Dwyer v. Ameriprise Financial
On April 25, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a precedential opinion in Dwyer v. Ameriprise Financial siding with the consumer Plaintiffs, affirming the broad remedial nature of Pennsylvania’s flagship consumer protection law, the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (UTPCPL).
Liberal Damages Award under UTPCPL
The Supreme Court held that the trial court could not use a jury’s common-law punitive damages award or the award of statutory attorney fees to limit the availability of treble (triple) damages under the UTPCPL. 
Rather than being interchangeable with punitive damages, treble damages under the UTPCPL are a separate remedy available to consumers wholly independent of any entitlement to punitive damages or attorney fees.
The Court reiterated the UTPCPL’s purpose “to benefit the public at large by eradicating” unfair acts and practices and the Act must be read “liberally to effect its object of preventing unfair or deceptive practices.”
Amicus Brief Authors
Flitter Milz, PC attorneys Cary Flitter, Andy Milz and Jody Lopez-Jacobs, along with Community Legal Services of Philadelphia and other top consumer rights law firms co-authored an amicus brief in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on behalf of the National Consumer Law Center, the National Association of Consumer Advocates and various legal aid organizations. This “friend of the court” brief called on the Court, “once again, to protect the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. §§ 201-1 to 201-9.2 (“UTPCPL”), from narrow, restrictive interpretations that deny consumers the full scope of the remedial relief mandated by the statute.”
“It’s good to see the Court reiterate the importance of a strong consumer protection law to allow consumers to level the playing field when dealing with big business,” said FlitterMilz.
This same group of consumer attorneys co-authored a successful amicus brief in an earlier Supreme Court decision, Gregg v. Ameriprise, in which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that a Consumer Protection Law claim built on “deceptive” conduct need not prove the intent of the merchant who made the deceptive statement. Both cases from the Pa Supreme Court move the state’s consumer protection law in the right direction for consumers.
Drug companies have filed lawsuits in courts across the country challenging the Constitutionality of the new 
On April 29, 2024, the federal court in the first of these New Jersey cases sided with the government and the arguments raised in amicus briefs filed by Flitter Milz attorneys 
“We’re gratified by the Court’s ruling in this case and happy to be part of a top-tier team that made it happen,” says Milz. “Whenever we can help consumers, particularly the elderly, save money on necessities, we consider it a job well done.”
The IRA contains several reforms designed to lower the high cost of prescription drugs and make them more accessible to patients, including seniors enrolled in Medicare. The program relies on a process in which the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which is responsible for implementing Medicare, and the manufacturer of selected drugs negotiate the prices at which drugs will be made available to Medicare providers and drug plans.
NPLS will direct the cy pres funds to continue their work in assisting disadvantaged consumers in Northeastern Pennsylvania.
This past summer our attorneys visited Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey and Dover Air Force Base in Delaware to educate military lawyers (commonly known as Judge Advocates General or “JAGs”) about common scams targeting servicemembers and how consumer protection laws exist to give our men and women in uniform some measure of relief.
Young and impressionable servicemembers often become targets of scammers. Factors such as reliable pay checks and great military benefits, as well as being subject to sudden deployment and relocation, make servicemembers easy prey for payday lenders, buy-here-pay-here auto dealers, and sub-prime finance companies.
Fortunately, the “Military Lending Act” places caps on interest rates to be charged, mandates certain disclosures, and prohibits the use of arbitration clauses in credit agreements. A violating seller can face punitive damages and having to pay the servicemember’s attorney fees.
The “
Our firm gets a lot of calls from consumers who are senior citizens, or from their children, after they have realized that the “free” solar panel deal they were promised is nothing of the sort.
Every week, we hear similar complaints from consumers who met with a solar sales representative and felt taken. Statements such as the following may be deceptive or outright false:
Salespeople are likely to tout a 30% federal solar tax credit (for 2023). Consumers must be careful, this is not cash or a refund, but rather a tax credit to count against the taxes you pay. Some seniors pay only minimal taxes or no taxes at all (if, for instance, their sole income is Social Security) and may not benefit at all from this promised “government program.” Other times, the company keeps the tax credit for itself.
Salesmen also like to tout a “no cost installation” or “no upfront cost” because this makes it sound like the consumer is getting the solar panels for free. That is not the case. With programs like solar leases or power purchase agreements (PPAs), it is the solar company, not the consumer, who owns the panels that are installed on the roof.
While the solar company may not charge upfront for the panels and the installation, the consumer is bound to pay for the energy that’s produced by the panels at ever-increasing rates – sometimes for 25-years or more – forcing some elderly consumers to pay expensive rates until they’re over 100 years old. All the while, they are still obligated to pay their electric bill.
Solar sales can be expensive and burdensome to consumers. Solar salesmen know this, and that’s why they use electronically displayed and signed contract documents (instead of a paper contract that you hold and keep) with deceptive language to hide the agreement from elderly consumers by using a bum email address or making up an email address that only the sellers control.
The lender may attempt to collect the deficient balance from the borrower or assign the collection to an agency or collection law firm. If the debt is not collected, the lender may choose to file a lawsuit against the borrower.
Judgments are dangerous. The lender attempt collection of the judgment through bank attachment, seizure of property, or in many states, wage garnishment.
You might need to consider getting someone to cosign an auto loan if you are unable to qualify for the credit. Frequently, poor credit or lack of credit history, lack of income, or being able to make a down payment are reasons that a lender would require the borrower to get a cosigner. But co-signing holds a lot of responsibility…even if you’re doing it for a family member or close friend.
The co-signer’s good name and credit history provide additional assurance to the lender that the terms of the loan agreement will be honored with payments being made in full and on time.
Both the co-signer and primary borrower hold equal responsibility for the signed auto loan. When payments are late or missed, the lender has the right to repossess the vehicle. Credit reports for both the borrower and co-signer will list a negative payment history and the repossession.
The lender may contact the co-signer, and/or the primary borrower, after a vehicle has been repossessed. The bank, credit union or financial institution will look to the co-signer to bring the account current or satisfy the loan in full. Credit scores may drop as a result and impact existing credit, or make it difficult to obtain new credit for both the borrower and co-signer.
Scenarios involving mixed credit files are all too common today. A mixed credit file, or mis-merged file, can happen when your credit information is commingled with someone else’s on your credit report. For years, the credit bureaus have been told their methods of matching consumer data is fundamentally flawed, but the often-devastating errors keep happening.
Federal court in Philadelphia rules TransUnion must go to trial
Errors on your credit reports can derail your finances, and sometimes prevent you from obtaining the credit you may need. By checking your credit reports regularly with the three main bureaus — Transunion, Experian and Equifax — you can make sure negative entries and inaccurate listings don’t stand in your way of getting the car loan, mortgage, job or apartment you deserve. Take these steps to work towards your financial freedom.
Credit reports show the history of credit accounts and illustrate whether a consumer is a good credit risk. Consumers must review their reports for accuracy and take steps to correct inaccurate information. Common credit reporting problems are:
