Discover Financial Services Lawsuit Settlement

Discover Card Class Action Settlement

Opening my Discover Card statement this week, a little loose leaf page fell out. It was covered with a list of court cases brought against Discover Financial Services, et al and DFS Services LLC. It states that it is regarding those enrolled in or billed for Discover payment protection, Accountguard, identity theft protection, and credit score tracker. It is between the dates of Jan 21, 2004 and Nov 9, 2011.

The notification is as follows:

If you were enrolled in or billed for Discover Payment Protection, Accountguard, Identity Theft Protection, Profile Protect, Wallet Protection, The Register and/or Credit Score Tracker between January 21, 2004 and Novemember 9, 2011, This notice describes your rights in connection with a settlement of lawsuit and your potential recovery.

You may be entitled to a payment under a proposed class action settlement. In the actions entitled Walker v. Discover Financial Services, et al. (N.D. III. Case No. 10-cv-06994-JWD), Callahan v. Discover Financial Services, et al. (N.D. III. Case No. 1:10-cv-07181-JWD), Alexander v. Discover Financial Services, et al. (D.S.C. Case No. 7:10-cv-02754-HMH), Sack v. DFS Services LLC, et al. (W.D. Tenn. Case No. 2:10-cv-02906-JPM), Boyce v. DFS Services LLC, et al. (E.D. Pa. Case No. 2:11-cv-00265-LLD), Conroy v. Discover Financial Services, et al. (C.D. Cal. Case No. 2:10-cv-5260-MMM-E), Triplett v. Discover Financial Services, Inc., et al. (S.D. Fla. Case No. 1:11-cv-20519-AJ) and Carter v. Discover Financial Services, Inc., et al. (E.D. Pa. Case No. 2:11-cv-01656-BMS)(collectively, the "Actions"), Plaintiffs challenge as improper certain of Discover Bank's ("Discover") alleged marketing, enrollment, pricing and administration practices for its Discover Payment Protection (formerly known as Discover AccountGuard) ("DPP"), Identity Theft Protection (formerly known as "Profile Protect") ("ITP"), Wallet Protection (formerly known as "The Register") ("WP") and Credit Score Tracker ("CST") products (together, the "Products"). Discover vigorously denies these allegations and denies any claims of wrongdoing. However, in settlement of the Actions, Discover has agreed to establish a settlement fund of $10.5 million. This notice is only a summary. Details of this settlement, including information on how to file a claim, are available at http://www.walkersettlement.com or by writing to or calling the Settlement Administrator at the address or toll-free number below.

Discover's records indicate that you may be a member of the Settlement Class because you were enrolled in or billed for a Product at some time between January 21, 2004 and November 9, 2011. Class members may (1) file a claim for money from the settlement, (2) exlcude themselves from the settlement, or (3) object to the settlement. Class Counsel estimate that settlement payments will be between $10 and $60, but could be more or less based on factors including the number of claims submitted and the amount of fees you paid. You have the right to cancel your enrollment, call 1-800-347-5538.

You cannot receive a payment unless your claim is received by June 6, 2012. In addition to payments to the Settlement Class Members, the settlement provides for not more than $3,500,000 in attorney's fees, costs and $2,500 service awards for the representative plaintiffs to be sought from the Court by counsel for the Settlement Class. Remaining monies will paid to charity.

If you do not want to be legally bound by the settlement (and receive no money from the settlement), the Settlement Administrator must receive your request for exclusion no later than March 23, 2012. The detailed notice fully explains how to exclude yourself or object.

If the settlement is approved, all Settlement Class Members who do not exclude themselves will be bound by any judgement entered whether or not it is favorable to the Settlement Class and they will give up the right to sue Discover or related parties for any known or unknown claims relating to the Products.

To obtain the instructions for excluding yourself, filing an objection or filing a claim, go to http://www.walkersettlement.com, or write or call the settlement administrator at P.O. Box 8023, Faribault, MN 55021-9423 or (866) 944-5034 (Toll-Free).

This is only a summary of the settlement and your rights. Do not call or write to the court or the clerk of the court. Do not contact Discover about the settlement. Telephone representatives are not authorized to change the terms of the settlement or this notice.

STA1211PPL    12-10031

Lawsuits - Should you Fight or Settle?

In this day and age where the words “I’ll see you in court” is almost as common as “I’ll see you at lunch”, we no longer get surprised when even nicest people we know are embroiled in some kind of lawsuit. America has become known as the country of litigation. Everywhere you see people suing each other left and right for the smallest things. Now lawsuits don’t exactly come cheap. So the question is, should you fight or settle?

