Docstoc

Judges Topical Summary 2004

Document Sample
Judges Topical Summary 2004 Powered By Docstoc
					          Topical Summary
                  of
   Consumer Protection Statutes
Applicable to Proceedings In Michigan
                Courts
    (updated February 26, 2004, including new summaries)




                                                    Ian B. Lyngklip
                              Lyngklip & Taub Consumer Law Group, PLC
                                    24500 Northwestern Highway, Ste. 206
                                                    Southfield, MI 48075
                                                         (248) 746-3790
                                                      IanLaw@Pop.Net
                                                       Table of Contents


Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Index of Statutes by Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Disclaimer and Use Notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Appliances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
      Joe Gagnon Appliance Repair Act, MCL § 445.831 et seq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Cars and Car Repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .      3
       Michigan Odometer Act, MCL § 257.233a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                       3
       Federal Motor Vehicle Cost Savings and Information Act, 49 U.S.C. § 32101 et seq. . . . . . . .                                     4
       Motor Vehicle Service & Repair Act, MCL § 257.1301 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                              4
       Garage Keeper’s Liability Act, MCL § 256.241 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        5
       Motor Vehicle Code, MCL § 257.201 et seq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                    5

Collection Matters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       Fair Debt Collection Practices, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                      6
       Michigan Occupational Code, MCL § 339.901 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                         6
       Michigan Collection Practices, MCL § 445.251 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                      7

Consumer Transactions Generally . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
     Michigan Consumer Protection Act, MCL § 445.901 et seq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
     Item Pricing And Advertising Act, MCL § 445.350 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Cleaning and Laundering of Clothing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
       Cleaning, Repair, or Storage Services Act, MCL § 445.1751 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Credit Generally . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
       Truth In Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
       Fair Credit Billing Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1666 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
       Equal Credit Opportunity Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1691 et seq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
       Michigan Legal Interest Statute, MCL § 438.31 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Credit Repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
       Credit Services Protection Act, MCL § 445.1824. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
       Federal Credit Repair Organizations Act, 15 U.S.C.§ 1679 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10


                                                                             Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                                      Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                                               Page 2
Credit Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       Michigan Credit Reporting Practices Act, MCL § 445.271 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Credit In Specific Transactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       Motor Vehicle Sales Finance Act, MCL § 492.101 et seq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Door to Door Sales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
      Michigan Home Solicitation Sales Act, MCL § 445.111 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Leases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       Article 2A of the Michigan Uniform Commercial Code, MCL § 440.2801 et seq. . . . . . . . . 13

Money & Credit Card Transactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     Fair Credit Billing Act, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Mortgages and Mortgage Servicers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                   15
      Real Estate Settlement and Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                 15
      Truth In Lending Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2601 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                         15
      Home Ownership Equity & Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1639. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                    15

Real Estate Rental . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
       Warranty of Habitability, MCL § 554.139 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Telephone Solicitations, E-Mail, and Facsimiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                          17
      Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                            17
      Transmitting Unsolicited Advertising Messages Via Facsimile Machine, MCL § 445.1776 . .                                                17
      Unsolicited E-Mail (Spamming), 15 U.S.C. § 7701 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                17
      Unsolicited E-Mail (Spamming), MCL § 445.2501 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                  17

Warranties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   17
      Uniform Commercial Code, MCL § 440.2101 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                17
      Magnuson Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                17
      Mobile Home Warranty Act, MCL § 125.991 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                                18




                                                                                Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                                         Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                                                  Page 3
                                           Index of Statutes by Name


Federal Statutes
Equal Credit Opportunity Act, 15 U.S.C. 1691 et seq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Fair Credit Billing Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1666 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Fair Debt Collection Practices, 15 U.S.C. §1692 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Federal Motor Vehicle Cost Savings and Information Act, 49 U.S.C. § 32101 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Home Ownership Equity & Protection Act, 15 USC § 1639 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Magnuson Moss Warranty Act, 15 USC § 2301 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Real Estate Settlement and Procedures Act, 12 USC § 2601 et seq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 USC § 227 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Truth In Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8, 15




Michigan Statutes
Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code, MCL § 440.2101 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Article 2A of the Michigan Uniform Commercial Code, MCL § 440.2801 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Cleaning, Repair, or Storage Services Act, MCL § 445.1751 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Credit Services Protection Act, MCL § 445.1824. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Garage Keeper’s Liability Act, MCL 256.241 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Item Pricing And Advertising Act, MCL § 445.350 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7


                                                                     Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                              Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                                       Page 4
Joe Gagnon Appliance Repair Act, MCL § 445.831 et seq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Landlord Tenant Relationship Act, MCL 554.651 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Michigan Collection Practices, § 445.251 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Michigan Consumer Protection Act, MCL § 445.901 et seq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Michigan Credit Reporting Practices Act, MCL § 445.271 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Michigan Home Solicitation Sales Act, MCL § 445.111 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Michigan Legal Interest Statute, MCL 438.31 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Michigan Lemon Law, MCL 257.1301 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Michigan Occupational Code, MCL § 339.901 et seq . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Michigan Odometer Act, MCL § 257.233a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Motor Vehicle Code, MCL § 257.201 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Motor Vehicle Installment Sales Contract Act, MCL § 566.301 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Motor Vehicle Sales Finance Act, MCL § 492.101 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Motor Vehicle Service & Repair Act, MCL § 257.1301 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Transmitting Unsolicited Advertising Messages Via Facsimile Machine, MCL § 445.1776 . . . . . . . . 17

Truth In Renting Act, MCL § 554.631 et seq. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Warranty of Habitability, MCL § 554.139 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16




                                                                       Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                                Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                                         Page 5
                                   Disclaimer and Use Notice
         The materials presented in this outline are not intended to be taken as a comprehensive
discussion of the listed statutes. Many of the statutes discussed below have been the subject of
entire treatises spanning several hundred pages. This outline should be used only as an entry
point for commencing research or diagnosing possible issues which might arise in the context
of a consumer transaction. As such, many of the statutes are summarized without a detailed
discussion of possible exemptions, coverage or regulation.
         At the same time, the summaries provided are intended to give a broad overview to
common issues which are frequently regulated by multiple statutes. By identifying the topical
areas, this outline should provide a general framework for the analysis of most consumer
litigation issues.

