There are many types of consumer fraud, all of which can result in financial loss and injury. Increased awareness of consumer fraud can help you protect yourself and your loved ones, or help you tackle an injustice you’ve already experienced.

What is Consumer Fraud?

We’ve all heard the term, but what exactly is consumer fraud?

Consumer fraud refers to unfair or deceptive business practices that cause consumers to lose money or be misled.  Fraud can consist of false promises, inaccurate claims, and other illegal business transactions, without the victim’s awareness. There are several common types of consumer fraud, from credit card fraud to identity theft and false advertising. Here, we explore some of the most common types of consumer fraud and explain what to do next if you have been targeted.

Identity Theft

This is one of the most common types of consumer fraud. When someone steals your personal information, you are a victim of identity theft. The type of information commonly stolen includes:

  • Your name
  • Credit card information
  • Social Security number
  • Other financial information

Perpetrators assume your identity to access your bank account, use credit cards in your name, collect refunds owed to you, and complete other unauthorized financial transactions. If there are unfamiliar accounts on your credit report or you notice unexpected withdrawals from your bank account, you may be a victim of identity theft.

Mortgage/Real Estate Fraud 

Consumer fraud also occurs through illegal mortgage and real estate transactions. Real estate and mortgage agents can scam consumers by misusing their specialized knowledge of the market and real estate law. For example, you may be the victim of mortgage and real estate fraud if you were asked to sign essential papers without having the chance to read or understand them, or were misled regarding information about foreclosure or loans.  Under the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), protections are in place for individuals who engage in real estate transactions.  Mortgage and title companies who charge hidden fees or do not disclose the nature and amount of charges may be liable for violating this law. 

Credit and Debit Card Fraud 

Credit card fraud typically refers to the unauthorized use of a credit card or debit card. Some signs of credit and debit card fraud include charges on your statement that you do not recognize, charges from unfamiliar locations, or a significant drop in your account balance. 

Data Breach Litigation

Perpetrators acquire social media login information, email addresses, credit card numbers, social security numbers, and other personal information through data breaches. Typically, the goal for hackers obtaining this information is to use it for identity theft. As a result, criminals can take out loans in your name, make purchases, or complete other fraudulent transactions.

Companies that store individual account information may be liable for the harm that is caused when hackers obtain this information through a data breach.  Joseph, Greenwald & Laake is national counsel for the plaintiff class in the Marriott Data Breach Litigation, currently pending in United States District Court for the District of Maryland. 

Debt Collection Fraud 

In some cases, debt collection is legitimate. Debt collection fraud occurs when companies engage in illegal, deceptive, or improper tactics in the collection of debt. 

Some indicators of debt collection fraud include:

  • Continual harassment by a debt collection company.
  • Debt collectors pretending to be police or lawyers to gain trust.
  • Intimidation, threats, bribes, and other forms of harassment from “debt collectors.”

False Advertising

Another common type of consumer fraud is false advertising. Under law, a business is required to make accurate representations and statements about their product’s characteristics, qualities, and benefits.  When a business misrepresents an item for sale by making untrue claims or declarations, this may be false advertising. Examples of false advertising include false claims that a product can improve your physical health, mental health, or capabilities. 

What to Do if You Are a Victim of Consumer Fraud

If you suspect you are the victim of any of the above fraudulent activities, the consumer fraud attorneys at JGL Law are here to assist you. We specialize in consumer protection law nationwide and are committed to excellence. Backed by over five decades of experience, we deliver strategic solutions and zealous advocacy to all of our clients, and we are committed to helping those who have been victims of unlawful business practices or fraud. Contact us today to schedule a consultation with our skilled consumer fraud attorneys.

Joseph, Greenwald and Laake has been representing clients in suburban Maryland and the District of Columbia for almost 50 years. With offices in Greenbelt and Rockville, Maryland, we have lawyers who focus their practices in diverse areas of the law, including employment and whistleblower actions, family law, estates and trusts, civil rights, business planning and commercial litigation, personal injury, medical and professional negligence.

In this episode, Drew LaFramboise discusses the following:

  1.  Laws that prohibit unfair and deceptive commercial and trade practices in the sale of goods and services   
  2. a) the types of damages available under the laws, and b) how a person may go about seeking a remedy, including applicable statutes of limitations.  
  3. Rule 23 requirements and the Class Action Fairness Act. 

JGL LAW FOR YOU brings you up close and personal with our lawyers who will be discussing how to navigate the many legal processes,  developments in the law, other current events and how they may affect you.

“The estate of Bowen Levy and the Anne Arundel County Board of Education entered into a consent decree Wednesday under which the system will pay $2.5 million, implement a Pica Safety Protocol and provide special education substitute staff vacancy data quarterly to the family of a student who died after choking on a disposable glove at school.” 

