Protect Your Rights: Lemon Law, Credit Reports & Arbitration Traps (ft. Elizabeth Wagner)
Consumer-protection attorney Elizabeth Wagner joins host Taylor Darcy to elucidate the intricacies of navigating consumer rights, particularly in identifying defective products, rectifying credit report inaccuracies, and contesting unjust fees. Central to our discourse is the critical notion of recognizing a "lemon" and the imperative of pursuing a buyback, empowering individuals to reclaim their rights in the face of corporate indifference. We delve into the often convoluted landscape of credit reporting, offering actionable strategies to rectify errors that may adversely affect one’s financial standing. Additionally, we address the pernicious issue of "junk fees" and underscore the significance of opting out of arbitration clauses that may curtail consumer recourse. Through practical steps, lucid definitions, and real-world examples, we aim to equip listeners with the knowledge necessary to defend their rights without the prerequisite of a legal education.
Consumer protection is a vital aspect of our democratic society, and in this episode, we delve deep into the nuances of rights that every consumer should be aware of. Elizabeth Wagner, a seasoned consumer protection attorney, joins host Taylor Darcy to elucidate critical topics such as identifying 'lemons' in the car market, rectifying inaccuracies on credit reports, combating unjustified junk fees, and understanding the significance of opting out of arbitration. The conversation is rich with practical advice, clear definitions, and real-world examples, empowering listeners with the knowledge necessary to protect their rights without the need for a law degree. With an emphasis on actionable steps, Elizabeth highlights how consumers can actively engage with their legal rights and navigate the complexities of consumer law with confidence. This episode serves not only as an informative guide but also as a rallying cry for consumers to stand up against corporate injustices and assert their rights in the marketplace.
Takeaways:
- Consumer protection attorney Elizabeth Wagner elucidates the importance of identifying lemon vehicles to secure buybacks and refunds.
- Understanding one's rights in consumer law is crucial, as many protections are being eroded incrementally.
- Credit report inaccuracies can significantly hinder financial opportunities; it is vital to dispute such errors promptly.
- Opting out of arbitration clauses in contracts can preserve consumer rights and ensure access to the courts.
- Engaging with local politics can amplify consumer voices, pushing for stronger protections against corporate malfeasance.
- Awareness of hidden fees and rights regarding credit agreements can empower consumers to take control of their financial health.
Companies mentioned in this episode:
- California Western School of Law
- Experian
- Bank of America
- Wells Fargo
- FTC
- FCA
- CFPB
- CSLB
- Apple
- Target
- Ford
Transcript
Welcome to Perfect Union.
Speaker A:Pending the show where policy meets real life and democracy is still under construction.
Speaker A:I'm Taylor Darcy, your guide through the messy blueprints of American governance.
Speaker A:Elizabeth Wagner is a consumer protection attorney specializing in limit law and credit reporting disputes.
Speaker A:She has represented consumers against credit bureaus, banks and debt collectors, particularly in cases of identity theft and reporting inaccuracies.
Speaker A: A: Speaker A:Welcome, Elizabeth.
Speaker B:Thank you.
Speaker B:Thanks for having me.
Speaker A:You're welcome.
Speaker A:It's good to see you.
Speaker A:It's been a while.
Speaker B:Yeah.
Speaker A:Remember when we were studying for the bar and all the fun stress that that entailed?
Speaker B:Oh, yes.
Speaker B:So happy that we have that part of that stage of our life is behind us.
Speaker A:Right, right.
Speaker A:I mean, I remember being the most stressed I think I've ever been.
Speaker A:Although, to be fair, I hadn't been a practicing attorney yet.
Speaker A:So I think that was just like a prelude to the fun that is practicing, which is a completely different body game than what it was.
Speaker A:So we've known each other for.
Speaker A:We've been practicing for about eight years, and certainly we've learned a lot since law school and we've certainly grown.
Speaker A:But more importantly, you know, we live in a country right now where the rule of law is under assault.
Speaker A:We're mostly in a constitutional crisis at the moment where we have the executive branch that is trying to be the unitary executive branch, and there's a lot of pushb.
Speaker A:Can you kind of frame what that means from the consumer protection angle?
Speaker A:Where are we at?
Speaker A:Where are we headed?
Speaker A:What do you think we can do to prevent the more bad stuff from happening?
Speaker B:Yeah, so.
Speaker B:Well, that's a.
Speaker B:That's a big question.
Speaker B:But where are we at with everything?
Speaker B:I think is the starting point and where we're at is we're having these little rights that what I do to protect for, you know, suing credit bureaus or car manufacturers on behalf of the little guy.
Speaker B:They're trying to chip away at those rights and slowly taking away a lot of these consumer protections that are in place.
Speaker B:And it's not something that's going to happen tomorrow.
Speaker B:They're not going to wake up and no longer be able to dispute an inaccuracy on their credit report or be able to sue a car manufacturer.
Speaker B:But even heading into this, there was a huge change in the California lemon law that just happened that was under the guise of trying to expedite lemon law cases in California, but it's actually coming into fruition in a way that's maybe limiting the amount of money lawyers can make off of the cases, which is attacking the consumer rights.
Speaker B:Because if we can't make a living off of defending them or bringing those cases, those cases don't get brought.
Speaker B:So, yeah.
Speaker B:So with them being this administration and Trump attacking the ftc, dismantling a lot of these federal agencies that implement consumer protections, what you're going to see is a lot of those rights being reeled back a little bit by a little bit, to the point where it's going to be somebody who's trying to buy a house, can't get something that's wrong off their credit report, and then they have no recourse and they don't know when they lost the right to even have that fixed for them.
Speaker B:So it's something that they're not going to feel immediately unless something goes wrong in their life.
Speaker B:Same thing with getting a lemon buying a bad car.
Speaker B:You don't know you've lost the right to demand a repurchase to get all of these other remedies for yourself until you're in a position to need to demand them and they're gone.
Speaker B:So.
Speaker B:So right now we're going towards.
