Palmer v. Kleargear.com , no. 13-cv-00175 (D. Utah, filed December 18, 2013), is a 2013 federal suit in which an internet retailer is sued by two customers after charging a $ 3,500 customer after a negative review. Retailer, Kleargear.com, specializes in nerd outfits, toy addicts, gadgets, and office toys; it is owned by Descoteaux Boutiques based in Paris. The plaintiffs accused the company of violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act, defamation, and intentional suffering over emotional distress. In March 2014, the district court entered the default decision for the plaintiff, and in June 2014 awarded $ 306,750 in damages. By 2015, Palmers continues to seek to collect judgments.
The cost of internet retailers for consumers is based on the anti-disparity clause of their site terms and conditions.
This case led to California laws prohibiting the enforcement of the clause, and the introduction of the Consumer Review Freedom Act of 2015, the proposed bill which, since adoption, has imposed a similar ban at the federal level.
Video Palmer v. Kleargear.com
Histori
Plaintiffs, John and Jen Palmer, tried to buy the desk ornaments and key chains of the company for a price below $ 20. Kleargear.com was never sent. PayPal automatically canceled orders in December 2008. Soon after, Jen left negative reviews on Ripoff Report. In May 2012, the company sent a bill to Jen Palmer from Layton, Utah for $ 3,500 based on the anti-disparity clause of their site terms and conditions unless they agreed to remove the review. The Ripoff report has a policy of not removing reviews; a fact statement can only be removed if a $ 2,000 arbitrage fee is paid and the arbitrator determines that the statement is false. When Palmer and her husband John refused to pay, Kleargear reported a fine for the collection, which lowered their credit ratings.
One of the problems in the dispute is whether an insult clause has been present when the plaintiff has made their order in 2008. By 2013, after checking the archive of the Terms of Service Kleargear on the Internet Archive, KUTV and TechDirt states that the clause has not there and has been added to the site in June 2012. By 2014, Kleargear states that the clause has existed in 2008.
After the internet counterattack, Kleargear closed the Facebook page and protected his Twitter account. Businessweek calls the public reaction an example of the Streisand effect. Both the Better Business Bureau and TRUSTe have issued a statement that Kleargear used their logo without permission and has initiated an investigation. Experian has also begun an investigation on the credit report.
On 25 November 2013, Public Citizen, representing Palmers, sent an open letter demanding Kleargear pay Palmers $ 75,000, remove stains on their credit ratings, and stop and stop using future non-disparity clauses. Kleargear ignored the December 16, 2013 deadline to respond to the offer, and Public Citizen sued the company in federal court for violations of the Fair Abuse Act, defamation, and other charges. According to lawyer Scott Michelman, many attempts to connect with Kleargear before the lawsuit were unsuccessful. In March 2014, US District Court judge Dee Benson entered a favorable default assessment for Palmers. Kleargear states to the press that the default judgment is invalid because the notification should be submitted to its parent company in France. Judge Benson awarded Palmers $ 306,750 in compensation and punitive damages on June 25, 2014. On July 24, Palmers filed a motion for $ 47,596.86 in attorneys' fees and expenses. On August 28, the court provided the requested fees and expenses.
On February 15, 2015, Judge Benson approved the assignment to the Legal Office of Ronald P. Slates, a Los Angeles law firm specializing in the collection of decisions, and closing the case of Utah.
In response to Palmers' experience with KlearGear, California enacted a law in 2014 that prohibits the use of non-contempt clauses in consumer contracts. A similar ban was introduced in both houses of Congress in 2015, and Jen Palmer testified directly before the US Senate Committee on Trade, Science and Transport in November 2015. Citizens also filed written testimony to the Committee. With Public Citizen's support, the Consumer Review Freedom Law passed the Senate in December 2015.
In April 2015, Palmers and the Slate Company filed suit in US District Court for the Central District of California to enforce appraisal with the withholding of Kleargear's assets, including levies with Discover Bank credit cards, American Express Centurion Bank, MasterCard International and Visa Inc. Paypal, Inc. against the account held by Kleargear with such companies. As of October 2015, the case was handed over to US District Court Judge George H. King.
Maps Palmer v. Kleargear.com
Further implications
Inspired by Palmers' experience with KlearGear, California legislature passed a bill in 2014 to ban the use of non-contempt clauses in consumer contracts, and Governor Jerry Brown signed it into law on September 9, 2014.
In September 2015, the 2015 Consumer Freedom Consensus Act (S. 2044) was introduced at the US Congress, to make the clause void and unenforceable at the federal level. US Senator Jerry Moran cited the Kleargear case as one of the bases for the bill.
The US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transport is scheduled for a hearing on the bill for November 4, 2015. Among those scheduled to testify is Jen Palmer, plaintiff at Palmer v. KlearGear ; Adam Medros, vice president of TripAdvisor; Daniel Castro, vice president of Information Technology and Innovation Foundation; Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University Law School; and Ira Rheingold, executive director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates.
In November 2016, the 2015 Conformity Consumer Freedom Act entitled The Consumer Expectation Review Act 2016 (H.R. 5111) was unanimously passed in the Senate. On December 15, 2016, it was signed into law by Barack Obama.
References
External links
Legal document, Palmer v. Kleargear , no. 13-cv-00175 (D. Utah)
Complaint- , filed on December 18, 2013
- default assessment, issued May 5, 2014
- order the award of damages, issued July 1, 2014
Kleargear.com statement
- KlearGear Public Statement, May 19, 2014
- Changed Kleargear's Public Statement, May 21, 2014
More
- Palmer v. Kleargear in Public Citizen
- California law prohibits non-humiliating clauses
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments