How to Report Consumer Fraud and Scams

At Ross Law, we often get calls from consumers who were ripped off, but they may not have the best civil case for a lawyer to take on. Things like phone scams, robocalls, internet scams, and scams involving people overseas are often difficult for a non-government consumer lawyer to handle. However, that does not mean they should not be reported. Additionally, even scams like auto dealer fraud, debt collection scams, door-to-door sales scams, and unlawful trade practices should be reported even if a civil lawyer is able to assist. However, you should speak with a lawyer before reporting them.

Then the issue is how do you report these consumer scams? Here is a brief list of people and organizations that may be able to assist with your consumer Fraud:

1. Call Ross Law at 503.224.1658: We are happy to assist with referrals or discuss whether or not we would be a good fit to assist consumers who have been ripped off or defrauded by businesses. However, keep in mind we are not a government entity and we are limited by Civil remedies that we pursue on our client’s behalf. For more information about the difference between civil and criminal remedies click here.

2. Report to the Oregon Department of Justice: The Oregon Department of Justice (DOJ) has a couple of different ways to report complaints. You can call the consumer hotline at 18778779392 or you can file a complaint online. You are also able to search for past complaints against a business that operated in Oregon. Click here for more info.

3. Report to the CFPB & FTC: The Federal Government has the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) which is part of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The CFPB has a new website to report scams, fraud, and bad business practices. It is a user-friendly website that asks you to tell the CFPB about the scam. The FTC asserts it will use that information to investigate the scammers and hopefully bring them to justice. Click here for more information on how to make a report of fraud, scams, or unfair business practices.

4. Report to the Better Business Bureau: The Better Business Bureau is a private entity that focuses on consumer complaints and reviews. They are not a government entity so they have no power to enforce the law. The BBB also charges businesses to advertise with them. To search for a business or make a complaint click here.

5. Report to Local Law Enforcement: Some local law enforcement agencies have investigators to investigate fraud and scams.

The above list is not exhaustive. There are many other places you can report scams, fraud, and unlawful business practices, but please keep these in mind. Please remember that this blog post may be considered Attorney advertising. If you have any questions about auto dealer fraud the Oregon Lemon Law, personal injury cases, auto crash injuries, bicycle crashes, and other injury or death cases please call Portland Oregon Personal Injury and Consumer Fraud lawyer Jeremiah Ross at 503.224.1658.

2019 Was An Incredible Year for Ross Law's Clients!

2019 was an amazing year for Ross Law and our Clients! Ross Law worked tirelessly to assist Oregonians to obtain maximum compensation for their Personal Injury cases, wrongful death cases, crime victim cases, insurance disputes, and consumer cases.

Below is a rundown on some of the results from 2019:

• $2,225,000.00 Jury Trial Verdict where Jeremiah Ross co-counseled a two-week medical malpractice & Patient Safety case with another attorney against one of Oregon’s top medical malpractice defense law firms. Click HERE for more information on that case.

• Significant Settlement in Case Against DHS and others in a case where our young client was abused and neglected while she was in the legal custody of the Department of Human Services. Click HERE for more information on the lawsuit against Oregon’s DHS & CPS.

• Confidential Settlement in Wrongful Death Case against a mental health provider whose negligence resulted in a schizophrenic’s suicide;

• Confidential Settlement received in a civil domestic violence case against an abuser. Ross Law represented a young survivor of domestic violence and filed a lawsuit against the abuser after he was convicted of his crimes in criminal court. As a crime victim’s lawyer, Ross Law fought tirelessly to cut through very complex legal issues to ensure the victim received compensation to regain the power and control of her life.

• $100,000.00 settlement for Ross Law’s client who was backed over by a vehicle while she was urinating behind the vehicle due to her intoxication. The bad driver’s insurance company denied any liability until Jeremiah Ross litigated the matter.

• Insurance Benefits obtained for a client who the insurer denied personal injury protection benefits to a cyclist who was thrown into a car at a stop sign. The stopped vehicle’s insurer denied benefits based on its interpretation of the law that the cyclist had to be “struck by” the vehicle. The judge ordered the Insurance Company to pay the cyclist $15,000.00 in denied insurance benefits and the cyclist’s costs and attorney fees. Click HERE for more information on that case.