Speaker B:Everything's still kind of the same, right?
Speaker B:In the industry.
Speaker B:There's a lot of emails back and forth, watching things, trying to track the data on how it's changing.
Speaker B:And what I fear is going to happen is we're going to see some of these lawsuits go away, possibly in their entirety, because they're going to take away the private consumer being able to act as a private attorney general.
Speaker B:If they do that in certain.
Speaker B:With certain laws that we have, that's a huge implication in the consumer protection realm.
Speaker A:Can you explain what acting as a private attorney general means?
Speaker A:It's kind of a foreign concept even, I'll be frank, even within law.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:I mean, that's not necessarily a common thing, but I know that the.
Speaker A:I believe it's called paga, if I'm not mistaken.
Speaker A:The.
Speaker A:That that's an important part, but kind of break that down for us so we can understand how.
Speaker A:Why that's so important.
Speaker B:So PAGA is actually in the employment side.
Speaker B:So I'm not super familiar with paga, but I do know that that's part of this.
Speaker B:But the being a private attorney general means that I'm able to something that's typically the government's duty to protect.
Speaker B:They are the ones who are in the position to be better protect its people.
Speaker B:But because this affects so many people, the government can't be vindicating the rights in the millions, in the hundreds of thousands even so they give us this private right of action that allows private persons, through private attorneys to bring lawsuits against major corporations to indicate these specific enumerated rights.
Speaker B:So specifically with being the credit reporting stuff, stuff, for lack of a better word.
Speaker B:But when there is an identity theft situation and there is, you know, a person trying to fix their credit report, we are empowered as private attorney generals to sue Experian, bank of America, Wells Fargo, whoever it may be, on behalf of that consumer.
Speaker B:So the government has empowered us to act as that.
Speaker B:And they've made these statutes fee shifting.
Speaker B:So, so that means when we bail the plaintiff or our client pay us, the defendants pay us.
Speaker B:So it provides this route to us where these cases wouldn't necessarily on their own be worth it to attorneys.
Speaker B:But because we have that tool in place, we are empowered to sort of pursue these smaller cases.
Speaker B:I don't think they're smaller.
Speaker B:Most people don't think they're smaller.
Speaker B:But you go in from a judge who's handling million dollars cases, they don't think thousand dollar cases.
Speaker B:It's not big, it's not a big deal.
Speaker A:Well, you know, to be honest, like I handle civil litigation or I did more than I do and you know, if you're not talking in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, it's almost not worth suing for.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:And that leaves a lot of things in the justice system that they don't really handle.
Speaker A:In fact, just recently, I think it was beginning of this year, they increased the limits for limited civil, unlimited civil and small claims court from it was 25k, now it's 35k.
Speaker A:It was like 10 to $24,999.99 for the limited civil.
Speaker A:And then small claims court was 10,000 DOL or less.
Speaker A:And now they've bumped that up basically 5 and then up to 25 and then up to 35.
Speaker A:And so what's happening is the dollar amounts for these cases are getting pushed upwards because I mean things are legitimately getting more expensive.
Speaker A:But there's a very big difference in discovery for a case that is a $35,000 case or higher than a case that is small claims court.
Speaker A:And people don't necessarily understand those differences and I'm not expecting them to.
Speaker A:But there's a real issue with lack of justice when we're talking about what's a lot of money to A lot of people, but isn't when it comes to litigation.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:It's really hard to get attorneys to take cases if they're not going to get paid for them.
Speaker A:And it's really hard to ask someone that has damages of 10,000 or 20,000, which is a lot, but it's not a lot for litigation.
Speaker A:Litigation, 100,000 is a good number for most attorneys because then the investment in litigation makes sense because if you spend 30, 40,000 on litigation, that's a good return on investment as far as getting that $100,000 back.
Speaker A:But the smaller that number is, the less likely it makes sense for the attorney to spe the time and energy or the potential client on litigating that case.
Speaker A:And I can certainly see why the consumer protections is a huge issue because it's almost like class action stuff.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:Like where you've got small dollar amount wrongs.
Speaker A:Still wrong, but spread over numerous people.
Speaker A:Well, in consumer, correct me if I'm wrong and if I'm wrong, I am happy to be so consumer typically are lower dollar amount what I see in civil litigation for businesses, but they're still wrong when it comes to the dollar amounts.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:But they're smaller than what would be.
Speaker A:Typically you don't want to spend $350 an hour on an attorney, 450, $600 an hour on an attorney for a $10,000 claim or a $15,000 claim or whatever.
Speaker A:But those are the things that are really wrong, right?
Speaker A:Like the people that are getting hurt by that.
Speaker A:Is that accurate to say?
Speaker B:Yes, that's completely accurate.
Speaker B:You know, the, the with Lemon law, there's a max set of amount of money they can get and that's set forth in the statute with the credit reporting, it's a little bit more open ended, but we're still talking the maximum a case is worth is, you know, a couple hundred thousand dollars.
Speaker B:And you see judges that will say, oh, this, I've got a Google case, we're talking about $20 million.
Speaker B:I don't care about this.
Speaker A:Right, right.
Speaker A:Well, that's an unfortunate truth.
Speaker A:And our justice system is not built for the modern era.
Speaker A:And that's a, we're seeing that more and more with the Trump issue.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:Like he's able to do things that you, that the system just was never built for.
Speaker A:And it's sad too, because we need to have some judicial reform.
Speaker A:We need to have just stupid things, like simple, easy things that we could fix, like having consistent rules like from one jurisdiction to the next, you know, avoiding and I Not trying to diss the judges.
Speaker A:I've been before.
Speaker A:I've had some good ones.
Speaker A:I've had some not so good ones.
Speaker A:But having rules that are consistent from one courtroom to the next, Right.
Speaker A:Where it's not their own little personal fiefdom.
Speaker A:And I'm not trying to say that they don't have jurisdiction or they don't have a say in what happens in the courtroom, but, you know, one set of rules in one court can be a huge miscarriage of justice for rules in a different court.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:You're going to have different outcome, and that's not what we should want.
