Consumer Protection

New York Taxi Medallion Loan Fraud

New York Taxi Medallion

Lieff Cabraser is investigating allegations of fraud and other deceptive practices by taxi medallion lenders in connection with loans provided to New York City taxicab drivers to finance the purchase of taxi medallions.

As reported by the New York Times in May of 2019, various taxi medallion lenders and related financial institutions in their network provided loans to New York City taxicab drivers to help those drivers purchase taxi medallions. In the Times’ reporting, allegations surfaced of artificial inflation of medallion prices, and the issuance of reckless loans to low-income buyers.

Many of the drivers reported signing interest-only loans that included exorbitant fees, including cases where lenders required borrowers to split loans to charge higher interest on one portion of the loan. In some cases, lenders submitted applications indicating that the borrower had an income nearly five times that which was stated on the borrower’s tax return; such a practice would potentially allow the lender to issue a much larger loan to a prospective borrower, and thereby allow the lender to charge higher interest, and more fees. Many of the loan agreements reported on by The Times included so-called ‘balloon provisions’ that allowed a lender to dramatically increase interest rates, to as high as 24%, if the loan was not fully repaid in three years.

When the price of taxi medallions suddenly dropped, hundreds of drivers were left unable to pay the minimum payments, the interest, or the fees associated with their loans. Several drivers have declared bankruptcy; some committed suicide.

If you are or were a New York City taxicab driver, who relied on a taxi medallion lender, broker, or bank for a loan to purchase a taxi medallion, we invite you to complete the contact form below or call us toll-free at 1-800-541-7358.

Contact a Consumer Protection Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser is a national law firm that represents consumers and small businesses throughout the United States in fraud and deceptive practices lawsuits. The information you provide will assist our investigation. We will review and evaluate your complaint for free and without any obligation on your part.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please describe your experience with New York taxi medallion loans:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

VW Porsche Audi Bentley Reduced Fuel Economy Lawsuit

cars in crowded traffic

Lieff Cabraser represents consumers across the U.S. in lawsuits against Volkswagen, Porsche, Audi, and Bentley relating to vehicles that may experience worse fuel economy than promised and advertised. Porsche, Bentley, Audi and VW owners and lessees bought these vehicles believing they would get a certain number of miles per gallon, but in reality they got fewer miles per gallon. They therefore had to buy more gas than they should have had to buy, and spent more money than they should have had to spend.

The potentially affected vehicles are listed at the bottom of this page. If you own or lease one of these vehicles, we urge you to contact a vehicle fraud lawyer at Lieff Cabraser today about your rights and potential recovery.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone Day

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Vehicle make:

What model is the vehicle?

What model year is the vehicle?

Comments & questions:



Vehicles Affected by the 2013-2017 VW Porsche Audi Bentley Reduced Economy & Heightened Emissions Lawsuit

MakeModelEngine Capacity (liters)Model Year(s)
AudiA8L4.02015
AudiA8L6.32013-16
AudiRS74.02015-2016
AudiRS74.02014-2015
AudiS84.02016
AudiS84.02013-2014
BentleyContinental GT4.02013-2017
BentleyContinental GT Convertible4.02015-2017
BentleyContinental GTC4.02013-2014
BentleyFlying Spur4.02015-2016
BentleyFlying Spur6.02014-2016
PorscheCayenne3.62014, 2016
PorscheCayenne (760)3.62013
PorscheCayenne GTS3.62016
PorscheCayenne GTS4.82014
PorscheCayenne GTS (762)4.82013
PorscheCayenne S3.62015-2016
PorscheCayenne S4.82014
PorscheCayenne S (761)4.82013
PorscheCayenne Turbo4.82014
PorscheCayenne Turbo (764)4.82013
PorscheCayenne Turbo S4.82014, 2016
VolkswagenTiguan 4MOTION2.02017
VolkswagenTouareg3.62013-2014

2019 Ford Ranger Fuel Economy, Fuel Efficiency Fraud Investigation

Fuel gauge and pointer

Lieff Cabraser is investigating claims by owners and lessees of 2019 Ford Ranger trucks that the published and advertised fuel economy ratings for these vehicles were fraudulent and deceptive. Ford promised consumers that the Ranger trucks were “the most fuel-efficient gas-powered midsize pickups in America” with a “best-in-class and unsurpassed EPA-estimated fuel economy rating.” As a result, consumers paid a premium for the 2019 Ford Rangers based on these misrepresentations.

The U.S. Department of Justice has opened a criminal probe into whether Ford falsely represented the fuel efficiency of the 2019 Ford Ranger truck and potentially other vehicles. Lawsuits on behalf of consumers have been filed against Ford alleging deliberate misrepresentations and miscalculations with regard to Ford’s testing practices, fuel efficiency, and overall vehicle performance. These suits seek restitution and damages on behalf of owners and lessees of all affected Ford vehicles.