• Insurance Benefits obtained for a client who was wrongfully denied Personal Injury Protection benefits from USAA and Auto Injury Solutions. The judge ordered USAA to pay the outstanding benefits and our client’s costs and attorney fees. Click HERE for more information on that case.

• Numerous favorable Settlements in Lemon Law and Auto Dealership Fraud Cases. These settlements included cash that was paid directly to our clients by the dealership, buy-backs of vehicles, unwinding car deals, and the dealership or auto manufacturers paid Ross Law’s consumer client’s costs and attorney fees.

There were many other amazing results for or clients! Please remember that results for all clients will vary. Each case is different. Some cases are better than others. If you, or someone you know, needs a personal injury lawyer, wrongful death lawyer, crime victim’s lawyer, or consumer lawyer please call Ross Law at 503.224.1658.

Jeremiah Ross Selected as a SuperLawyer! Again....

2019 was an incredible year for Ross Law and Jeremiah Ross! Ross Law fought tirelessly for our clients in personal injury cases, insurance disputes, wrongful death cases, medical malpractice cases, lemon law cases, auto dealership fraud cases, and crime victim cases. Ross law achieved incredible results for our clients.

Peers selected Jeremiah Ross as a 2020 SuperLawyer for personal injury general plaintiff’s practice. This is the fifth year Jeremiah Ross has been recognized by SuperLawyers.

• 2020 Oregon Super Lawyers

• 2019 Oregon Super Lawyers

• 2018 Oregon Super Lawyers

• 2017 Oregon Rising Stars

• 2016 Oregon Rising Stars

We look forward to continuing with the amazing success Ross Law has had and are thankful to be rated as a SuperLawyer!

Please remember the results may vary for each client. Each case is different. If you or someone you know needs to speak with a Personal Injury Lawyer, Wrongful Death Lawyer, Crime Victim Lawyer, or Consumer Lawyer, please call 503.224.1658 to speak with Ross Law. This post may be considered Attorney Advertising.

Ross Law Is Open!

It has been a crazy couple of weeks. COVID-19 was an unknown term three weeks ago, now we are working to “flatten the curve” by staying home and social distancing in an effort to slow the spread of this virus. Here at Ross Law we are working hard to continue to provide exceptional client services while working remotely. Personal Injury case, Insurance Disputes, and Crime Victim case evaluations and meetings will now be by phone and email. Consumer consultations and auto fraud case evaluations will also occur on the telephone and email. This is less than ideal, but we are adapting as this situation unfolds.

Things may take a little longer because insurance companies and medical providers take longer to process claims and get us records, but we will keep moving forward. Please contact Ross Law at 503.224.1658 to discuss your personal injury case, insurance denial, consumer or auto fraud case. Oregon Personal Injury and Consumer lawyer Jeremiah Ross is happy to assist Oregonians during these difficult times.

Ross Law Files Lawsuit Against Jaguar for Selling a Lemon

Ross Law recently filed a lawsuit against Jaguar Land Rover North America. The lawsuit is a result of Jaguar selling a vehicle with serious software issues that have affected the infotainment system, the dashboard, and the vehicle’s audio package. Jaguar charged our client over $3,000.00 for the additional audio package that Jaguar claims deliver exceptional definition. However, the software glitches currently cause the speakers to crackle intermittently. The case was filed in Multnomah County Oregon alleging violations of Oregon’s Lemon Law and the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act. Should we prevail our client may be entitled to enhanced damages and reimbursement of all costs and attorney fees.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT OREGON’S LEMON LAW!

Portland, Oregon based Ross Law represents consumers in Lemon Law Cases throughout Oregon. If you or someone you know has been sold a “Lemon” in Oregon please call Oregon Lemon Law Lawyer Jeremiah Ross. Please note this post may be considered attorney advertising.