The consent decree addresses the chronic staffing shortages in special education and lack of supervision which led to Bowen’s tragic and unnecessary death. The Levy Family filed this suit to make sure no other child is placed at risk like Bowen was.  They will work vigorously to enforce the consent decree to make sure special education programs in the county are properly staffed and supervised and safe for all children.”

JGL attorneys representing the Levy Family are Tim Maloney, Matt Bryant and Alyse Prawde

Read more about the story on:

Capital Gazette, May 5th 2022: Anne Arundel County schools agrees to pay $2.5 million in consent decree settling Bowen Levy lawsuit – Capital Gazette

Maryland Federal Court Certifies Largest Data Breach Class Ever. JGL’s Veronica Nannis and Tim Maloney proudly serve on the Plaintiff’s Steering Committee in the now largest data breach class ever certified – affecting over 130 million American consumers.

Rare for these types of cases, the Court issued his 73-page opinion on May 3 certifying an initial class of affected consumers for trial, and renamed Nannis and Maloney to the PSC for the next phase of this large class action. JGL is proud to play its small part in this litigation. This case is of huge importance not only for the 130+ million consumers affected by the data breach, but also for this quickly developing area of litigating the security of our personal financial information.

Read more about the story here:

Business Wire, May 5th 2022: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220505005762/en/DiCello-Levitt-Gutzler-Federal-Judge-Rules-Massive-Marriott-Data-Breach-Class-Action-May-Proceed

Law.com, May 4th 2022: Judge Certifies Classes of Marriott Guests Hit With Data Breach | Law.com

On Monday, May 2, 2022, Joseph Greenwald & Laake filed a civil rights lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland alleging that Plaintiff William Garcia Trejo was illegally arrested, detained, and transferred to ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) by Howard County, Maryland.

Mr. Trejo, who is represented by JGL attorneys Timothy Maloney and Drew LaFramboise, was pulled over by Maryland State Police in September 2020 because he was talking on his cell phone while driving.  He was arrested and taken to the Howard County Detention Center because of outstanding motor vehicle citations and failures to appear.  While under Howard County custody, Mr. Trejo posted bond.  Rather than release him as they were required to do under Maryland law, Howard County continued to detain Mr. Trejo overnight and ultimately transferred his custody to ICE without any legal basis.  Mr. Trejo, a Salvadoran national, has remained under continual ICE surveillance since this detention and risks deportation as a result.  The lawsuit alleges that Howard County and individual officers and personnel violated Mr. Trejo’s rights under the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and under the Maryland Declaration of Rights.  The lawsuit also alleges the defendants were negligent in their detention and processing of Mr. Trejo and face liability for falsely imprisoning him.

The lawsuit also alleges that Howard County had a longstanding pattern and practice of violating immigrant detainees’ rights.  These rights violations often arose out of Howard County’s lucrative contract with ICE, valued at more than $2.5 million/year, through which the county agreed to coordinate with ICE in the detention of immigrant detainees.  The lawsuit alleges that Howard County had a pattern and practice of transferring immigrant inmates to ICE who, like Mr. Trejo, had a history of only minor infractions.  After Mr. Trejo’s arrest and detention, Howard County ended its ICE contract.  The General Assembly also passed the Dignity Not Detention Act, which prohibited Maryland local governments from entering into contracts with ICE.

Read more on The Daily Record story here

Media Coverage: 

Law360, May 5th 2022: County Called ICE On Immigrant For Traffic Issue, Suit Says – Law360

On January 26, 2018, Steven Alexander was walking through a park on his way home from work as a special police officer at the Embassy of Qatar when he was stopped by Maryland National Capitol Park and Planning Commission (MNCPPC) officer Mel Proctor. Officer Proctor accosted Mr. Alexander, pepper sprayed him twice in the face, tackled him to the ground, pulled his gun on him, and arrested him for impersonating a police officer, resisting arrest, obstruction of justice, and failing to obey a lawful order.

The Court later dismissed all counts against Mr. Alexander, finding that he did nothing wrong other than “walking through a park after having worked a long hard day, carrying his belongings from work, and carrying his groceries, and a police officer who wasn’t following protocol only exacerbated the situation by making it worse.” As a result of this incident, Mr. Alexander lost his job as a special police officer, where he worked for nine years, and continues to struggle with the psychological trauma from this event.

This is an important case because it highlights the complete lack of accountability at MNCPPC, and the broken policing system that allows officers to attack innocent citizens walking through a park, turning an everyday scenario into one of life or death. In bringing this suit, JGL is hoping to shine a light on ways that police departments like MNCPPC can institute profound institutional changes.