Speaker A:You know, we should have consistent rules from federal to state to local to.
Speaker A:I mean, when I start listing off.
Speaker A:One time I was at a. I was doing an appeal, and the security guard who worked at the court, we were talking briefly, and he mentioned, you know, he was talking about, you know, the attorneys that come through, or sometimes they're a little egotistical, and I'm like, yeah, I know.
Speaker A:I get it.
Speaker A:And I'm like.
Speaker A:And we started talking, and I said, I explained to him all.
Speaker A:He didn't know this, and he works in the appellate division of the court.
Speaker A:He did not know how different the rules were from one jurisdiction to the next, one courtroom to the next one, everything to the next.
Speaker A:And he looks at me and he's like, why would anyone ever want to do that?
Speaker A:And.
Speaker A:And I'm like, I know it's a royal pain in the patouches.
Speaker A:And imagine a layperson trying to navigate all of these rules and expecting a successful outcome.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:And that's just something simple.
Speaker A:We could all agree on, that we should all have the same rules, regardless of area, but we don't.
Speaker A:And that's an issue for justice, because how do you get it if nobody can follow the rules, or if you have to have a law degree to follow the rules?
Speaker A:You know, there's a whole lot wrong with that.
Speaker A:So let's talk about what, you know, in the context of Lemon Law.
Speaker A:What exactly is that?
Speaker A:Because there's a lot of misconceptions about what that is.
Speaker A:I'm not familiar with it enough to be able to speak any type of authority on it.
Speaker A:And I'm curious, because there's so much misinformation and disinformation out there.
Speaker A:What would you say is, like, the biggest big picture and then narrow it down to what's the most important details that if you were talking to somebody face to face, should they know?
Speaker B:Yeah.
Speaker B:So one of the biggest things That I immediately tell someone is it's not just about having a bad car, it's a warranty law.
Speaker B:So your car has to be under warranty for the California's lemon law to take effect.
Speaker B:And that can be in the form of if you buy a certified pre owned, but that's difficult because those warranties are only a year.
Speaker B:So you need more than one presentation, which can be hard to do in that timeline.
Speaker B:So yeah, the big picture is you need a car that has more than one presentation, ideally with the same issue during the warranty period.
Speaker B:And you need to present the vehicle to an authorized dealership for repair and they're unable to repair parent, you are able to ask for a repurchase or a buyback or a replacement.
Speaker B:All of those are sort of used interchangeably.
Speaker B:I've not seen it be very common that these manufacturers, any manufacturer offers a replacement vehicle.
Speaker B:So it's usually a repurchase, which is a refund of the money that you have spent.
Speaker B:So your down payment, your monthly payments, you get those back minus an offset that the manufacturers get the benefit of, which is the amount of miles you were able to drive the vehicle before you had an issue.
Speaker B:And the big thing I think people think about with lemons too is they think it needs to be the exact same issue.
Speaker B:So my engine had a problem with the exact same component multiple times, and that's not necessarily true because this is a giant machine.
Speaker B:They're very complicated now, honestly, and highly technical.
Speaker B:So if you're having many issues in different parts of your vehicle, it can be part of a larger problem with the vehicle.
Speaker B:So just because the exact component's not a problem three times or four times, that doesn't mean you might not have a possible, you know, ability to get your money back or to get out of that vehicle.
Speaker B:With the California living law, by the time that we get involved, if you have had a repurchase that you've asked for and it has been denied, we can also seek civil penalties, which can be an up to a two time civil penalty and it's a misnomer because you know, these laws are not written good at all, but it's actually a multiplier of three.
Speaker B:So if you've got a $20,000 vehicle that your refund is 20,000, then your full time civil penalty would actually be $60,000.
Speaker B:So that is something that you could, by the time you get into litigation, you can pursue that extra damage to punish them.
Speaker B:It's, it's actual punishment money.
Speaker B:So that's, that they can.
Speaker B:Consumers can currently pursue.
Speaker B:And that is special to California.
Speaker B:Not every state has that.
Speaker B:So that's really great for California.
Speaker B:We are pro consumer here.
Speaker A:Yes.
Speaker B:But did a huge change to the California lemon law this year.
Speaker B:Still navigating how that change goes, but it changes the timing on everything.
Speaker B:And we don't get that discovery that you were talking about earlier.
Speaker B:We get limited discovery for a certain amount of time, and if the case doesn't settle, then we can get full discovery.
Speaker B:But we have to go through these new hoops.
Speaker B:So.
Speaker B:Yeah, and so we'll see how that plays out.
Speaker B:But that was something that was lobbied hard for by fca, some of these really big car manufacturers.
Speaker B:So they got the government's ear right now.
Speaker B:And it's the worst for a company like that to have the government's ear in a way where this is really affecting how we can pursue our, you know, consumer rights.
Speaker A:And, you know, I think.
Speaker A:I think there's enough, I mean, for lack of a better way of saying it, I don't think there's enough people that understand how important these types of things are because, you know, it truly is a balancing act between the right for a producer of goods and services to produce them that are in a way that do not harm the consumer.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:But then the next part of the context is like, for instance, the, if I'm remembering correctly, and maybe you don't know the part, but the CFPB was in charge of like, bank fees, is that correct?
Speaker A:And I'm remembering this where basically they were limiting the amount of bank fees that they could charge.
Speaker A:And so that's something that really affects the poor and the indigent.
Speaker A:Right?
Speaker A:That's the people that you have a bounce check.
Speaker A:You didn't mean to bounce the check.
Speaker A:You weren't trying to bounce the check.
Speaker A:But it happens, right?
Speaker A:We all oops on something.
Speaker A:And then that overdraft fee kills any type of getting out of the hole.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:Especially when they charge you 36, $50 in some instances.
Speaker A:Absurd numbers.
Speaker A:And so these types of things that are going away or potentially going away are only hurting the people that need the help the most.