                                       Statute Summary


Appliances
Joe Gagnon Appliance Repair Act, MCL § 445.831 et seq.
Repairs of appliances are now regulated by the Joe Gagnon Appliance Repair Act. The
provisions of this statute requires that persons performing compensated repairs to appliances
comply with the disclosure and warranty provisions of the statute. First, prior to performing any
repairs on an appliance, a “service dealer” must provide the consumer with an estimate which
includes the service dealer's name, mailing address, and telephone number; a description of the
problem requiring service, and itemization of the cost for parts labor, and transportation charges.
(MCL § 445.833). At the conclusion of repairs, the service dealer must provide consumer with
a final bill listing the name and address of the service dealer; the costs of the repairs; a
description of any applicable warranties; and a statement of the consumer’s rights. (MCL §
445.835). The servicing dealer must warrant all repairs for a minimum of 30 days and perform
repairs to the appliance for free if the consumer sends a written notice of the problem during
the warranty period. (MCL § 445.386). All replaced parts must be returned to the consumer
unless the consumer elects not to return the parts or the dealer must retain the parts. (MCL §
445.834). Finally, the statute prohibits false or deceptive statements for the purpose of inducing
a consumer to authorize repairs. (MCL § 445.837(1))

                                                      Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                               Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                        Page 1
Aggrieved consumers may bring an action for the greater of actual damages or $250, along with
costs and statutory attorney fees. (MCL § 445.837(1)). Consumers may obtain twice their action
damages for willful violations

Note: While this statute contains a number of requirements which parallel the Motor Vehicle
Service and Repair Act, MCL § 257.1301 et seq. these two statutes are not identical. The JGARA
does not contain any regulatory, licensing or rule-making provisions. Enforcement of the statute
is purely by judicial action. Additionally, the statute contains liquidated damage provisions which
are not present in the MVSRA which may be levied in addition to damages available under the
Michigan Consumer Protection Act, MCL 445.901 et seq. (See, MCL 445.837(3)).


Note: From its name, the statute would appear to have broad application. However, coverage
under the act limited to the enumerated appliances: a refrigerator, dehumidifier, freezer, oven,
range, microwave oven, washer, dryer, dishwasher, trash compactor, or window room air
conditioner.




                                                      Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                               Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                        Page 2
Cars and Car Repair


Michigan Odometer Act, MCL § 257.233a
The Michigan Odometer Act represents an analog to the Federal Motor Vehicle Cost Savings
and Information Act, 15 U.S.C. § 32101 et seq. The Michigan Act 1) regulates the manner in
which mileage is disclosed certificates of title are to be handled as between buyers and sellers of
vehicles; 2) prohibits tampering with odometers; and 3) establishes a civil remedy for the
mishandling of certificates of title.

The Act’s disclosure requirements mandate that sellers of vehicles issue a written disclosure of
the mileage of the vehicle to the purchaser before delivery of the vehicle. The disclosure must
contain the name and signatures of the parties, a date, the mileage of the vehicle, and a
description of the vehicle. (MCL § 257.233a(1)(a)-(e)). The mileage disclosure must be “certified”
by the transferor to be either actual, unknown, or in excess of the vehicle’s mechanical limits.
MCL 257.233a(1)(g) and the certification is made under penalty of both civil and criminally
liability (MCL § 257.233a(1)(f)). For vehicles which have been previously titled (used cars), the
odometer disclosure must be made on the certificate of title. (MCL § 257.233a(1). See also,
 MCL §§ 257.222(4) and 257.233(4)). [This requirement was mandated by the federal Odometer
Act]. In order to further insure that these disclosures are accurate, the statute prohibits vehicle
dealers from accepting any such disclosures where the mileage is left blank. (MCL §
257.233a(4)) and prohibits any person from executing both the transferor and transferee
portions of disclosure within the same transaction. (MCL § 257.233a(3)).

In addition to the disclosure requirements, the statute also prohibits false disclosures and
tampering with odometers (MCL § 257.233a(6)). The statute creates a treble actual damage
remedy with a minimum statutory damage of $1,500 along with attorney fees. (MCL §
257.233a(15)). The treble damage provisions of the Act are mandatory and a trial court may not
refuse to grant such damages where a claim is established. Harvey Cadillac Co. v. Rahain, 204
Mich.App. 355, 514 N.W.2d 257 (1994).


Note: Case law under the odometer act demonstrates a strong link between compliance with the

                                                      Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                               Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                        Page 3
act and the validity of contracts for the sale of vehicles, particularly where there are irregularities
in the transfer of title. In this context, the Court of appeals has allowed consumers to avoid
transactions in which the Act was violated. Whitcraft v. Wolfe, 148 Mich.App. 40, 384 N.W.2d
400 (1985) and citations therein. While the requirements of the Odometer Act and Motor
Vehicle code will preempt the provisions of the UCC, the UCC’s Warranty of Title, MCL §
440.2312 may come into play where irregularities would render title void or subject the
purchaser to downstream liability for improprieties in transfer.