Litigation Shenanigans & the Attorney Fee Multiplier-What You Need to Know

Most consumer and personal injury lawyers represent clients based on a contingency fee agreement. That means that the attorney will not get paid unless the client receives a settlement, award, or judgment in their favor. Many firms and attorneys defending lawsuits charge by the hour. They are then paid monthly by the corporate defendant or insurance company. This can often result in defense lawyers using tactics that are meant to drain the plaintiff’s attorney’s time, money, and resources in an effort to force the plaintiff to settle or divert the plaintiff’s lawyers attention from the issues in the case. These tactics can come at a price though, and an unpublished Ninth Circuit opinion sheds some light on the remedy available to a party who is subjected to litigation shenanigans. In Beck v. Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Co., No. 16-35816 (9th Cir. June 5, 2018) the Ninth Circuit approved an attorney fee multiplier of 2.0 due to the defendant’s litigation tactics. What this means is that the plaintiff’s lawyers attorney fee claim of $597,669.25 was doubled to $1,195,398.50 “due to the nature of this case and the conduct of Metropolitan and its Counsel.” Beck v. Metropolitan Prop. and Casualty Insurance Company,. 3:13-cv-00879-AC pg 44. (Dist. Or. Sept. 16, 2016)

You are probably wondering how was the plaintiff able to force the defendant Insurance company to pay double the amount of her attorney fees. Thankfully, John Acosta, United States Magistrate Judge, drafted a 56 page order that provides a clear road map for lawyers who are seeking an attorney fee multiplier in Oregon. In this breach of insurance contract case, Judge Acosta addressed the legal standard that permitted the plaintiff to seek fees under ORS 742.061 (whether or not the plaintiff satisfied the “proof of loss requirement). Judge Acosta found the plaintiff had satisfied the proof of loss requirement under ORS 742.061. As a result the defendant was forced to pay plaintiff’s reasonable attorney fees. The question then became, What is the reasonable amount of fees?

The Judge used the ORS 20.075(1) and (2) factors to determine what was reasonable. First, the Judge rejected defendant Metropolitan’s argument that the ORS 20.075(1) factors apply only to the court’s determination whether to award fees and not the amount of fees, and not to the reasonableness of the fees.. In doing so, the court provided clear guidance that both ORS 20.075(1) and ORS 20.075(2) factors are to be used to determine the reasonable amount of attorney fees to award.

The Court then delved into the factors under ORS 20.075(1). The court evaluated the parties’ respective pre-litigation conduct and did not look kindly at Metropolitan’s attempts to resolve the case on unilaterally established terms. The court also looked at the objective reasonableness of the claims and defenses asserted by the parties under ORS 20.075(1)(b). In addressing that factor the court acknowledged that the case was a simple breach of contract case. However, the defense asserted unreasonable defenses in its answer, and advanced unreasonable arguments to use as the equivalent of defenses. For example the defense asserted a merit-less “Fraud” defense. This is a common defense tactic in consumer cases, and the court did not take kindly to it. The Court then delved into the various other ORS 20.075(1) factors and found they either weighed in plaintiff’s favor or they did not apply.

The court then turned to the ORS 20.075(2) factors. The court did a fantastic job concisely addressing each of the numerous factors. In doing so, the court addressed the prevailing market rates for legal services in the relevant community. In this case the plaintiff’s attorneys submitted expert declarations as expert evidence of the plaintiff’s attorneys’ skill and experience in insurance law and to support the hourly rates she requested. The court used the expert opinions and the 2017 Oregon State Bar Economic Survey to assist in establishing the attorneys’ respective hourly rates.

The court also addressed whether the fee is fixed or contingent factor under ORS 20.075(2)(h). The plaintiff’s lawyer initially worked under an hourly fee and then transferred to a contingency fee. The Beck case is similar to many consumer cases, because the defense used tactics which made it impossible for the plaintiff to pay the lawyer an hourly rate. However, the firm representing Ms. Beck continued to be able to do so under a contingency fee agreement. The court noted that the defense’s litigation strategy increased the risk to Beck’s attorneys that they might not be fully compensated for their time, and that factor weighed in favor of an attorney fee award.