Speaker A:And that's the poor and people that do live a little closer to the edge of paycheck to paycheck, which, you know, to be fair, some of us always have and some of us have, you know, we're working on not.
Speaker A:But talk a little bit more about some of the things that, because a car is, you know, typically a single purchase, you purchase it, it's good Five years, six maybe, unless you're on a lease.
Speaker A:Talk about some of the things that the Consumer Protection Bureau help with that are more day to day.
Speaker B:The junk fees or the fees that you were just referencing.
Speaker B:I thought about that after you asked your initial question.
Speaker B:That is something that is immediately going into effect, that's being taken away.
Speaker B:There was a limit that was imposed.
Speaker B:I think it was $5.
Speaker B:You couldn't charge more than $5 for overdraft or return checked fees.
Speaker B:And now that's gone.
Speaker B:And there was also a limit on how often they could impose those charges.
Speaker B:And I think I haven't looked at the numbers in a while.
Speaker B:But before that change was put into effect, banks were pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars off of this.
Speaker B:And as you said, it was always, it's not someone who's wealthy who's writing paycheck to paycheck or writing close to that zero in their account.
Speaker B:So you're putting poor people in a more poor position.
Speaker B:And so the CFPB has rules like that that they were implementing and that was the big one that was a hard fought for protection that's now been completely undone.
Speaker B:So some of the other protections that they have in place have to do with trying to think a little bit on this.
Speaker B:But fees are a big one.
Speaker B:Imposing interest rates, those are, that's a big one as well, is monitoring interest rates on certain types of loans.
Speaker B:That's something the CFPB protects.
Speaker B:And they also are highly involved with the student loans.
Speaker B:And I know the student loans are definitely a hot button topic, but they are also helping with students who are dealing with those types of loans that are from not a student, private student loans or fraudulent situations with student with entities that may have, you know, gone away for various reasons, bankruptcy or they were fraudulent to begin with.
Speaker B:So the CFPB is protecting against that as well as any business that you may do business with that is not licensed, that doesn't have government backing.
Speaker B:The CFPB is there to hold them accountable on a larger scale.
Speaker B:And they do sometimes bring lawsuits and on a yearly basis bring in a certain amount of money.
Speaker B:And that money goes right back into the CFPB to try to help fund the functioning of the cfpb.
Speaker A:Yeah.
Speaker A:In fact, are you familiar with the CSLB licensing requirements at all?
Speaker A:Okay, so this one is really good and this one is probably worth some money to somebody out there.
Speaker A:So I hope they hear that in CSLB or the contractor Safety Licensing Board.
Speaker A:Contractor.
Speaker A:I always forget the stupid acronym meaning.
Speaker A:But anyway, if you are Unlicensed in California and you do work on someone's home of greater the value of $500.
Speaker A:$500, okay.
Speaker A:Not a lot of money.
Speaker A:You can.
Speaker A:What will happen is even if you do the work to code, they will have what's called discouragement of profits, where if you get paid 10,000, 15,000, 20, whatever dollar amount, even if you do it absolutely 100% perfect, the person can sue and get all of their money back.
Speaker A:Even if you did it perfect, no negligence required, simply by not having a license.
Speaker A:You can be.
Speaker A:Your entire amount that you did can be refunded back to the person so they get the value of the property, they get the value of the service, and they get their money back.
Speaker A:Because CSLB does not want unlicensed contractors out there doing work when there's licensed contractors available.
Speaker A:So if you're thinking about undercutting a licensed contractor by not getting your license, think again, number one.
Speaker A:And number two, get your dang license.
Speaker A:But where this comes into play is if you are in that situation where you hire somebody and they say they have a license and they don't have a license, getting your money back is very possible.
Speaker A:And unlike a normal civil suit where you have to prove a lot of stuff, all you have to do is prove that they don't have a license and it's very easy to do and you can get your money back.
Speaker A:It's one of the most crazy ones that I've ever had to deal with because of that.
Speaker A:Because of the fact that they could do it perfectly, they could do it exactly to code, but simply by not having that license, they will lose all of that money.
Speaker A:It's nuts.
Speaker B:So, yeah, I know where I live that is incredibly common that people do that.
Speaker B:They add adus unlicensed a lot.
Speaker B:So that's crazy.
Speaker A:Yeah, that.
Speaker A:Hey, there's an area of practice area for you that fits in the consumer protection category, right?
Speaker A:Like it's cslb, but it's consumer protection.
Speaker A:That's really what it's for, is to protect people from being hurt by unlicensed contractors.
Speaker A:And it blows people away when I start talking about that because they're like, wait, what?
Speaker A:Sorry, that's just how it works.
Speaker A:So, yeah, those junk fees, I thought.
Speaker A:Are you a fan of Katie Porter?
Speaker B:I don't know if I very familiar with the name.
Speaker B:Sounds familiar, but probably not.
Speaker A:She was in Congress and she was reading during one of the hearings the subtle art of not giving up.
Speaker A:And.
Speaker A:But she's very pro consumer.
Speaker A:That's why I thought you Might have heard of her.
Speaker A:But anyway, she was running for Senate against Adam Schiff.
Speaker A:And to make a long story short, she was the one that was grilling the Chase CEO about how it is possible that he can make an absurd amount of money.
Speaker A:I mean like $100 million.
Speaker A:And his bank teller can barely afford to keep the lights on.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:Like she, she can't afford to pay rent because of how little they pay their bank tellers.
Speaker A:And it was very interesting.
Speaker A:You should check it out on.
Speaker A:It's been on YouTube.
Speaker A:But it's one of those moments where like yeah, you know, I mean, because so many of these big, the, the pay gap disparity between, you know, what the CEO makes and what the, the lowest the janitor makes.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:Is absurd.
Speaker A:Absurd.
Speaker A:And yet I don't quite understand how that's okay by people.
Speaker A:I don't begrudge anyone making as much money as they humanly possibly can.
Speaker A:Knock yourself out.
Speaker A:Make your money.
Speaker A:I don't care.
Speaker A:Except for.