Federal Motor Vehicle Cost Savings and Information Act, 49 U.S.C. § 32101 et seq.
This statute is commonly referred to as the federal odometer act. However, following its most
recent amendment, the statute was renamed and re-codified to better suit its revised purpose.
As part and parcel of the revisions, congress mandated that odometer disclosures for previously
titled vehicles be given on the certificate of title. There are only two limited circumstances under
which the disclosures may be given elsewhere. 1) when the original certificate of title is not
available at the time of the sale 2) when the original certificate has no remaining space. In the
first instance, disclosures may be made under a power of attorney. In the second instance, the
disclosures may be made on a separate document. However, in both instances the transfer must
be made on approved, secure paper. The disclosures must be made at the time of delivery,
signed by the seller, and attested to by the buyer. These certificates of title are securities for
purposes of federal law, and falsification or laundering of these titles constitutes federal securities
fraud. (Moskal v. U.S., 498 U.S. 103, 111 S.Ct. 461, 112 L.Ed.2d 449 (1990). Due to exigencies
of dealership floor plans; the presence of salvage, flood and lemon brands, or the presence of
a daily rental company in the chain of title many dealers simply forge the consumer’s signature
to these disclosures. In addition to requiring disclosures, the statute prohibits tampering with
or disabling an odometer. Extensive regulations have been promulgated under the act at 49
CFR § 580.101. Consumers who prevail on claims under this statute may recover the greater
of $1,500 or treble actual damages along with attorney fees.



Motor Vehicle Service & Repair Act, MCL § 257.1301 et seq.


                                                         Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                  Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                           Page 4
This statute regulates car repairs and car repair facilities and contains provisions for licensing,
regulation, administrative enforcement and civil liability. The major provisions of the statute
require that facilities provide a written estimate of all repairs prior to commencing work. Once
the estimate is given, the facility may not charge more than 10% more than the estimate for the
repairs without authorization from the consumer. That authorization may be either verbal or
written. Upon completion of the repairs, the facility must provide a statement of the repairs
containing a summary of the repairs that were effected and a certification that all repairs were
completed properly. Regulations issued under this act have been promulgated by the Secretary
of State’s Bureau of Automotive regulation, MAC §§ 257.101-257.173. In addition to providing
processes for licensing, these rules have enumerated several dozen unfair, deceptive and coercive
practices, including most of the practices listed in the Michigan Consumer Protection Act. MAC
§§ 257.131-137. The liability provisions of the statute permit consumer to recover actual
damages, or two times actual damages for willful violations. All successful consumers may
recover attorney fees. Owners and operators of repair facilities are jointly and personally liable.
MCL § 257.1337. When raised as an affirmative defense, this statute prohibits a facility that
violates the act from collecting for repair work or asserting any form of lien against the
consumer. MCL § 257.1331.



Garage Keeper’s Liability Act, MCL § 256.241 et seq..
This statute governs vehicle bailments for hire. Garage’s parking lots, and vehicle repair facilities
fall under the act’s coverage. Any business which accepts vehicles for storage in exchange for
a fee is liable in conversion for any portion of the car which is removed while under its care.
Additionally, where damage is done to the vehicle while subject to the bailment, the fact of the
damage creates a prima facie showing of negligence on the part of the garage keeper. The
provisions of the statute may not be waived notwithstanding contract language to the contrary.
MCL § 256.245.



Other Statutes
Motor Vehicle Code, MCL § 257.201 et seq.


                                                       Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                         Page 5
Collection Matters


Fair Debt Collection Practices, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.
This federal act regulates debt collectors and debt collection practices. Coverage under the
statute is limited to those individuals or entities which attempt to collect on debts which are in
default at the time received. As such, the original creditor or assignee of any debt will not
generally be covered. At the same time, attorneys who regularly collect or sue on these
debts are covered. As a prerequisite to initiating any direct collection efforts with the
consumer, the debt collector must notify the consumer of his rights under the statute, which
include the right to demand validation of the debt. 15 U.S.C. § 1692g. The statute also contains
a choice of forum provision which requires that any debt collection suit be initiated in the
district where the debtor resides or signed the contract in question. 15 U.S.C. § 1692. Most
importantly, the statute contains an exhaustive list of unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices
which are prohibited. All violations of the statute give rise to claims for actual and statutory
damages up to $1,000 plus attorney fees.



Michigan Occupational Code, MCL § 339.901 et seq.
This statute mandates licensing and regulation of collection agencies within the state. It does
not in any way regulate the conduct of creditors collecting on their own debts. In addition to
these regulatory provisions, the act provides remedies for consumers who are subject to unfair,
deceptive or abusive debt collection practices. In this fashion, the Occupational Code operates
as less comprehensive analogue to the federal FDCPA. Most forms of collection abuse would
be covered by the act’s generalized prohibitions, however, some of the more specific forms of
violations are not covered (e.g. choice of venue, 15 U.S.C. § 1692i, mandatory notices, 15 U.S.C.
§ 1692g and 1692e(11)). The major difference between the Michigan and federal act lies in its
remedies. The FDCPA provides for statutory damage of up $1,000 plus actual damages and
attorney fees. On the other hand, the Occupational Code provide for the greater of $50 or


                                                      Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                               Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                        Page 6
actual damages and attorney fees; or in the case of a willful violation $150 or treble actual
damages plus attorney fees.