As a rule, it is usually better to settle out of court rather than take a person to trial. It will save both of you a great deal of time, money, effort and aggravation. In deciding whether you should fight or settle, there are many things you have to consider.

"Filing a lawsuit is very expensive..."

First, consider the amount you would have to spend in the lawsuit. Filing a lawsuit is very expensive, especially if big money is at stake. You might be able to save money by settling out of court.

Second, lawsuits can be very time consuming. Consult your lawyer and ask for an estimate on how much time the lawsuit might take. Factor in the delays and other things that are beyond your control.

Third, consider your chances of winning. Look at cases similar to yours. How have they fared? If your chances for winning are slim then it might be best to settle. However, if too much is at stake then maybe it would be better to push through with the lawsuit. So again, it depends on the situation.

Fourth, publicity. You can’t keep a trial private. Anyone can just go in and watch the proceedings. So unless you don’t want bad publicity or your private affairs to be made public, it would be best to settle. There might be sensitive personal information that can be divulged because of the trial. Or they might be important trade secrets of your business that might have to be revealed in order for you to win the case. Consider what you are willing to give up in order for you to win the case. If it’s worth it, then by all means, fight for it. But if not, then let it go and settle.

“Amy C. is an interior decoration aficionado and online marketer. She also likes testing and trying new home and office decorating themes. In addition to being an interior decoration hobbyist, she enjoys designing calming solar fountains and glass art. Amy invites you to browse her delightful collection of glass vases”

Defending Debt Collection Lawsuits

Mistakes you should avoid

Mostly, people face problems with the lawsuits filed against them by debt collectors. The majority of people become so panicky that they make various mistakes while defending themselves against the collections lawsuit. Moreover, collection agencies are hard to handle. Thus, it becomes important for you to know how not to defend a debt collection lawsuit or the mistakes that you should avoid while defending yourself.

How not to defend debt collection lawsuits

First of all, in order to avoid making any kind of mistakes while defending yourself against a collection agency filing, it is important for you to know about the debt laws in your state. In order to do that you can take the help of an attorney. It is the lawyer, who can help you with better understanding of the laws related to debt collection, how the collection agencies are supposed to act and what are they prohibited from doing and what your options are as a debtor. While handling a court case, it is also better to get help from your legal adviser so that you cannot go wrong in any way.

You should know that basically a lawsuit is started by filing it with the court. Now, the FDCPA or the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act prohibits the debt collectors from filing the case in a court which is situated far away from the place of your residence. If this happens, you have the option to file a claim in the court and also file complaints against the collection agency with the Federal Trade Commission or the FTC and the State’s Attorney General. The lawyer can also help you in this.

Then after the case is filed, you are supposed to be served with a summons, to which you are required to respond. In this case too, it is better to take the help of your legal advisor. Attorneys are in general more experienced in dealing with such situations and answering to the summons in the right way. You should never make the mistake of attempting to defend yourself by not answering to the lawsuit.

Another mistake that most of the debtors make is that they didn’t have any account with the collection agency. But this is a silly thing to argue about and should be avoided anyhow while defending yourself against the collection lawsuit. You should know that debts can be sold off to debt buyers (collection agencies) by the creditor. If the debt buyer had legally bought the debt from the creditor, the agency has the right to try and collect the dues from you or even file a case against you (debtor).

In addition, you should not make the mistake of not checking with your credit report before going to the court. It is extremely important for you to be aware of the state of all of your accounts and this particular account against which the case has been filed. There are many such cases where case has been filed by collection agencies against accounts which were well beyond the Statute of Limitations or SOL. The SOL is the time limit within which the creditor or the collection agency can sue you for not paying off the debt. If you find out that the SOL on the debt against which the collection agency is suing you have expired, discuss it with your legal advisor and take the necessary steps to prove this in court. The collection agencies (and the creditors too) cannot pursue any lawsuit against you and win the same after the SOL on a debt has expired.

So, you will have to keep in mind all of these things while defending yourself against a debt collection lawsuit.

Guest post by Rebecca

Loyola Law School of Los Angeles

Loyola Law School Los Angels

Loyola Law School

919 Albany Street

Los Angeles,
CA
90015

Aside from giving away a good grade point average, Loyola Law School of Los Angeles is a really great law school! This southern California branch opened its doors to the world in 1920 and is a division of Loyola Marymount University. It was also initially the premiere ABA-approved (American Bar Association) law school in California with requirements of pro bono work for graduation. Loyola also boasts Alumni representation in all 50 states!

Loyola Law School Facts

• Loyola Law School of Los Angeles opened in 1920.
• Accredited by the American Bar Association in 1937.
• Designed by award-winning architect Frank Gehry.
• About half of the entering class, does so on grant assistance or scholarship.