Contact a Ford Fuel Efficiency Fraud Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

If you own or lease a 2019 Ford Ranger, or are concerned about the performance and claims made about other recent Ford vehicles, we urge you to contact a consumer protection lawyer at the national plaintiffs firm of Lieff Cabraser today. We will review your claim for free and with no obligation on your part. The information you provide will help us hold Ford accountable for any fraudulent and deceptive representations it made.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone Day

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

In what state did you purchase or lease your 2019 Ford Ranger?

Was the vehicle purchased new, used, or leased?

When did you acquire the vehicle?

Do you still possess the vehicle?

In what state is your vehicle registered?

Have you received any letters or other communication from Ford or your dealer regarding the fuel efficiency issues with your vehicle? If so, please provide details.

Comments & questions:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

TRW Airbag Safety Defect Lawsuits

Airbag Recall Lawsuits

Defective ZF-TRW airbags were also supplied to FiatChrysler/Dodge/Jeep, Kia, Hyundai, Mitsubishi, Honda, and Toyota/Acura

On April 29, 2019, Lieff Cabraser and Baron & Budd filed a class action lawsuit in federal court in California on behalf of consumers across the U.S. against Hyundai Motor America, Kia Motor America, and ZF-TRW Automotive Holding Corp. over defective vehicle airbags that fail to operate during crashes due to electrical overstress (“EOS”). As detailed in the Complaint, a defect in the application-specific integrated circuit (“ASIC”) built into the airbags causes a failure in the Airbag Control Unit that prevents the airbags and the seat belt pretensioners, both vital to maximizing safety in a vehicle crash, from deploying. As the Complaint further alleges, ZF-TRW, Hyundai, and Kia became aware of the ACU defect as early as 2011, but did nothing to protect consumers or warn of the product dangers until 2018.

The lawsuit against Hyundai and Kia followed widespread reports that over 12 million vehicles in the U.S. from Hyundai, Kia, Mitsubishi, Honda, FiatChrysler, and Toyota with ZF-TRW airbags have defective and unsafe Airbag Control Units (ACUs) that prevent airbags and seatbelt pretensioners from deploying and activating during a crash. Multiple incidents have been reported, including at least one that led to a fatality.

The allegedly defective ACUs are manufactured by TRW Automotive Inc. (a subsidiary of German auto parts maker ZF). The full list to date of vehicles involved with the ZF-TRW defect appears under the contact form below.

The ACU units are supposed to detect crashes and deploy the airbags and seatbelt pre-tensioners. However, the TRW ACUs suffer from electrical overstress in crash conditions, and this can cause the airbags and seat belt pretensioners to fail to operate, greatly increasing the risk of injury. Reports indicate there are no warning signs of the problem, so owners and lessees have no way of knowing the airbag and belt failures will happen.

Contact a Vehicle Safety Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

If you own or lease any of the vehicles listed below, they may contain airbags with defective ACU units. If you are concerned about the safety of your vehicle and its airbags, please use the form below to contact Lieff Cabraser for a prompt and confidential evaluation of your case. You can also call us toll-free at 1 800 541-7358 and ask to speak with attorney Nimish R. Desai.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone Day

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

What is the vehicle year?

What is the vehicle make?

What is the vehicle model?

Comments or any additional information you may wish to provide:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes


Complete list of affected vehicles with ZF-TRW ACU airbags:

  • Acura RLX 2014-2019
  • Acura RLX Hybrid 2014-2019
  • Acura TL 2012-2014
  • Acura TLX 2015-2017
  • Acura TSX 2012-2014
  • Acura TSX Sport Wagon 2014
  • Acura TSX Sportswagon 2012-2013
  • Dodge Nitro 2010-2011
  • Dodge Ram 1500 2009
  • Dodge Ram 3500 2010
  • Fiat 500 2012-2019
  • Honda Accord 2013-2015
  • Honda Accord Hybrid 2014-2015
  • Honda Civic 2012-2015
  • Honda Civic GX 2012-2015
  • Honda Civic Hybrid 2012-2015
  • Honda Civic SI 2012-2015
  • Honda CR-V 2012-2016
  • Honda Fit 2012-2017
  • Honda Fit EV 2013-2014
  • Honda Ridgeline 2012-2014
  • Hyundai Sonata 2013-2019
  • Hyundai Sonata Hybrid 2013-2019
  • Jeep Compass 2015-2017
  • Jeep Liberty 2010-2012
  • Jeep Patriot 2015-2017
  • Jeep Wrangler 2010-2018
  • Kia Forte 2013
  • Kia Forte KOUP 2013
  • Kia Optima 2013-2019
  • Kia Optima Hybrid 2012-2016
  • Kia Sedona 2014
  • Mitsubishi Lancer 2013-2017
  • Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution 2013-2015
  • Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart 2014-2015
  • Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback 2013-2016
  • Mitsubishi Outlander 2013
  • Ram 1500 2009-2012
  • Ram 2500 2010-2012
  • Ram 3500 2010-2012
  • Ram 4500 2011-2012
  • Ram 5500 2011-2012
  • Toyota Avalon 2012-2018
  • Toyota Avalon Hybrid 2013-2018
  • Toyota Corolla 2011-2019
  • Toyota Corolla IM 2017-2018
  • Toyota Corolla Matrix 2011-2013
  • Toyota Sequoia 2012-2017
  • Toyota Tacoma 2012-2019
  • Toyota Tundra 2012-2017