The court then addressed the attorney fee multiplier. The court noted, “Oregon law permits an enhancement of fees when it is supported by the facts and circumstances of the case. See Griffin v. TriMet, 112 Or. App. 575, 585 (1992) aff’d in part and rev’d in part, 318 Or. 500 (1994) (approving trial court award of 2.0 multiplier).” The court then spent significant time addressing the facts leading up to the litigation and the defense’s litigation tactics. The court noted that the defense’s efforts to attempt to obtain irrelevant evidence through the discovery process, using theories that lacked any relevance, and the defenses disorganized or deliberately untimely approach to raising various issues resulted in the plaintiff incurring fees for having to respond to both the substance of the issues and their “procedural infirmity.”

However, the court limited the 2.0 multiplier to the fees the plaintiff only incurred during the litigation. The court concluded that pre-litigation fees that were incurred were not subject to the multiplier because the defense’s litigation counsel played no role in the parties’ negotiations.

Judge Acosta did a magnificent job in providing a road map and guidance for future litigants facing a defendant who desires to engage in litigation shenanigans in a fee shifting case. Hopefully the opinion will have a deterrent effect and help litigants combat litigation shenanigans. The opinion is also a fantastic example of the various issues a fee petition should address and the arguments a fee seeking party may face. Lastly, the opinion is an excellent example of the facts and factors the court looks to when deciding if a fee multiplier is appropriate in a particular case.

If you are having an issue with an insurance company or have questions about attorney fees, call Jeremiah Ross at 503.224.1658. Ross Law PDX represents people in various claims against their insurance companies Ross LAW PDX is happy to represent Oregonians in Personal Injury Protection Insurance disputes, and claims for Uninsured Motorist Benefits and Under-insured Motorist benefits. Please remember the law is constantly changing and to not solely rely on this post.

Oregon Women Pay More For Car Insurance Than Oregon Men! Here is Why...

As an Oregon Personal Injury Lawyer and Consumer Lawyer, I am regularly asked by people if making a claim to their auto insurance will cause their insurance rates to go up. This is not an easy question to answer, because Insurance Companies are for profit businesses. As a result, Insurers are going to do what they feel is necessary in order to make a profit unless regulators or attorneys’ stop them. For example, GEICO was ordered to pay $23,000,000.00 to one of their insureds for GEICO failing to pay benefits, and denying payments on a whim. State Farm agreed to pay its customers $250,000,000 (That is not a typo) in order to avoid a racketeering trial in which customers claimed that State Farm was rigging an election for a Judge that had made favorable rulings for State Farm. USAA agreed to pay $39,000,000.00 to settle a lawsuit filed by its insureds (Veterans, Active Duty Military, and their families). These cases are evidence that some Insurance Companies are willing to skirt the law and disregard the moral high-ground in an effort to make a profit. Another example of insurers putting profit over people is how insurance companies are charging Oregon women more than Oregon men for auto insurance.

A recent study by an insurance search engine, The Zebra, found that Oregon women’ paid roughly $70.00 more for auto insurance last year than men did. A recent Pew Research study also came to the same conclusions on a national level. The studies found certain states prohibit gender based pricing, but Oregon is not one of them. What this means is that Insurers are at liberty to charge women more for insurance than men, and they do not have to have any justification for doing so.

The statistics support the fact that Oregon insurance companies are charging dramatically different rates for women than men. In 2016, insurers charged Oregon women $13.00 more for auto insurance than men. However, in 2018 that number inexplicably jumped to women paying $71.00 more for auto insurance than men. Does that mean that women are more dangerous on the road than men if insurers are charging them more? The answer is no.

The data does not support the Insurance Industry’s decisions to charge women more for car insurance in 25 States. The Zebra study affirmed that women and men equally engage in distracted driving, so that could not be a basis to charge women more. Additionally, fatality statistics do not support the insurance industry’s decision to overcharge Oregon women for car insurance. For example, men are the drivers in the vast majority of fatal Driving Under the Influence (DUII) crashes. Men also cause more speed related wrongful deaths on the road. The statistics show that men are riskier to insure than women.

View fullsize

Additionally, different companies charge different rates to similarly situated women throughout the country. For example, State Farm charged middle aged women the same as men. However, GEICO charged middle aged women 16% more than men. This is an important statistic. If insurance companies rates reflect the risk of a particular demographic of drivers then there would not be such a large disparity between the rates particular insurance companies are charging.

