Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Many U.S. states impose versions of those cooling-off period laws, and offer similar laws for an additional range of transactions, such as time share purchases and health club contracts. For example, California provides cooling-off periods for many consumer transactions, including insurance purchases, car warranties, dental services, and weight ...
Consumer protection law or consumer law is considered as an area of law that regulates private law relationships between individual consumers and the businesses that sell those goods and services. Consumer protection covers a wide range of topics, including but not necessarily limited to product liability , privacy rights , unfair business ...
As part of the settlement, Apple agreed to refund a minimum of $32.5 million to affected consumers that were billed for in-app purchases incurred by children. Apple was also required to modify its in-app purchase practices to ensure that users have a clear understanding of the costs associated with in-app purchases. [ 2 ]
The agreement allows states to investigate airlines and ticket agents and hold them accountable when they violate aviation consumer protection laws. New refund laws and minimum seat sizes.
The US government proposed a crackdown on cable companies’ billing practices Wednesday as it announced plans to ban early-termination fees and to introduce fresh rules that could lead to ...
Colorado Cash Back is a one-time refund of state revenue from the state fiscal year 2021-22. To be eligible, taxpayers must: Have been at least 18 on or before Dec. 31, 2021
The debt collection industry which includes debt buyers, "in-house collection departments, third-party collection agencies, and collection attorneys", recover and return "billions of dollars in delinquent debt" to "card issuers and other creditors" annually which "increase[s] the availability of consumer credit and reduce[s] its cost". [2]
Virginia State Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that a state could not limit pharmacists' right to provide information about prescription drug prices. [1] This was an important case in determining the application of the First Amendment to ...