<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Virginia Lawyers Weekly &#187; Consumer Protection</title>
	<atom:link href="http://valawyersweekly.com/tag/consumer-protection/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://valawyersweekly.com</link>
	<description>VA Lawyers Weekly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 20:24:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Warranty Disclaimer Inadequate for RV Buyer&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/warranty-disclaimer-inadequate-for-rv-buyer/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/warranty-disclaimer-inadequate-for-rv-buyer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:34:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge James C. Turk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Western District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73913</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A buyer who spent nearly $200,000 on an RV motor coach and is unhappy with repeated efforts to repair multiple alleged defects may sue the seller Camping World for breach of implied warranties, as the Roanoke U.S. District Court finds the dealer’s disclaimer clause inadequate under the Virginia UCC. Defendant Camping World did not offer [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/warranty-disclaimer-inadequate-for-rv-buyer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Debt Collector Proves ‘Bona Fide Error’&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/debt-collector-proves-bona-fide-error/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/debt-collector-proves-bona-fide-error/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:33:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Norman K. Moon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Western District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73911</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Although an employee of defendant debt collector lost his place in his telephone script and omitted from his voicemail message the statement that the call was “an attempt to collect a debt by a debt collector,” defendant debt collection law firm wins summary judgment in this FDCPA case with its bona fide error defense, says [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/04/22/debt-collector-proves-bona-fide-error/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Loan Servicer Contacts Violated FDCPA&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/20/loan-servicer-contacts-violated-fdcpa/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/20/loan-servicer-contacts-violated-fdcpa/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 13:43:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Norman K. Moon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Western District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73269</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A loan servicing company that continued to contact a borrower seeking payment of a loan and refused to contact her lawyer, although she had settled her case, violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Charlottesville U.S. District Court grants summary judgment to the borrower and will hear evidence on her damages. The loan [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/20/loan-servicer-contacts-violated-fdcpa/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Despite $500 jury award, judge gives consumer lawyer $8K in fees&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/12/despite-500-jury-award-judge-give-consumer-lawyer-8k-in-fees/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/12/despite-500-jury-award-judge-give-consumer-lawyer-8k-in-fees/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:03:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Vieth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attorneys Fees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Thomas D. Horne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Loudoun County Circuit Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=73079</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Virginia consumer lawyer says a judge’s hefty fee award in an otherwise small-value used car case will encourage lawyers to stand up for consumers even when the stakes are small. Loudoun County Circuit Judge Thomas D. Horne awarded $8,000 to the car buyer’s attorney even though a jury decided the buyer was entitled to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/03/12/despite-500-jury-award-judge-give-consumer-lawyer-8k-in-fees/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Debt Cancellation Statute Not Preempted&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/01/07/debt-cancellation-statute-not-preempted/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/01/07/debt-cancellation-statute-not-preempted/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2013 15:10:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Andre M. Davis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=71730</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A consumer who bought a car from a local Maryland dealer on a retail installment contract that included debt cancellation protection that did not comply with a Maryland statute did not lose that protection when the contract was assigned to another lender; the 4th Circuit vacates the district court decision holding that the Maryland statute [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2013/01/07/debt-cancellation-statute-not-preempted/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Debt collection law firms wary of new agency&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/06/debt-collection-law-firms-wary-of-new-agency/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/06/debt-collection-law-firms-wary-of-new-agency/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:53:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Vieth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=71255</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some debt collection lawyers soon may be coming under the scrutiny of aggressive federal regulators, and few seem to be aware of the potential new layer of oversight. That’s the word from a Virginia lawyer who is tracking the regulatory efforts of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency bent on finding and punishing wrongdoers [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/06/debt-collection-law-firms-wary-of-new-agency/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No Arbitration Waiver from Litigation Activity&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/04/no-arbitration-waiver-from-litigation-activity/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/04/no-arbitration-waiver-from-litigation-activity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2012 15:58:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Allyson K. Duncan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=71219</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A district court erred in applying Maryland law, instead of the Federal Arbitration Act, to deny a financing company’s motion to compel arbitration of a car buyer’s lawsuit; the 4th Circuit says the financing company did not waive arbitration by delaying about six months before filing its motion to compel and using “litigation machinery” to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/04/no-arbitration-waiver-from-litigation-activity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No class claim against Equifax, appeals court says&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/03/no-class-claim-against-equifax-appeals-court-says/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/03/no-class-claim-against-equifax-appeals-court-says/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2012 21:44:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Dennis W. Shedd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Robert E. Payne]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Roger L. Gregory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virginia Trial Lawyers Association]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=71172</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A major credit reporting agency will not face a class action suit by Virginia residents with potentially inaccurate Virginia court judgments on their credit reports. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed an order certifying a class in a suit that had the U.S. Chamber of Commerce squaring off against the Virginia Trial Lawyers [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/12/03/no-class-claim-against-equifax-appeals-court-says/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Collections ‘best practices’ adopted&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/26/collections-best-practices-adopted/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/26/collections-best-practices-adopted/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2012 13:01:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peter Vieth</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Stories]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Creditor's Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General District Courts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=71033</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Stricter requirements for collections lawsuits by so-called “debt buyers” are spreading in Virginia. A set of “best practices” adopted by Fairfax County general district judges three years ago to ensure the integrity of the court’s judgments have inspired guidelines imposed by judges in Newport News, the Roanoke Valley and – expected soon – the Richmond [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/26/collections-best-practices-adopted/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Debtor Alleges CCA Misrepresents Services&#160;</title>
		<link>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/20/debtor-alleges-cca-misrepresents-services/</link>
		<comments>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/20/debtor-alleges-cca-misrepresents-services/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2012 20:54:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Elkins</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Opinion Digests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Norman K. Moon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. District Court - Western District]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://valawyersweekly.com/?p=70977</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Charlottesville U.S. District Court will hold a bench trial to determine whether plaintiff is bound by a Client Agreement to arbitrate her claims against defendant InCharge Debt Solutions, a credit counseling agency that allegedly falsely represented that it provided “negotiations” with and “benefits” from, creditors, when it allegedly only provided Debt Management Plan terms [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://valawyersweekly.com/2012/11/20/debtor-alleges-cca-misrepresents-services/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
