cases out of court, making it harder to identify bad actors. A scandal at Wells Fargo involving the opening of fake accounts last year highlighted the need for this rule. In that case, consumers were blocked from suing the bank because of a forced arbitration clause in their contracts.
Shannon said nursing homes use these clauses in a more troubling way.
"You don't get into nursing homes unless you have signed away your right to hold the nursing home accountable for the treatment to your loved ones,” he explained. “And I think that's an outrage. And this rule addresses that as well."
Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas said he has started drafting a resolution to rescind this new rule. Shannon said he hopes it stays in place, contending that forced arbitration has become a "license to steal" for the companies that use it.
"Who's Congress going to stand up for here?” he asked. "Are they going to stand up for consumer protections, for people in America, or are they going to go to bat for Wall Street and banks and financial institutions and big employers who abuse these clauses?”
get more stories like this via email
Air travelers could face fewer obstacles in securing a refund if their flight is canceled or changed under new federal rules announced Wednesday.
The moves are being praised by watchdog groups. The Department of Transportation said airlines are now required to promptly provide passengers with automatic cash refunds when they are owed one.
Teresa Murray, consumer watchdog director for the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, said some carriers have not adhered to standards, leaving passengers in a bind.
"They would drag their feet, and they would say, 'Well, you bought your ticket from a ticket agent, so we don't know where your money is. Or, here, have a voucher,'" Murray explained.
Amid higher complaint volumes, companies will be forced to act quickly. The new rules, which are being phased in, provide clearer definitions for travel disruptions, including delays of at least three hours on a domestic flight and six hours on international flights. A key industry group responded to the announcement by touting transparency efforts among carriers.
Murray acknowledged most people are not frequent flyers, and it is hard for them to keep up on all the least practices and policies among airlines.
"The average person only flies once every 18 months," Murray pointed out. "This will just bring transparency to that process and it kind of evens the playing field."
Murray added it could come in handy for Midwestern customers when a winter storm wreaks havoc on air travel. The new rules also require refunds for baggage fees when a piece of luggage is delayed by 12 hours or more for domestic flights. And there must be upfront disclosure on fees for first and second checked bags and carry-on bags.
get more stories like this via email
Wisconsin lawmakers recently debated reforms for payday loans. Efforts to protect consumers come amid new research about financial pain associated with cash advances offered through smartphone apps. The Center for Responsible Lending is out with findings that detail how "earned wage advances" from digital platforms come with extra costs disguised as things like tips. Traditional payday lenders are often criticized for charging excessive interest rates on loans that are usually around $500.
Lucia Constantine, a researcher with the Center for Responsible Lending, said customers are usually seeking smaller amounts from the apps, but she warns they can be just as costly.
"They are trapping consumers in a cycle of borrowing that is similar to that of a payday loan, " she said.
The report said after using these financial products, customers are seeing overdrafts on their checking accounts increase by 56% on average. Industry leaders deny they're barraging consumers with hidden fees, stressing that features such as suggested tips are optional. More broadly, a bipartisan payday loan reform bill in the Wisconsin Legislature failed to advance this month.
Constantine said like longstanding payday lenders, these cash advance apps can be hard to regulate. Meanwhile, she urged those in a bind to explore other options.
"[They should] try talking to their friends and family as a first source. The other option which I would recommend is reaching out to their credit union or banking institution to see if they can get some sort of small-dollar loan," she said.
She noted places such as credit unions typically provide more transparency on loan costs. According to the report, three-quarters of consumers took out at least one advance on the same day or day after a re-payment was posted.
get more stories like this via email
Food prices remain high, in Montana and across the country.
A new report by the Federal Trade Commission says the country's largest grocery companies are gouging consumers, by keeping prices artificially high.
Many grocers, retailers and wholesalers have consolidated to cut costs. Grocers continue to blame supply chain problems, even though regulators have said most of those issues have been resolved.
President of the advocacy group Farm Action, Angela Huffman, said retailers were doing more than making up for lost revenue during the pandemic-era supply chain disruptions - and the FTC report says they continue to do so.
"In 2021, the retailer revenues, they rose to more than 6% higher than their total costs, and that those profits are still going up," said Huffman. "So, in the first nine months of 2023, the profits increased to 7%."
At nearly 6.5%, Montana had the nation's ninth-highest grocery price increase in 2023.
The FTC data show Amazon, Kroger and WalMart each gained market share during and after the pandemic - while profits continued to rise.
Other large retailers and wholesalers have consolidated, which they say gives them more buying power and the ability to pass those savings on to customers.
Huffman said that isn't what's happening, and calls on regulators to fine the grocers, or more.
"This would be kind of the farthest extent of what they could do, but go so far as breaking them up," said Huffman. "In years past, they broke up the telephone companies and the railroads and, you know, that would be the ideal outcome for us, is to take away their excessive power."
Huffman also points to a 150% increase in egg prices in 2023, which producers blamed on the avian flu. The FTC says the disease did not justify the drastic price hike.
get more stories like this via email