This case is also important because it relates to separate, pending litigation by JGL against MNCPPC for racism within the department. A black MNCPPC police officer detailed incidents of racism and humiliation by his co-workers and superiors that included inciting race wars and killing Black Lives Matter protesters. These two cases show that the embedded culture of racism at police departments, including MNCPPC, pervades not only the institutions themselves, but also negatively affects how officers interact with citizens on the streets.

Read more on Atlanta Black Star here.

As part of its Title IX Abuse and Discrimination practice, Joseph, Greenwald & Laake’s Principal Erika Jacobsen White and Senior Counsel Drew LaFramboise are representing “Jane Doe” in her suit against Liberty University.

On April 27, 2021, Plaintiff Jane Doe, a Liberty University student, was brutally raped and sexually assaulted by a fellow Liberty student on the premises of an off-campus student housing complex called The Oasis. Liberty University received prompt notice of the rape and assault but failed to provide Plaintiff with services or reasonable accommodations required under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the Rehabilitation Act, and other laws as described in the Complaint.

The Complaint was filed on April 27, 2022, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, to hold Liberty University accountable for failing to investigate Jane Doe’s report of a violent student-on-student sexual assault and rape, refusing to provide accommodations for her emotional, physical, psychological suffering that resulted from the assault, and retaliating and discriminating against her in the wake of the assault.

Click here for more information.

Recent news coverage on this issue is below.

The Daily Beast, April 29, 2022: Feds Turn Up at Liberty U to Probe Handling of Sex Assault Reports (thedailybeast.com)

WFXR TV, April 29, 2022: Sen. Kaine, Roanoke attorney discuss Title IX amid misconduct reports at Liberty University (wfxrtv.com)

ProPublica, April 29, 2022: Liberty University’s Handling of Sexual Assaults Under Investigation by Department of Education — ProPublica

The Hill, April 28, 2022: Liberty University sued for allegedly failing to investigate student assault | The Hill

University Business, April 28, 2022: Liberty University facing another claim it mishandled report of sexual assault | (universitybusiness.com)

Stars And Stripes, April 28, 2022: New plaintiff claims Liberty University mishandled sexual assault report | Stars and Stripes

The Roys Report, April 28, 2022: New Lawsuit Accuses Liberty U of Retaliating Against Rape Victim (julieroys.com)

The New Yorker, April 27, 2022: https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-education/can-liberty-university-be-saved

Washington Post, April 27, 2022: New plaintiff claims Liberty University mishandled sexual assault report

WSET, April 27, 2022: https://wset.com/news/abc13-investigates/liberty-university-lu-sued-student-violated-title-ix-laws-april-27-2022-2021-rape-sexual-assault

WSLS, April 27, 2022: https://www.wsls.com/news/local/2022/04/27/liberty-university-sued-over-alleged-failure-to-investigate-reported-rape/

WAVY, April 27, 2022: https://www.wavy.com/news/virginia/another-jane-doe-sues-liberty-unviersity-claims-rape-sexual-assault-ignored/

Axios, April 27, 2022: https://www.axios.com/liberty-university-lawsuit-alleges-sex-assault-claims-mishandled-263f0529-c8dd-49e0-acdf-24565271e4f9.html

For media and press inquiries contact: media@jgllaw.com 

GREENBELT, Md., April 27, 2022 – Today Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, P.A., filed a Complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia (PDF) to hold Liberty University accountable for failing to investigate its client Jane Doe’s report of a violent student-on-student sexual assault and rape, refusing to provide accommodations for her emotional, physical, psychological suffering that resulted from the assault, and retaliating and discriminating against her in the wake of the assault.

The Complaint alleges that on April 27, 2021, Jane Doe, then a Liberty University student, was brutally raped and sexually assaulted by a fellow Liberty student at an off-campus student apartment building called The Oasis. Liberty University received prompt notice of the rape and assault but failed to provide Jane Doe with services, protection, and accommodations required under Title IX law. 

According to the lawsuit, despite their knowledge of the incident, Liberty failed to take any action or protective measures in response. Instead, Liberty systematically demonstrated deliberate indifference, retaliated against Jane Doe, and perpetuated the sexually hostile and dangerous environment on and around campus. 

As a result of Liberty’s conduct, Jane Doe was deeply harmed, suffering significant damages. Her academic standing suffered, she was ostracized from the university community, accused by the administration of violating the “Liberty Way” (Liberty’s code of student conduct), lived in regular fear of encountering her assailant on and around campus, and dealt with daily mental, emotional, and psychological trauma. Ultimately, Jane Doe was forced out of Liberty University.