Michigan Collection Practices, MCL § 445.251 et seq.
While the Occupational Code seeks to regulate the conduct of collection agencies, the Collection
Practices Act regulates only direct creditors. This statute provides a list of prohibited conduct
in which is virtually identical to that of the Occupational Code. Compare MCL § 339.915 to
MCL § 445.252. relation to collection. As with the Occupational Code this statute provides
express consumer remedies to recover for the greater of $50 or actual damages and attorney
fees; or in the case of a willful violation $150 or treble actual damages plus attorney fees.



Consumer Transactions Generally


Michigan Consumer Protection Act, MCL § 445.901 et seq.
This statute prohibits a wide variety of unfair and deceptive acts by persons engaged in
commerce. Virtually every form of common law fraud has been codified within this act, as well
as breach of warranty and contract (MCL § 445.903(1)(y). Mikos v. Chrysler, 158 Mich.App. 781,
(1986)). In addition to its general prohibits, the statute creates a private right of action in favor
of consumers, and permits the consumer to obtain minimum statutory damages of $250 or
actual damages, injunctions, and declaratory relief. Together with these remedies, the statute has
a fee shifting provision and express authorization for attorney fees and class actions (MCL §
445.911). The principal issue for litigation under the statute at this time is the scope of the
coverage and exemptions (i.e. whether particular forms of business are covered by the act). At
this time, the controlling case is law. Smith v. Globe Life Ins. Co., 460 Mich. 446, 453, 597 N.W.2d
28 (1999).



Item Pricing And Advertising Act, MCL § 445.350 et seq.


                                                       Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                         Page 7
Commonly referred to as the “scanner” statute, this act regulates most retail transactions. The
statute requires that merchants affix a price to most goods sold at retail. The act also prohibits
merchants from charging more for the goods than that price; if a merchant uses an automated
system for charging at the point of sale, and that system results in an overcharge, the consumer
has a remedy under the “scanner” provisions of the act. MCL § 445.353. Merchants of virtually
all goods are prohibits from price frauds where the merchant refuses to sell at an advertised
price. Additionally, if a merchant advertises a special or sale price, the merchant must also
include in the advertisement, the quantity of the item available, or else the merchant must
provide a rain check for the goods. Except for scanner violations which are measured at 10
times the overcharge to a limit of $5.00, the statute includes a civil liquidated damage penalty
$250 for violations per day and recovery of liquidated attorney fees.



Cleaning and Laundering of Clothing

Cleaning, Repair, or Storage Services Act, MCL § 445.1751 et seq.



Credit Generally


Truth In Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq.
The Truth In Lending Act (TILA) represented a watershed in the area of consumer protection.
Under this act, all creditors must accurately disclose the cost of credit to consumers with whom
they do business. The statute does not substantively regulate what charges can be levied upon
credit consumers. Rather, the sine qua non of TILA is disclosure of the cost of credit in a written
form before the consummation of the transaction by the consumer. Special disclosures are
required for open ended credit (credit cards and revolving lines), closed end credit (retail
installment contracts), and residential real estate transactions. The single most important aspect
of this statute is its definition provisions which introduced the concept of the “finance charge”
as means of allowing consumers to comparison shop between direct loans and time-price-

                                                        Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                 Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                          Page 8
differential sales, thus beginning a statutory erosion of the installment sellers’ exemption from
usury regulation. The significance of TILA cannot be underestimated since a number of
Michigan statutes incorporate the provisions of this federal act by reference. Additionally, the
act regulates billing and service practices. The remedial portions of the statute include three
liquidated damage provisions for real estate transactions, general credit transactions, and leases.
The statute expressly authorized class actions and provides to for attorney fees to all prevailing
consumers. The primary reference on this statute is the NCLC Truth In Lending Act manual.
Regulations under TILA can be found in Regulation Z, 12 CFR § 226.1 et seq. along with an
extensive, formal staff commentary which carries the legal authority of formal regulation.



Fair Credit Billing Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1666 et seq.
This act govern billing errors for both closed and open ended credit transactions. Billing errors
are broadly defined under the act to include almost any form of challenge to a billing that is
made by a consumer. Consumers have 60 days or two billing cycle to take advantage of this
statute’s protections. If the consumer writes a dispute within the statutory time frame, the credit
must immediately cease any collection and any credit reporting of the disputed amount. The
creditor must then send a written acknowledgment of the dispute and conduct an investigation
of the dispute. The general remedial provisions of the Truth In Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1640,
apply to violations, including minimum liquidated damages and shifting of attorney fees.



Equal Credit Opportunity Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1691 et seq.
This statute which initially prohibited forms of credit discrimination now regulates most aspects
of the credit application process as well. Creditors are prohibited from discriminating on
prohibited bases. Additionally, all creditors must notify the consumer of the action taken in
relation to their complaint, namely adverse actions (denials), approvals, and counter offers.
Additionally, the statute also requires that creditors report the credit history of spouses in certain
circumstances. The requirements of the statute may be enforced with actual, and statutory
damages up to $10,000 along with costs and attorney fees. Extensive regulations promulgated
under congressional grant are found in Regulation B, 12 CFR 202.1 et seq, and further explained


                                                        Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                 Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                          Page 9
through staff commentary.



Michigan Legal Interest Statute, MCL § 438.31 et seq.
Statute generally bars excessive interest and prohibits the collection of “any interest, any official
fees, delinquency or collection charge, attorney fees or court costs” and for shifting of attorney
fees in cases involving usurious transaction.