Law Degrees Offered at Loyola Law School

• Juris Doctor
• Juris Doctor/Master of
  Business Administration
• Juris Doctor/Master of
  Laws in Taxation
• Master of Laws in Taxation

Scholarships and Tuition

Tuition for Loyola runs around $37,890 for a full-time law student, and around $25,340 for evening classes. Financial aid is available for most students, with around 85% receiving assistance in one form or another. Applicants are automatically considered for merit-based scholarships by the Admissions Office. Those who are awarded a full tuition scholarship, will still be responsible for mandatory fees and a stipend for books. Students interested in a scholarship to Loyola Law School should make sure to research the Fritz. B. Burns Scholarship, The Public Interest Scholars Program, Yellow Ribbon Award, Dean's Scholarship, and the Loyola Scholarships.

The Loyola Law School Campus

Loyola Law Campus

Loyola Law is located in the Pico-Union district, in the building that now houses the William M. Rains Library. Loyola Law School is on Albany Street, just off Olympic Boulevard and West 9th Street in Los Angeles, California. Just blocks away from the Good Samaritan Hospital. Another draw of the Pico-Union area is the South Bonnie Brae Tract Historic District (which can be find on the National Register of Historic Places), where you'll find blocks of homes that date to the 1890s and reflect Queen Anne and Colonial Revival architecture.

Loyola is quick drive off of the Harbor Freeway, at exit 22A. From the exit, take your first right on Blaine Street, then take your next left onto Olympic Boulevard. You'll find the campus two blocks down on the right.

Guest Post: Fom John

Your Pet Parrot, Rat, or Snake is No Longer a Service Animal

Almost all of the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act are perfectly sensible on paper, and were written with the best of intentions: to ensure that individuals with physical disabilities do not face discrimination in employment, when their disability doesn’t affect their ability to do the job, and to ensure that businesses that serve the public are reasonably accessible to the disabled.

Few will argue that such measures are a bad thing in the abstract. However, I’ve discussed before how these laws can be abused, often placing a significant burden on small businesses. One abuse that I didn’t discuss, however, is the practice of designating virtually any pet, whether it’s a dog, monkey, spider, or snake, as a “service animal,” allowing their owners to take them into any business they like. This is because the Americans with Disabilities Act requires most businesses which disallow animals on the premises to make exceptions for service animals.

After a flurry of complaints from business-owners, the Obama administration has promulgated a new regulation, set to take effect on March 15, which limits the definition of “service animals” to dogs, with a few very narrow exceptions.

Most business owners will probably be pleased with this, because a well-behaved dog can be almost anywhere without causing any problems. And this may just be my own personal bias, but who doesn’t like dogs? Furthermore, this regulation should have few effects on many people who are actually disabled, and in need of a service animal, since the overwhelming majority of service animals are dogs, anyway.

And for many people who try to bring their non-canine pets wherever they want under the protection of the ADA, the disability they claim to be afflicted with is often questionable, at best.

These new regulations, if they end up being enforced (and, more importantly, business owners are apprised of their rights to eject disruptive animals and their owners from their businesses), should go a long way in mitigating some of the most ridiculous abuses of the ADA, while hopefully ensuring that it still protects the people it was meant to protect.

However, the ADA is a federal law. It applies nationwide, but is meant to lay out the bare minimum level of protection from discrimination that the disabled receive. Individual states can adopt laws that provide additional protections, and several have. For example, in California, protections for the disabled go much, much farther than the federal law. These additional protections take many forms, including a broader definition of what constitutes a disability, and much greater protections for service animals.

Again, when California lawmakers created these protections for the disabled, they probably had no clue that these well-intentioned rules would be abused.

What is the solution to this? Obviously, changing the law on this subject to make it clearer, thereby making outlandish interpretations of it less likely, would help. However, when it comes to civil rights laws, any change that does not unambiguously expand their scope runs the risk of being interpreted as a “rollback” of civil rights for a particular group.

So, lawmakers will have to tread very carefully in this area, to avoid the appearance that they’re trying to curtail the civil rights of disabled Americans. However, most mainstream groups that advocate for the disabled already acknowledge that abuse of laws like the ADA is a problem for everyone, including the disabled community; such abuse makes all disabled individuals, most of whom simply want a reasonable chance at the same economic opportunities that most people take for granted, and feel that people who abuse laws for their own convenience make people with real disabilities look bad.

Hopefully, with the support of the mainstream disabled community, making laws like the ADA less prone to abuse will become politically tenable.