THE ASCERTAINABLE LOSS STANDARD
Recently, the Appellate Division affirmed a trial court’s decision to dismiss a potential class action lawsuit filed by a lawyer and involving New Jersey’s Consumer Fraud Act where the lawyer was miffed because the merchant sought to exact a shipping fee for a “free bonus” product. Fortunately, for the merchant, the product was never shipped and, as a result, the shipping charge was never accessed against the lawyer’s credit card. As a result, the issue in the case was whether the lawyer sustained an “ascertainable loss” which is one of the essential elements of a consumer fraud claim in New Jersey. An ascertainable loss has been defined as an actual loss that can be measured or calculated with reasonable certainly. Notably, the consumer does not have to actually spend any money in order to sustain an ascertainable loss. It may be enough that a lien or a debt claim is made against the consumer or his/her property for an ascertainable loss to occur.
In a serious effort to plug the apparent hole in the case, the lawyer engaged an expert in statistics who asserted that although the transaction was not debited to his credit card, it was approved by the credit card company and, as a result, a loss was sustained because the lawyer’s credit line or purchasing limit was reduced by the amount of the shipping fee of $7.95.
The court rejected this contention for two reasons. The first was that the expert did not present any explanation for the conclusions he offered. Secondly, the court reasoned that even if there was a diminution in the available credit, the lawyer failed to establish that this perceived limitation on his credit line damaged him in any way.
In short, the Act requires a claimant to establish that a loss was actually sustained and while the loss need not be financially devastating, it must be susceptible to some type of reasonable measurement.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
What are NJ residents left to do when the officials they put in office ignore their cries for help? Notoriously known for its lack of distress and utter incompetence on behalf of the people, the NJ Legislator just seems to be digging itself deeper into the ditch of corruption.
There is a serious consumer fraud issue occurring throughout the state of NJ, a consumer insurance fraud issue to be exact. State Farm insurance company has been deceiving its customers for years by utilizing ambiguous language within their contracts. Contradiction and pure deceit Is apparent in State Farm’s Personal Articles Policy and Renters’ Policy. After careful observation and evaluation it has become apparent that State Farm has three versions of exactly when a claim by a constituent can be filed.
Clearly stated under the conditions section of State Farm's Renters Policy it states the following, "Further no action with respect to Coverage L shall be brought against us until the obligation of the insured has been determined by final judgment or agreement signed by us" (emphasis added). In contrast, State Farm has given out acknowledgment claims letters stating, "Suit against Us, No action shall be brought unless there has been compliance with the policy provisions. The action must be started within one year after the date of loss of damage." In various correspondences State Farm has also asserted a third position which states: "Although NJ courts have also applied a 'tolling period' for the time the claim is being investigated, this tolling period does not in any way change the fact that the one year period starts to run on the date of the loss."
(There is also an apparent and almost identical mishap within State Farms' personal articles policy.)
THREE DIFFERENT VERSIONS!!!! State farm policies are unfair, unjust, inequitable, misleading and contrary to law. Their policies violate Title 17 under the NJ Statute. As someone who is acquainted with several individuals who have been scammed by State Farm after unfortunate flooding, I have seen first hand the distress it can cause for an individual.
This individual and I'm sure many others have reached out to various NJ Legislators including the big Director of NJ's Insurance Department, Donald Bryan. Assemblyman Gary Schaer has also been reached out to for over a year to help assist in this matter but has declined to get his hands dirty. When will someone step up and help the poor people of NJ? This is a call to all Assembly members, L. Grace Spencer, Gary R. Chiusano, Jack Connors, Denise M. Coyle, John F. McKeon, John S. Wisniewski (just to name a few) and all others that can help.
This is an issue that is probably affecting thousands of individuals throughout the country. If State Farm was so quick to play games with consumers in NJ what makes you think they would stop there. I can almost promise that NJ is not the only state where individuals are being scammed!
It is the tax dollars and the persistence of the people that have helped these elected officials to be where they are. Our tax dollars pay for their offices to operate so that they can aid and guide us, THE PEOPLE!
Attorney General Annie Milgram! Where are you? Why won't you help us? If you only knew that the people you trust to enforce the law actually make it up themselves. Donald Bryan! What are you doing? Ignoring the issue will not make matters any better, it will just expose you for what you really are.
Has anyone else experienced the neglect and incompetence of the NJ Legislator to help you solve their problems? Well the next time one of their volunteers comes and knocks on your door asking for your vote, you be sure to tell them this story.
Post a Comment