Speaker A:And this is my.
Speaker A:Except for.
Speaker A:And this is what I teach in my business law course.
Speaker A:Except for when you harm others in the process.
Speaker A:If other people can't live because you choose to make bad choices, like you know, McDonald's with coffee and Target with their, their situation.
Speaker A:That was, that's always fun when I start listing off all these different tort cases in my, in my business law course and people are like, excuse me, genuinely surprised about the coffee case because people only heard the negative about the woman.
Speaker A:That the reality was McDonald's was by far in the wrong.
Speaker A:Right?
Speaker A:Like there was no doubt about that case after you heard everything, but they smeared the crap out of her all over the place.
Speaker A:But this idea that these corporations can hurt people, right?
Speaker A:Make as much money as you want, but don't hurt your employees.
Speaker A:Make as much money as you want, but don't hurt the people that are consuming your products.
Speaker A:That should be, you know, Ford with the Pinto case, when I blow my students minds with that one, when I say it costs $11 to fix the Pinto first they always wonder what the Pinto is.
Speaker A:But, but then when they, when, when I show them.
Speaker A:Did you ever see the movie Real Genius?
Speaker B:No.
Speaker A:Okay, so in Real Genius, he.
Speaker A:Not Real Genius, Sorry, top secret.
Speaker A:It was with Val Kilmer and there's a scene in there where a truck comes up and dings the back of a Ford Pinto and it goes, ding.
Speaker A:And then it goes.
Speaker A:And it blows up.
Speaker A:Referring to the Ford Pinto that blew up.
Speaker A:And you have to see it.
Speaker A:It's a good movie.
Speaker A:Rest in peace, Val Kilmer.
Speaker A:But anyway, but when I start telling them these stories about cases that it only cost $11 and yet Ford made the choice to say it's cheaper for us to litigate this than it is for us to spend the money to fix it, that's where you come into play.
Speaker A:That's where we talk about consumer protections.
Speaker A:I'm guessing recalls fall underneath consumer protections as well.
Speaker A:Or is that underneath the National Transportation Safety Board?
Speaker B:Yeah, they keep changing it.
Speaker A:Yeah, tell us about that.
Speaker A:Tell us about how those things fit underneath those.
Speaker A:Those are administrative agencies.
Speaker A:But how do consumer protections throughout, like the epa, you know, there's lots of different areas and I know you may not have knowledge in all of them, but you know, the fact that we have clean water for the most part, you know that type of thing.
Speaker B:So you made some really interesting points that my clients ask me about every single case.
Speaker B:I, I have a almost script memorized for how I explain this to him.
Speaker B:Why are they not buying my car back?
Speaker B:And they are paying their attorneys, they're paying you.
Speaker B:And then I'm going to get my car back too, or get my money back as well.
Speaker B:Why did they not just do what they should have done in the first place?
Speaker B:And I have to explain to them that you're not a person and, and people don't, they really don't think that until it happens to them that, that they're going to be treated like that.
Speaker B:That cog on the wheel, that piece on the conveyor belt, they've made a decision at a certain point that they're going to just put this money into this because they decided that's how they want to do business.
Speaker B:And it doesn't make financial sense at the end of the day.
Speaker B:It doesn't make moral sense at the end of the day.
Speaker B:And I don't know who's talking to them on accounting side saying to fight this because it's absolutely absurd.
Speaker B:You know, some of these vehicles are, you're talking a 40, $50,000 car and they end up spending $400,000 to defend the lawsuit.
Speaker B:That is absolutely insane.
Speaker A:Well, you get people like Martha Stewart who, you know, and it blows people away when I tell them about her.
Speaker A:Who you don't screw with her intellectual property.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:Like you don't.
Speaker A:She's like the queen.
Speaker A:And I say that in the best way possible because she will sue you into oblivion if it means that she protects her brand.
Speaker A:And so I guess what it comes down to, sometimes it's the money and sometimes it's Principle of the thing, right?
Speaker A:For them from being sued or suing Target.
Speaker A:There was a case recently where I'd say recently, within the last five years, not.
Speaker A:There could be a lot of things where there was a young child who picked up a hypodermic needle and she got infected with something.
Speaker A:It wasn't aids, if I'm remembering correctly.
Speaker A:It was a disease, but it wasn't that.
Speaker A:And so the mother said, look, we don't want anything other than the treatment that it takes to take care of her.
Speaker A:We're not asking to be made rich by this.
Speaker A:We just want the treatment.
Speaker A:And the treatment was about $1,000, if I remember correctly.
Speaker A:Now, if I'm on either the accounting or general counsel for Target, what am I saying to them?
Speaker A:Give them the damn money, right?
Speaker A:Like, a thousand dollars is nothing.
Speaker A:You're gonna lose that in a heartbeat.
Speaker A:But Target, in their infinitely stupid wisdom, and I do say that because that's the only thing I can do, it says, no, we're gonna fight this.
Speaker A:They fought and lost.
Speaker A:And the award was a million dollars.
Speaker A:Now, I don't know if it got remitted down, whatever, but even still, the fact that you spent the kind of money that you had to have spent to lose is absurd.
Speaker A:Over $1,000.
Speaker A:If I was general counsel, I would have said, settle, settle, settle.
Speaker A:Like on Liar, Liar, right?
Speaker A:When he's trying to get them to settle.
Speaker A:You are idiots to have not.
Speaker A:And they had to pay the million dollar price.
Speaker A:And you're like, at what point do you have to just say, that was dumb, right?
Speaker A:Like from an ethical perspective and a financial perspective, either way, you spend a lot of money on attorneys fees and.
Speaker A:Or you spend a lot of money and if you actually pay the settlement, that it's going to cost you a million dollars.
Speaker A:It's just the absurdity of this, it just blows my mind.
Speaker A:The companies that do that stuff because you're like.
Speaker A:And what about the image, you know, like, what about the.
Speaker A:Like how you look to other people?
Speaker A:I don't shop at Target for the most part after I found that case.