Erika Jacobsen White, Principal at Joseph Greenwald & Laake and counsel for Jane Doe explained, “Liberty’s treatment of Jane Doe is emblematic of the kinds of institutional barriers that sexual assault survivors regularly face in getting justice. Rather than immediately taking steps to protect our client, Liberty engaged in a pattern of retaliation that included failing to provide her with any reasonable accommodations at all in order as she was recovering from the trauma that she endured from being raped. Instead of ensuring Jane Doe’s safety, Liberty engaged in classic victim-blaming, compounding her trauma,”

Ms. Jacobsen White continued: “Following her complaints, Liberty failed to take any meaningful steps to keep Jane Doe’s assailant away from her, allowed him to continue to harass her on campus – even being assigned to the same housing as Jane Doe where she was raped – and then systematically targeted our client for allegedly violating the “Liberty Way” for associating with other students who were allegedly drinking. This kind of institutional discrimination, harassment, and retaliation is designed to silence victims and perpetuates a toxic culture of oppression.”

As noted by Drew LaFramboise, Senior Counsel at Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, “Today’s action unfortunately follows a number of other lawsuits alleging Liberty’s Title IX violations in handling sexual assault and harassment claims by students or former students. Liberty has knowingly created and fostered a culture where sexual violence is ignored or swept under the rug, and far too many students have suffered as a result. Students should not be afraid for their safety or fear their school’s response to reports of sexual assault. This suit seeks justice for our client, and we hope it will compel Liberty to make institutional changes to protect survivors of sexual assault.” 

The Complaint outlines the details of the case and the Title IX claims, negligence claims, and disability discrimination claims against the defendants: Liberty University, the student assailant, and the companies that owned and operated the off-campus housing where the attack occurred.

To learn more about Joseph, Greenwald & Laake’s Title IX practice, click here.

Media Contact: Lauren Smith, MBA | media@jgllaw.com | (202) 656-1774

####

About Joseph, Greenwald & Laake

Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, P.A., is one of the most trusted law firms serving Washington, DC, and the suburban Maryland area. For more than 50 years, our law firm has represented a variety of clients, including individuals, small businesses and multimillion-dollar corporations. From simple to complex legal needs, our law firm is prepared to deliver strategic solutions with high standards. Call or e-mail us at Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, P.A. to schedule a consultation with an experienced attorney. We offer reliable counsel on what your rights and responsibilities are and on how to proceed.

On April 25, 2022, the Fourth Circuit in Coady v. Nationwide Motor Sales Corp. agreed with Joseph Greenwald and Laake’s client Michael Coady that a car dealership’s arbitration agreement was invalid.

The underlying case concerned current and former salespeople who allege that Nationwide, a Timonium, Maryland dealership, failed to pay millions of dollars in commissions owed. The Fourth Circuit held that the employees can pursue their lawsuit in federal court by applying the long-standing principle in Maryland law that an employer cannot unilaterally change an arbitration agreement at any time.

This is an important decision because the waiver and the agreement, which allowed Nationwide to modify the agreement at any time without notice, were separate, and the Court rejected Nationwide’s argument that separating them made the agreement enforceable. In this respect, the Court recognized that drafters of arbitration agreements have to actually commit to arbitration and cannot have it both ways by waiting to see whether court or arbitration works out better. The case is now expected to move forward in Court.

Read more on The Daily Record coverage here

Joseph, Greenwald and Laake has been representing clients in suburban Maryland and the District of Columbia for almost 50 years. With offices in Greenbelt and Rockville, Maryland, we have lawyers who focus their practices in diverse areas of the law, including employment and whistleblower actions, family law, estates and trusts, civil rights, business planning and commercial litigation, personal injury, medical and professional negligence.

In this episode, Lindsay Parvis discusses the following issues and more:

  1. Parent-child contact problems – resist/refuse 
  2. Parents using the pandemic to restrict parenting time
  3. Parent compromise & conflict over COVID-related parenting decisions

JGL LAW FOR YOU brings you up close and personal with our lawyers who will be discussing how to navigate the many legal processes,  developments in the law, other current events and how they may affect you.

Current or former car salespeople who allege a Timonium-based dealership cheated them out of more than $1 million in commissions can pursue their lawsuit in Federal Court.

JGL partner Brian J. Markovitz represents the plaintiffs who allege that costs for the card were falsely inflated in order to artificially reduce commissions.

Read More

Joseph, Greenwald and Laake has been representing clients in suburban Maryland and the District of Columbia for almost 50 years. With offices in Greenbelt and Rockville, Maryland, we have lawyers who focus their practices in diverse areas of the law, including employment and whistleblower actions, family law, estates and trusts, civil rights, business planning and commercial litigation, personal injury, medical and professional negligence.

In this episode, Edward Bortnick discusses the following points and more:

  1. Situations where business evaluations are needed
  2. How to avoid the pitfalls of the process
  3. What standards does a business valuator follow

JGL LAW FOR YOU brings you up close and personal with our lawyers who will be discussing how to navigate the many legal processes, developments in the law, other current events and how they may affect you.

Subscribe