OTHER STATUTES
Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2601
Retail Installment Sales Act, MCL 445.851 et seq.
Due On Sale Clause, MCL § 445.1621
Credit Reform Act, MCL § 445.1851 et seq.



Credit Repair

Credit Services Protection Act, MCL § 445.1824.
This Michigan statute operates as a state-law analog to the federal Credit Repair Organizations
Act. Its prohibits largely parallel to that statute and prohibit a wide variety of acts by
organizations who claim to provide credit repair services. The statute does not, however, have
parallel disclosure provisions. Underlying these prohibitions are two fundamental concepts:
First, that derogatory information which is accurate cannot be the proper subject of credit repair,
and second that credit repair services do not actually have the ability to effect repairs, and thus
cannot guarantee any particular result. As such, the statute bars false promises relating to these
services, accepting payment before the services are rendered, and failing to render the services.
While the statute includes provisions for actual and punitive damages, costs and attorney fees,
coverage under this act is far more limited than under the federal act.



OTHER STATUTES

                                                          Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                   Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                           Page 10
Federal Credit Repair Organizations Act, 15 U.S.C.§ 1679 et seq.




Credit Reporting

Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.
This statute regulates three distinct forms of conduct in relation to the compilation and use of
credit reports. First, the statute regulates the accuracy of the content of the report. Credit
reporting agencies are required to maintain reasonable procedures to assure the maximum
possible accuracy of the reports, and to conduct investigations in cooperation with the entities
that furnish challenged information. The second are regulation is the use of these reports.
Congress has provided a limited set of permissible uses for the reports. This list does not
contain any “catch all” exceptions under which a party is allotted leeway. Rather, the report
contains confidential information which can be misused, and therefore, no person can access
or use the credit report without a permissible purpose. Attorneys and parties cannot obtain
consumer reports for the purposes of litigation. Attorney’s in litigation must obtain a
subpoena in order to use the credit report in litigation. The third area of conduct is the
issuance of notices following the use of a credit report. Any party that uses a consumer report
and takes “adverse action” must issue a notice to the consumer informing them of the action
along with the identity of the credit bureau that supplied the report and a statement of the
consumer’s rights. This statute provides a private right of action along with attorney’s fees for
prevailing plaintiffs. Consumers may seek punitive damages – which are not available
under Michigan law – under this federal act, .



Michigan Credit Reporting Practices Act, MCL § 445.271
This statute regulates credit reporting as to cosigners of consumer loans. Under the act,
creditors may not report adverse credit information relating to a cosigner unless the creditor has
demanded payment from the cosigner and give at least 30 days to make acceptable payment
arrangements. Additionally, the creditor may not forward the account for collection during the

                                                       Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                        Page 11
dispute period.



Credit In Specific Transactions
Motor Vehicle Sales Finance Act, MCL § 492.101 et seq.
This is the principal regulatory act covering installment sales of vehicle. The statute provides
for licensing of persons seeking to collect finance charges under retail installment contracts, and
a regulatory framework for enforcement. Its provisions also set forth mandatory disclosures for
vehicle installment contracts, prohibited terms, incorporates some of the requirements of TILA,
and limitations on fees which may be imposed. The statute also includes a remedy of forfeiture
of finance charges where the installment has imposed excessive charges.



Motor Vehicle Installment Sales Contract Act, MCL § 566.301 et seq.
This statute, which is codified in the MCL’s within the statute of frauds, acts as mini-TILA
statute with regard to motor vehicle installment contracts. The act requires competition of all
essential terms of any motor vehicle retail installment contract and delivery to the consumer at
the time of the sale. The statute also includes its own remedial provisions with liquidated
damages in the amount of all finance charges.



OTHER STATUTES
Home Improvement Finance Act, MCL § 445.1101
Mortgage Lending Practice Act, MCL § 445.1611
Mortgage Brokers, Lenders, and Servicers Licensing Act, MCL § 445.1681.
Michigan Secondary Mortgage Regulation Act, M.C.L. § 493.51.


Door to Door Sales

Michigan Home Solicitation Sales Act, MCL § 445.111 et seq.


                                                      Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                               Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                       Page 12
Any sales which are initiated at the home of the consumer are subject to the HSSA. Under the
act, merchants selling goods or services under these circumstances must provide the consumer
with three days to rescind the contract of sale. The merchant must also provide a disclosure of
the consumer’s rights and provide a dated form for the consumer to cancel the contract. If the
merchant fails to provide the dated notice, the consumer may cancel until the merchant provides
the completed notice MCL § 445.113(4). Following cancellation, the merchant must honor the
recision and demand return of the goods or services within 20 days. If the merchant fails to
make the demand, the consumer may keep the goods without payment. Merchants who
engage in home solicitations sales must affirmatively prove their compliance with this
statute before they can recover for any contract under the act’s provisions. MCL §
445.117.



Leases

Federal Consumer Leasing Act, 15 U.S.C. 1667 et seq.
Like, the Truth In Lending Act, the consumer leasing regulates disclosures of leased goods (with
the exception of rent-to-own transactions). The statute requires disclosures of virtually all
material terms of the transaction, and also includes a substantive limitation on unreasonable
charges in connection with the early termination of leases. Extensive regulations which expand
on the statutory disclosures are found in Regulation M, 12 CFR § 213.1 et seq. Prevailing
consumers may recover liquidated damages of $1,000 plus costs and attorney fees.

OTHER STATUTES
Michigan Rent To Own Statute, MCL § 445.964 et seq.
Michigan Motor Vehicle Lease Contract Act, MCL § 445.991 et seq.
Article 2A of the Michigan Uniform Commercial Code, MCL § 440.2801 et seq.



Money & Credit Card Transactions

                                                     Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                              Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                      Page 13
Fair Credit Billing Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1666 et seq.
The Fair Credit Billing Act governs billing practices on open-ended credit plans. The statute
specifically allows consumers to dispute billing errors which include, billings for goods or
services not received (15 U.S.C. §1666(b)(1)); any item for which a consumer requests
clarification (15 U.S.C. §1666(b)(2)); billing for goods or services which were not delivered as
agreed (15 U.S.C. §1666(b)(3)); failure to credit a payment (15 U.S.C. §1666(b)(4));
computational errors (15 U.S.C. §1666(c)(5)); or a failure to send a bill (15 U.S.C.
§1666(b)(6)).A

In the event of a billing error, a consumer has the right to dispute the error within 2 billing cycles
or 60 days of receipt of the bill. In order to invoke the act, the consumer's dispute must be
made in writing. The notice must also identify the account, identify the error, and set for the
amount in dispute. (15 U.S.C. § 1666(a)). Upon receipt of the dispute, the creditor must follow
the procedures to resolve the billing dispute. Within 30 days, the creditor must acknowledge the
dispute and either

–      Within two billing cycles or 90 days, correct the bill and send a notice of the corrections
       along with an explanation of how the bill was corrected and provide any documentation
       requested by the consumer.
              or the creditor may
–      Send an explanation of why the bill was not changed after investigation, and provide any
       documentation requested by the consumer.

By invoking this credit dispute procedure, the consumer gains access to certain rights under the
act. Once a bill is in dispute, the creditor may not take any action to collect the bill or report the
disputed amount as being delinquent on the consumer's credit report (15 U.S.C. § 1666a(a)) until
the dispute resolution procedures is complete. Once complete, the creditor may resume credit
reporting, but only if it reports the account as being disputed by the consumer. Violations of
the act are subject to the same remedial provisions as the Truth In Lending Act under 15 USC
§ 1640. Under those provisions, consumers may pursue statutory damages as well as costs and

                                                        Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                 Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                         Page 14
attorney fees.



OTHER STATUTES
Electronic Funds Transfer Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1693.
Right to Financial Privacy Act, 12 U.S.C. § 3417.
Expedited Funds Availability Act, 12 U.S.C. § 4010.
Truth in Savings Act, 12 U.S.C. § 4310.



Mortgages and Mortgage Servicers

Real Estate Settlement and Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq.
This statute contains two important consumer protections for persons seeking and granting
mortgages. The first of these is the "good faith estimate" of charges. This estimate must be
issued to the consumer prior to closing on a mortgage and must include the items enumerated
in the statute and in Regulation X. This provision, while it provides important consumer
information, is less of an issue in consumer litigation than other provisions, due to the fact that
there is no private right of action or remedy for the failure to issue the good faith estimate.

While the pre-mortgage disclosures in the "good faith estimate" do not provide a basis for a
private remedy, other provisions of the statute do. In specific, consumers may demand that the
servicers of their mortgage (which includes both the mortgage holder and any third party)
provide information about the servicing of the mortgage and escrow accounts. Those demands
may include requests for an accounting of how payments have been applied to the loan. Under
12 U.S.C. § 2605, the consumer may invoke these rights by tendering a "qualified written
request" challenging the servicing. In turn, the mortgage service must respond to the request
by conducting an investigation into the matter within 60 days. During the 60 day investigation
period, the servicer may not report any adverse credit information relating to the disputed
account balance. Consumers may sue for actual and statutory damages. Prevailing plaintiffs are
entitled to recover attorney fees.

                                                      Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                               Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                       Page 15
OTHER STATUTES
Truth In Lending Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2601.
Home Ownership Equity & Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1639.




Real Estate Rental

Truth In Renting Act, MCL § 554.631 et seq.
This statute regulates the substantive content of rental agreements. The statute proscribes a
number of unconscionable contract provisions which limit inter alia the landlords waiver of rights
under the warranty of habitability, wavier of rights under the Landlord Tenant Relationship Act,
improper acceleration of rental, and confessions of judgment. The statute also requires a notice
of the tenants rights. Violations of the statute may entitle the tenant to void the lease, obtain
injunctions, claim actual damages, or obtain statutory damages of $250 or $500. Successful
tenants are also entitled to recover attorney fees.

Landlord Tenant Relationship Act, MCL § 554.651 et seq.
This statute regulates the manner in which a landlord may demand and use a security deposit on
residential real estate. The statute limits the amount of any security deposition to one and one
half the amount of the monthly rental. During the tenancy, the money must be maintained in
a deposit account which is identified to the tenant. At the conclusion of the tenancy, the
landlord must send the tenant an itemized list of damages claimed against the security deposit.
The landlord may then use any uncontested portion. The landlord must sue to use any
contested portion. The statute provides for double damages. Attorney fees may be recovered
through the MCPA, Smolen v. Dahlman Apartments, 186 Mich.App. 292 (1990).

Warranty of Habitability, MCL § 554.139
Michigan requires all landlords to warrant the premises they rent as habitable and fit. This
warranty of habitability applies to both the leased premises and common areas and requires that

                                                      Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                               Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                       Page 16
the landlord perform necessary repairs to maintain the premises. However, this warranty may
be modified where the lease period is at least one year. Where the warranty has not been
modified and the premises become uninhabitable through no fault of the tenant, the tenant may
move out and have no further liability under the lease. MCL § 554.201.



OTHER STATUTES
Forcible Entry and Detainer Act, MCL § 600.2818



Telephone Solicitations, E-Mail, and Facsimiles

Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227.
Transmitting Unsolicited Advertising Messages Via Facsimile Machine, MCL § 445.1776.
Unsolicited E-Mail (Spamming), 15 U.S.C. § 7701
Unsolicited E-Mail (Spamming), MCL § 445.2501
.



Warranties

Uniform Commercial Code, MCL § 440.2101 et seq.
The UCC is the principal source for all warranty law governing the sale of goods. In the
commercial setting, where the selling party is a merchant, goods are sold with implied warranties
of merchantability and fitness for purpose. These warranties may be disclaimed, but the
requirements of the statute must be met for the disclaimer to be effective. Additionally, any
representations made during the transaction, samples, or models shown constitute express
warranties which may not be disclaimed. A different notion under the statute is the limitation
of remedies. While merchants may limit remedies, the remedies provided must be adequate to
assure that the purchaser receives the value of the contract, and therefore, where an exclusive


                                                      Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                               Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                       Page 17
remedy fails of its essential purpose, all remedies under the code are available notwithstanding
the limitations in the contract.



Magnuson Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq.
This federal statute sets forth minimum standards for “full” warranties, governs the use of
written warranties, and limits disclaimers of implied warranties. The notion underlying the
statute is that the written warranty – which is used principally to instill consumer confidence in
goods offered for sale – should not be used remove protections and remedies which the
consumer would otherwise have in the absence of the warranty. Following this purpose, the
statute prohibits persons issuing warranties from disclaiming implied warranties of
merchantability and fitness. Likewise, where a supplier issues a service contract – which would
otherwise constitute a warranty but for the fact that it was separately purchased – within 90 days,
that person may not disclaim the implied warranties. Persons who fail to honor written
warranties, implied warranties arising under the act, or improperly limited warranties may be held
liable for actual damages and attorney fee.



Michigan Lemon Law, MCL § 257.1301 et seq.
The Lemon Law provides specific remedies to buyers of new cars which experience repeated
problems. The remedies under the act are mandated when a “new” vehicle which has been out
of service for 30 days during its first year, or been in to service times for the same defect which
arose initially during the first year of ownership. However, in order to trigger the statute’s
presumption that the car must be repurchased, the consumer offer a last chance to repair the
vehicle in writing, by certified mail after either the 3rd repair for the same defect or the 25th day
out of service during the first year. If the car is not repaired following the last chance, it must
be repurchased or exchanged. A consumer who prevails is entitled to recovery of attorney fees.



Mobile Home Warranty Act, MCL § 125.991 et seq.
This statute provides for a mandatory warranty on all new mobile homes sold within the state.

                                                       Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                        Page 18
(MCL § 125.993) which may not be waived or altered (MCL § 125.995). The warranty applies
to both the manufacture of the mobile home as well as the selling dealer (id), and the minimum
provisions for this warranty are described by the statute. At a minimum, the manufacturer
warrants that the mobile home complies with Michigan law, both statute and rule, as to
construction and fire protection and detection, in effect at the date of manufacture. (MCL §
125.994(a)) and is free from substantial defects in materials or workmanship at the time of
delivery to the dealer (MCL § 125.994(b)). The dealer separately warrants that the mobile home
is free from substantial defects in materials or workmanship at the time of delivery to the
consumer (MCL § 125.994(b)). Each of these warranties require that the dealer or manufacturer
will remedy defects in the home which arise within the first year after delivery (MCL §
125.994(c)). As a prerequisite to obtaining a repair remedy, the consumer must tender a
written demand for repairs within 10 days of the conclusion of the one-year warranty. (Id).
A manufacturer or dealer who fails to take a corrective action willfully or by gross neglect is
liable for treble damages under the statute. (MCL § 125.996)




                                                    Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                             Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                     Page 19
                              IAN BRYCE LYNGKLIP
                                      ATTORNEY AT LAW
      24500Northwestern Hwy., Ste. 206, Southfield, MI 48075 Tel: (248) 746-3790
______________________________________________________________________________


EDUCATION
      •   University of Detroit Mercy Law School, J.D. Summa Cum Laude, May 1992.
      •   University of Michigan, B.A. Philosophy, 1987.
      •   Cranbrook School, 1983.


HONORS AND AWARDS
      •   Consumer Advocate of the Year, National Association of Consumer Advocates, October 2003.
      •   Frank Murphy Honor Society, 1992.
      •   Bancroft-Whitney American Jurisprudence Award for Outstanding Achievement in Federal Courts,
          December 1992.
      •   Law Review, Associate Editor, 1991-92.
      •   The Roscoe Hogan Environmental Law Essay Contest, Honors, 1991
      •   Dean's Scholarship for Academic Excellence, 1991-92
      •   Law Review, Junior Staff Member, 1990-91.
      •   Bancroft-Whitney American Jurisprudence Award for Outstanding Achievement in Sales, December
          1990.
      •   Bancroft-Whitney American Jurisprudence Award for Outstanding Achievement in Contracts, May 1990.
      •   Dean's Scholarship for Academic Excellence, 1990-91


PUBLICATIONS
      •   Trade Secrets, Protective Orders and the Smoking Gun, The Consumer Advocate, Volume 9 Issue
          4, October 2003.
      •   Top 5 Mistakes of general practitioners in handling identity thefts and credit reporting disputes.
          Ingham County Bar Associate Briefs, October 2003
      •   The Court of Appeals Provides Guidance Interpreting Potential Violations of the MCPA.
          Consumer Law Newsletter, Volume 4 No. 1, January 2000.
      •   Motor Vehicle Repair Fees and the Consumer, Consumer Law Newsletter, Volume 2 No.
          2, June 1998.