Speaker A:I mean, other reasons, too, but that's at the top of.
Speaker A:That's one of the tops of the list.
Speaker A:Because if a company can't recognize, oh, by the way, they knew that there was a drug issue with their parking lot, right?
Speaker A:Like, it wasn't.
Speaker A:Like they had no clue and ended up making that choice.
Speaker A:They knew that it was.
Speaker A:That they were there, people were using drugs in their parking lot, and they still chose to not own up to it, it's like, you know, no, do the right thing.
Speaker A:You win customers that way by doing the right thing.
Speaker A:If you make a mistake, you know, it's like, we grow up and people are.
Speaker A:The idea that if you make a mistake, you shouldn't admit that you're wrong.
Speaker A:And I know that's a weird concept in law, but it should be the normal, right?
Speaker A:Like, oops, we made a mistake, let's make this right.
Speaker A:But they don't.
Speaker A:They make a mistake and then they just be like, nope, I'm not going to admit anything.
Speaker A:And then they spend a million dollars plus on fighting a stupid lawsuit that they didn't have to fight if they would have just done the right thing.
Speaker B:And I've had a chance to depose people for some of these car dealerships, and their, their mindset is so different when they're in the company.
Speaker B:That.
Speaker B:And I know I'm really biased on the other side at this point, right.
Speaker B:I can't pretend I'm a new person, but they, they will say things like, these people are just trying to get a free car out of me.
Speaker B:We don't make bad cars.
Speaker B:And I'm like, you can't truly believe that.
Speaker B:You put out a hundred thousand vehicles.
Speaker B:You're saying they're all perfect.
Speaker B:That's not actually mathematically likely at all.
Speaker B:So they really do believe this.
Speaker B:And on both sides of the consumer protection that I've worked on with the lemon law and the credit reporting, there have been these who have switched sides, who defended the corporation, and then they've described it as grabbing their soul back or to redeem myself.
Speaker B:And they're fascinating people to talk to that have done that because at the end of the day, they made a ton of money doing what they did.
Speaker B:So they have the ability to go do the righteous thing now.
Speaker B:But it is fascinating that they do know.
Speaker B:They do know that they're, you know, the Darth Vader in the situation, but they do anyways.
Speaker A:Tribalism is a real drug, right?
Speaker A:Like you, you don't.
Speaker A:You want to be on the winning side of your life.
Speaker A:And the idea that you have to work with the cognitive dissonance of saying, I'm not the hero that I think I am, that can be hard for people's perspective, right?
Speaker A:Like, they have to admit that of themselves, that can be hard because you're like, I went to law school to help people.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:Or whatever.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:Like, typically, most people didn't go to law school to become Darth Vader.
Speaker A:Just generally, I'm just Saying it's true, right?
Speaker A:Like most people went to help people.
Speaker A:That's most people.
Speaker A:There are those exceptions to that rule.
Speaker A:But and so you have to come face to face with, you know, do I do insurance defense?
Speaker A:You know, are there people out there that do try to get free stuff out of stuff?
Speaker A:Sure there is.
Speaker A:And I don't doubt that.
Speaker A:But I would say most people are good people, right?
Speaker A:And I can make that pretty generalized statement.
Speaker A:But this idea that, you know, you shouldn't own up to your mistakes and say oops.
Speaker A:Well, I mean, look, I'm not going to tell you say I'm going to say this Apple and all of its faults, right?
Speaker A:Like it has plenty of faults.
Speaker A:I'm not going to say that it's perfect.
Speaker A:But it was one of the first companies, even as bad as Steve Jobs was.
Speaker A:It was one of the first companies that made manufacturers warranties on computers last longer than 90 days.
Speaker A:They were the first company that made them last a year.
Speaker A:That's not nothing, right?
Speaker A:Like that is something because before that computers were lasting 90 days, their warranties were lasting 90 days, computers were lasting longer, but then they'd fail in week, in month six or month eight.
Speaker A:And you're like, well wait, okay, but I just bought this, right?
Speaker A:Like eight months is not that long for a computer.
Speaker A:Especially when life cycles of computers were anywhere between two and five years, right?
Speaker A:So the fact that they wouldn't cover them, you know, a computer breaks and you're like, okay, now I have to spend another three grand on a new computer even though I barely got the use out of this thing.
Speaker A:And so the fact that Apple went, now they baked it into their price.
Speaker A:They're not hurting.
Speaker A:I'm not suggesting that they're.
Speaker A:But it was something they didn't have to do that the industry standard was 90 days.
Speaker A:They could have just stuck with that and been like everybody else.
Speaker A:They increased their pricing and added the warranty.
Speaker A:I get it.
Speaker A:I'm not naive.
Speaker A:They're a money making machine.
Speaker A:But at the end of the day, you know, it's nice when you do buy a Mac computer that you do have a year and you can pay extra.
Speaker A:In fact they just recently changed it to where you can purchase their Apple Care.
Speaker A:I literally did it yesterday.
Speaker A:Even though a couple of my devices are out of warranty, as long as they're new enough, reasonably speaking, you can actually put AppleCare on them and it's a monthly charge, so it no longer is it.
Speaker A:You have to buy it within 60 days of buying the device.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:Or 90 days or whatever.
Speaker A:It was like, these are a couple of devices that were several months old, that actually were like six or seven months old that were far out of warranty, but still relatively new.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:But yeah.
Speaker A:And for $20 a month, I'm getting three devices that are covered, which is nice because that wasn't the case for the longest time.
Speaker A:And having to come up with $150, $250, 300 for warranty is like, okay, that's a lot extra on top of stuff, especially when you're already throwing down several.
Speaker A:A lot of money.
Speaker A:We'll just say that.
Speaker A:So, you know, we started with kind of talking a little bit about the protections that are getting lost or that we're losing.
Speaker A:What are things that we can do to, you know, what do we need to know to get them back?
Speaker A:Where do we need to go with this?
Speaker A:In other words, I don't like just saying here's a problem.