Then why are insurance companies charging women the so called “pink tax” to insure their vehicles? Why have the number of states where women pay more than men doubled in the past two years? The answer is simple, profits. The insurance industry is operating in a relaxed regulatory environment that permits them to take actions that will make their companies more profitable, even if that means imposing the “pink tax” on women.

For example, the insurance industry knows that Oregon does not have a bad faith claim, and Insurance Companies are specifically exempted from Oregon’s Unlawful Trade Practices Act (UTPA). The UTPA is a law that provides consumers a remedy if consumers are ripped off by a business. However, the insurance industry lobbied the legislature to be exempted from that law. As a result the insurance industry knows they are likely immune from any real consequences of arbitrarily charging women more for insurance than men.

Despite the insurance industry’s protections, here at Ross Law we will sue insurance companies if a person has been wronged by an insurer and there is a recognized legal remedy for that person. For example we regularly sue insurance companies on behalf of people whose automobile insurers deny paying personal injury protection benefits. We also sue insurance companies to collect uninsured and under-insured motorist benefits. Ross Law has also sued insurance companies for denying insurance coverage for a car crash.

If you or someone you know has an issue with an auto insurance company please call Jeremiah Ross at 503.224.1658 for your free case evaluation. Ross Law PDX is happy to represent Oregonians in many types insurance disputes.

Please note that Ross Law PDX is not affiliated with The Zebra or the Pew Research Center. Please refer to the links in the article for the most accurate information. Please note that this blog may be considered attorney advertising and expresses the opinions of this law office. Please remember that the law is constantly changing and insurance issues are usually very complicated. Please consult with an Oregon attorney if you have a dispute with an Oregon insurer. Do not simply rely on this blog post.

3 Things Oregon Car Buyer's Should Know Before Going to the Dealer

As an Oregon Consumer Lawyer I regularly sue Car Dealerships on behalf of people that get ripped off. Some Car Dealers have perfected the art of bamboozling customers in an effort to squeeze every penny out of the deal. Some dealers do such a masterful job, that most consumers feel powerless even though something “doesn’t feel right.” However, Car Buyers do have rights and can assert those rights. Here are 3 tips to help you Protect Yourself from a Car Dealer:

1) Read the Documents: It is a no brainer that you should read what you are signing. However, dealers use tactics to prevent this. Dealers are trained to keep their hands on the documents and point where to sign while engaging in conversation with you. You can protect yourself by asking the dealer to step out of the office or away from the desk and give you time to read the documents. You can also politely ask the dealer to stop talking as you are going through the documents, and remind them that you are trying to focus. There is never enough time to read all of the small print. However, before you sign the documents you should have an understanding of the major aspects of the deal.

2) Shop Based on Total Sale Price: Many people purchase cars solely based on the monthly payments. Focusing on monthly payments puts the consumer at a disadvantage because the dealer can tweak the financing and price of add-ons to keep the monthly payments roughly the same, but the actual amount financed of the vehicle is substantially higher. You can protect yourself by shopping based on the “Total Sale Price” of the vehicle. That price is located on the truth in lending act disclosures that the dealer requires you to sign.

3) Don’t Be Afraid to Walk Away If Something Doesn’t Feel Right: If you think the dealer is trying to take advantage of you then walk away. Dealers use long delays to exhaust buyers so that the dealer can get them to rush through signing the paperwork. You can combat this by giving them a certain amount of time to prepare the documents or you walk. You can also walk out if you get the sense that the dealer is trying to pull a fast one or take advantage of you.

If you or someone you know has been ripped off by a car dealer please call Ross Law PDX at 503.224.1658. Oregon Consumer Lawyer Jeremiah Ross has represented numerous consumers who have been victims of auto fraud, unlawful car sales, and vehicle financing schemes. Please remember that rules and laws are constantly changing. PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER THINGS YOU CAN DO TO PROTECT YOURSELF FROM BEING RIPPED OFF (Vehicle inspections, taking financing documents home, pre-loan approval, etc.) These are simply three basic tips. Please contact a lawyer or refer to the law rather than simply relying on this post. This post could be considered ATTORNEY ADVERTISING.