                                                          Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                   Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                           Page 20
     •   Civil RICO and Environmental Harms, University of Detroit Law Review, 1992


WORK EXPERIENCE
     •   Biernat, Chioini, Sarnacki, et al., Independent Research Attorney 1992 - 1994.
     •   Solo Practitioner, 1995 -1997
     •   Lyngklip & Taub Consumer Law Group, PLC, Partner 1998 - current


PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS & ACTIVITIES
     •   National Association of Consumer Advocates, FCRA Conference Steering Chair Person, 2003-
         004
     •   National Association of Consumer Advocates, Member, 1998 - Current
     •   National Association of Consumer Advocates, Membership Subcommittee Member, 2002-2003
     •   National Association of Consumer Advocates, Autofraud Conference Steering Committee, 2002-
         2003
     •   National Association of Consumer Advocates, FCRA Conference Steering Chair Person, 2002-
         2003
     •   National Association of Consumer Advocates, FCRA Conference Steering Committee Member,
         2001-2002
     •   State Bar of Michigan, Consumer Law Section Ex-Officio Chairperson, 2001
     •   State Bar of Michigan, Consumer Law Section Chairperson, 2000
     •   State Bar of Michigan, Consumer Law Section Counsel Member, 1997 - 1999
     •   Macomb County Bar Association Computer Committee, 1994 -1999
     •   Oakland County Bar Association, 1993 - 1999


SPECIALTY TRAINING PROVIDED
     •   Michigan Judicial Institute, Annual Meeting, Lansing Michigan. Anticipated March 29, 2004,
         Consumer Issues in the District Court (topics included consumer issues for Judges, Fair Debt
         Collection Practices, Federal Consumer Credit Protection Act).
     •   National Consumer Law Center Fair Debt Collection Practices Training Conference, Kansas City,
         MO, Anticipated Date February 21, 2004 (topics include primer on Credit Reporting Issues
         in Fair Debt Collection Practices Cases).
     •   National Consumer Law Center Annual Conference, Oakland, CA, October 25, 2003 (topics
         include primer on Fair Credit Reporting Act, panel member on FCRA Round Table).
     •   Michigan District Judges Association Conference, Frankenmuth, Michigan. September 24,
         2003 (topics included consumer issues for Judges, Fair Debt Collection Practices, Federal

                                                       Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                                Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                        Page 21
        Consumer Credit Protection Act, Securitization).
    •   Florida Bar Association Consumer Law Section Training, Orlando Florida. June 27, 2003
        (topics included identifying and handling credit reporting errors).
    •   UAW Legal Service Quarterly Training, Lansing, MI May 30, 2003 (topics included auto fraud
        basics, FCRA basics).
    •   National Association of Consumer Advocates Midyear Conference on Autofraud, Cleveland,
        OH, April 25-27 2003 (Topics included claims under the Consumer Credit Protection Act
        and proper limits of protective orders).
    •   National Association of Consumer Advocates Midyear Conference on Fair Credit Reporting Act,
        Orlando, FL, March 7-9 2003 (subjects included jargon of FCRA, reading credit reports,
        debt collection misuse of credit reports, case management).
    •   National Association of Consumer Advocates Midyear Conference on Fair Credit Reporting Act,
        Albuquerque, NM, June 2002.
    •   Michigan Poverty Law Center Road Show, October 3, 2001 (subjects included advanced
        topics in auto finance fraud and TILA).
    •   Consumer Law Section Annual Meeting, State Bar of Michigan, September 2001. (topics
        include Proper Limits of Arbitration in Consumer Cases).
    •   Michigan Consumer Law Task Force, June 21, 2001 (subjects included identity theft and
        civil remedies).
    •   Consumer Credit Counseling Services of Michigan Training, May 2001 (subjects included
        Fair Credit Reporting Act).
    •   Michigan Poverty Law Center Road Show, November 1999 (subjects included primer on auto
        warranty and advanced topics under Michigan Consumer Protection Act.).
    •   UAW Legal Services Consumer Training, November 1998 (subjects included auto repair and
        liens).


SPECIALTY TRAINING RECEIVED
    •   National Consumer Law Center Annual Conference, Oakland, CA, October 25, 2003.
    •   NACA Midyear Conference on Autofraud, Cleveland, OH, April 25-27 2003.
    •   NACA Midyear Conference on Fair Credit Reporting Act, Orlando, FL, March 7-9 2003.
    •   NACA Midyear Conference on Fair Credit Reporting Act, Albuquerque, NM, June 6-8.
        2002 NACA Midyear Conference on Fair Credit Reporting Act, Las Vegas, NV, June 2001
        (2 days).
    •   NCLC Annual Conference, Broomfield, CO, October 2000 (3 days).
    •   NACA Midyear Conference on Consumer Class Actions, Chicago, IL, June 2000 (2 days).
    •   NACA Midyear Conference on Predatory Lending, Decatur, GA, March 2000 (2 days).

                                                     Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                              Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                                      Page 22
•   NCLC Annual Conference, Washington DC, September 1999 (3 days).
•   NACA Midyear Conference on Autofraud, San Antonio, TX, February 1999 (2 days).




                                           Consumer Protection Overview and Issues
                                                    Ian B. Lyngklip, (248) 746-3790
                                                                            Page 23

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:22
posted:8/9/2011
language:English
pages:28