Speaker A:Good luck.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:What can we do to help us move forward and keep those types of protections?
Speaker B:Well, it's really interesting because you need to lean and, sorry, my cat is trying to claw my head out.
Speaker B:Leaning into your state and local politics more, which is been such a Republican stance, but to get your state to offer you more protections than what your federal agencies and your federal government is going to do.
Speaker B:So our federal government right now is a wild card at best.
Speaker B:So go into your city councils, go into your state representatives, get in their ears.
Speaker B:I'm very active here locally, and there have actually been some acknowledgments from local politicians about certain things with just postcard parties and things like that that seem so small, but in the scale of it, if you can get enough people who, who care about this issue or this protection do that, that is what I think is effective, is leaning into those local issues, leaning into your local politicians, your state legislators, your state state assemblymen and women, making sure they know what's going on because you can pass.
Speaker B:California has more protections than federal statutes give us.
Speaker B:And every state do that.
Speaker B:Every state can do that.
Speaker B:And it makes doing business very different for people who come to California than for those who go to Texas.
Speaker B:And for now, people think this is a great place to do business, but consumers disagree.
Speaker B:So I, you know, you can, you can take any blue state and increase those protections and hope that people follow suit.
Speaker B:You know, California is a, is a sort of a, a trailblazer for that.
Speaker B:Whatever people have to say about us, we do do that.
Speaker B:And I think getting other states on a local basis to follow that and to increase those protections.
Speaker B:Because you can do that.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:And I think one of the things that I find people don't think of often enough is one voice might not be the loudest, but if nobody else is speaking up, it can be incredibly loud.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:And you know the.
Speaker A:The old saying, the squeaky wheel gets the crease, Right.
Speaker A:You know, people struggle with, you know, how can I possibly make a difference?
Speaker A:Nobody's listening to me.
Speaker A:Nobody's paying attention to me.
Speaker A:And I had.
Speaker A:Do you know who Leah Lippman is?
Speaker B:Yes.
Speaker A:Okay.
Speaker A:I had her on.
Speaker A:She was actually my first guest.
Speaker A:And I asked her, you know, I said, what do you say to people like that?
Speaker A:She says, doing nothing lets them win.
Speaker A:Right?
Speaker A:Like, if you don't say anything, then it tells them it's okay.
Speaker A:It's complicity.
Speaker A:Right?
Speaker A:It's complicity.
Speaker A:You're saying that it's okay by not saying anything now, are you going to win every battle that you face, I mean, by speaking up?
Speaker A:No, of course not.
Speaker A:You're going to meet opposition.
Speaker A:But at the end of the day, if we don't stand up for our rights and stand up for these types of protections, then what we get within the.
Speaker A:Then the rich people get richer.
Speaker A:Right?
Speaker A:The companies can literally kill you with no type of issue.
Speaker A:They can make a poor product that people die from.
Speaker A:I mean, there's a reason why we don't have lawn darts anymore, Right?
Speaker A:There's a reason why in California, fireworks are outlawed for the most part.
Speaker A:And I don't just mean because of the weather, because of safety.
Speaker A:There's a whole lot fewer injuries from fireworks in California than there are in other states.
Speaker A:We live longer because of those things.
Speaker A:And I think it's important to remember that, yeah, we may not have the freedoms that people have in other states like that, but we also don't have to worry about dying in the same ways as they do.
Speaker A:And we can force manufacturers to improve their safety measures.
Speaker A:We can force companies to invest in their workforce rather than spending it on more yachts and more rich people stuff, right?
Speaker A:Like, there's no world in which the rich people need more of what they need.
Speaker A:But there is an absolute world where the poor and the people that don't have that.
Speaker A:We need more.
Speaker A:Right?
Speaker A:We have.
Speaker A:We need to do better with housing the poor population.
Speaker A:You know, we can spend 20 billion sending it to Argentina, but we can't afford housing assistance for people that are living on the street.
Speaker A:Where are our priorities?
Speaker A:Why are we letting rich people get richer.
Speaker A:And again, I don't begrudge anyone getting money.
Speaker A:I have no issue with making money and having people get money, but it's when they hurt others.
Speaker A:I mean, imagine you see someone that's starving and oh, but I get my yacht, right?
Speaker A:I don't have to worry about my food.
Speaker A:But that's a human being there.
Speaker A:Now I know I have a heart and that's much to my capitalistic desires.
Speaker A:My inner capitalist would say, arrr.
Speaker A:But at the end of the day, it's like, I'd rather have a heart and sleep at night than to have more money and be miserable and know that someone else is not living as well as they could simply because of my choices.
Speaker A:So anyway, so Elizabeth, by the way, I don't know if I ever told you this, but my oldest daughter's name is Elizabeth.
Speaker A:Did I ever tell you that?
Speaker B:Oh, I didn't know that, no.
Speaker A:Yeah, my oldest daughter's name is Elizabeth.
Speaker A:In fact, today is her birthday.
Speaker A:So she turned 11 today.
Speaker A:And she is quite, quite the.
Speaker A:She's so amazing.
Speaker A:I love her.
Speaker A:She's so sweet.
Speaker A:She's definitely caught her mother and I together there, which can be a good thing and a bad thing some days.
Speaker A:I'm just saying.
Speaker A:But anyway, so it's a favorite name.
Speaker A:So whenever I talk to you or I see your name, it's always fun because I'm like, aww.
Speaker A:So you'll always have a special place in my heart.
Speaker A:If for no other reason, my daughter's named not after you, but with the same name.
Speaker A:But anyway, Elizabeth, what, you know what would be like?
Speaker A:You talk to a lot of people about consumer protections if you had to give them one thing that you would say that could improve their life.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:What would that be?
Speaker B:Opt out of arbitration.
Speaker A:Oh, yes, yes, thank you.
Speaker A:Absolutely.
Speaker A:So important people.
Speaker A:It's funny because the independent third party mediation, arbitration, all that stuff got such a.
Speaker A:Like, everybody thinks they're so good, but I'm like, no, it's not.
Speaker A:It's not good.
Speaker A:It allows private thing, it allows bad things to remain private and it allows companies that are.
Speaker A:Have significantly deeper pockets to hurt people that it shouldn't.
Speaker A:And that's.
Speaker A:It's a sad place to be.
Speaker A:So yes, opt out of arbitration is a good one.
Speaker A:In fact, I don't put arbitration clauses in most of my agreements.
Speaker A:Unless the client specifically says, I want an arbitration clause, I leave it out because it doesn't help the people that it's supposed to help.
Speaker A:It only helps the people that it's Not.
Speaker A:And it's unfortunate because especially when I tell them how much a day of arbitration is, and their eyes go, bing.
Speaker A:And you're like, yeah, sorry, I don't get to make up the prices.
Speaker A:But you get retired judges that have been on the bench and they want their cheddar, and I get it.
Speaker A:But at the same time, as an expensive.
Speaker A:It's expensive for that.
Speaker A:And then they.
Speaker A:And then their eyes get bigger and they're like, wait, what?
Speaker A:Which is why, like, people suggesting for.
Speaker A:For these things, it's like, no, my clients don't have unlimited money to do that.
Speaker A:Let's just resolve the dispute.
Speaker A:Let's come to an agreement.
Speaker A:Let's make it happen.
Speaker A:But anyway, what else?
Speaker A:That was such a good one.
Speaker A:Sorry, I didn't want to.
Speaker B:Oh, yeah, that's my big one.
Speaker B:I would tell everybody, you can get your credit card agreements out, print them out, cross it out, initial it, send it in.
Speaker B:They'll probably keep doing business with you and store it in your file, and it never comes up again until you.
Speaker B:If you have an issue.
Speaker B:So, you know, 99% of the time, it's not an issue.
Speaker B:That's a big thing.
Speaker B:The other thing is just talk to people.
Speaker B:So I kind of had that thought when you were talking about what can you do?
Speaker B:And squeaky wheel gets the grease.
Speaker B:But also, being neighborly, you don't know.
Speaker B:I find that consumers don't know their rights.
Speaker B:They don't know that they've been wronged until they talk to someone and find out it happened to them, too.
Speaker B:And there's no substitute for that, for talking to people and hearing that there's a lot of embarrassment with a credit reporting issue or that I bought a brand new BMW and I can't believe it's having issues.
Speaker B:I don't want to talk to anybody about it because I'm embarrassed that I spent $80,000 on a piece of junk.
Speaker B:There's a lot of that.
Speaker A:Yeah, yeah.
Speaker B:So I want people to talk to people, because these problems are so every day.
Speaker B:And that's what consumer attorneys are for.
Speaker B:And you do probably have more recourse than you ever think you do.
Speaker A:And, you know, silence lets them win.
Speaker A:Right.
Speaker A:Like, I don't have a better way of saying it than Professor Linman did, but I mean, in the respect of if you keep quiet about something that happened because you don't want to burden someone else, you might be the key that unlocks that door for them to having what they need.
Speaker A:Here's a good one for you.
Speaker A:And you probably may or may not know this one, but I used to work at a credit union and our credit cards were pretty good credit cards.
Speaker A:They weren't crazy.
Speaker A:They weren't the wackadoodle ones that a lot of them are now.
Speaker A:But what most people don't understand is that they have.
Speaker A:Depending on the card, okay, Always got a.
Speaker A:The attorney in me just goes nuts if I don't say that.
Speaker A:Depending on the card, you can have travel insurance up to a certain dollar amount.
Speaker A:And depending on our cards, you could have 100,000, 400,000, even a million dollars worth of travel insurance simply by booking the flight with your credit card.
Speaker A:That if you.
Speaker A:If, for instance, AD&D was one of the benefits, right?
Speaker A:If you go down in a plane crash, your family's entitled to that benefit.
Speaker A:But most people don't know their benefits that are.
Speaker A:That are available with their credit cards.
Speaker A:So they go unclaimed by a large margin.
Speaker A:So these credit card companies can provide the benefit, provide it without ever actually having to pay it out because, well, why would they?
Speaker A:They're not going to tell you that it exists.
Speaker A:And so one of my favorite times was when people were especially new kids were getting new credit cards.
Speaker A:Well, you know, maybe, but anyway, and they would come to me and I'd tell them that detail.
Speaker A:I'd be like, okay, so make sure that you read the fine print on this and make sure that someone who would be a viable beneficiary, your mom, your dad, whomever for the kids or your spouse or whomever they know about this, put this in a safe spot.
Speaker A:Put it in a place where, if something were to happen on this flight or this trip that you're on, that you have this available to you, that you're aware of it.
Speaker A:Because otherwise, if you don't know, you don't know what you don't know.
Speaker A:So pay attention to these little things.
Speaker A:You could have a million dollars in coverage that you didn't even know about it.
Speaker A:And your family could be well taken care of simply by purchasing it with a credit card instead of a debit card.
Speaker A:And again, not all cards are like that.
Speaker A:I'm not going to get into that.
Speaker A:But that's one of those details that not a lot of people know.
Speaker A:But, man, they are sure happy when I've told them.
Speaker A:And they were just like, yay.
Speaker A:Because nothing bad happened.
Speaker A:But at the end of the day, something could have.
Speaker A:And their lives and their families could have been, you know, huge.
Speaker A:Could have been impacted.
Speaker A:Hugely.
Speaker A:Huge.
Speaker A:That's not a word.
Speaker A:Anyway, you know what I mean?
Speaker A:Elizabeth, it's been so good to catch up with you and our pre thing.
Speaker A:Thank you so much for your time.
Speaker A:And let me know if there's anything that certainly I can help you with.
Speaker A:But I'd love to talk with you again, and maybe we'll talk more in some policies and details of ways to help our fellow people.
Speaker A:All right.
Speaker A:Thank you.
Speaker B:Yeah.
Speaker B:Thank you so much.
Speaker B:And it was so nice to catch up with you, too.