Valsartan Contamination Consumer Fraud Litigation

Doctor with pills

Huge amounts of the hypertension drug Valsartan, the generic equivalent of the hypertension drug Diovan, were contaminated with a carcinogen called NDMA. In the wake of the Valsartan contamination and ensuing drug recall, lawsuits were filed across the United States on behalf of patients who purchased the unsafe contaminated drug, including for fraud and violation of warranties as well as other laws relating to the safe sale and distribution of prescription drugs. Valsartan is sold in the U.S. by three companies, Teva, Major Pharmaceuticals, and Solco Healthcare, and all of the blood drug that was recalled was manufactured by the Zhejiang Huahai Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. of China.

The recall began after the U.S. FDA announced it had reason to believe some of the Valsartan entering the U.S. had become contaminated with N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), considered a probable human carcinogen. The agency is still investigating, but said the contamination was believed to be related to changes in the way that Valsartan was manufactured. There are allegations in the lawsuits that as early as 2012 distributors ignored clear warning signs regarding the operating standards at the manufacturing plant in China

Valsartan recalls are ongoing, and now plaintiffs’ claims for economic loss are being included in the budding federal blood medication multidistrict litigation recently centralized in New Jersey.

Outreach to Patients Using Valsartan for Hypertension Control

If you have been prescribed valsartan and you were informed by your doctor, or otherwise learned, that your drug was recalled, the fraud and consumer safety lawyers at Lieff Cabraser welcome the chance to talk with you about your case against the manufacturer and distributors of Valsartan. You can contact us using the form below, or by calling us toll-free at ‪1 800 321-1510‬. All information will be treated with the highest confidentiality, and there is no charge for our review of your case.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone Day

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please describe your experience with Valsartan:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

Select Portfolio Servicing Mortgage Fraud

Mortgage Fraud

Lieff Cabraser is investigating widespread complaints that Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. is defrauding customers through improper interest rate change calculations and illegal collection of late fees on post-acceleration mortgage loans. As a result, you may be paying too much for your mortgage loan.

Contact a Consumer Protection Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

If you have a mortgage serviced by Select Portfolio Servicing, you may be paying too much, including improper and illegal late fees. Contact a national consumer rights lawyer at Lieff Cabraser today for a free, no-obligation review of your potential case.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please describe your concerns about Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

Greenway Health Breach of Contract and Fraud

Electronic Medical Records

Lieff Cabraser is investigating allegations of fraud and other deceptive practices by Greenway Health, LLC (“Greenway”) in connection with its sale of Prime Suite, Intergy, and SuccessEHR — three Electronic Health Record (“EHR”) systems marketed to and used by healthcare providers.

For years, Greenway has promised that its software met and would meet the requirements of the Federal Government’s Meaningful Use program, which sets standards for EHR software. Unfortunately, evidence is emerging that Greenway’s software does not comply with these requirements and may not have complied with them for years.

Greenway first acknowledged problems with its software in the fall of 2018, when it alerted customers that its software could not be relied upon by providers when submitting statistics confirming the meaningful use of a certified EHR system (now under the interoperability component of the Federal MIPS program). Greenway stated that its customers would need to file hardship applications, which will result in unexpected adjustments to the scoring methodology applied by the MIPS program. This disruption could result in negative consequences for Greenway’s customers, including the loss of incentive payments or even financial penalties.

In early 2019, Greenway further disclosed that its software had failed to accurately calculate some of the quality measures used for reporting to the MIPS program. For many providers, this adverse information was disclosed shortly before the deadline for reporting to the Government, and could result in providers experiencing further problems with submissions to the MIPS program or incurring financial penalties.

Finally, in early 2019, Greenway settled a False Claims Act lawsuit brought by the United States Department of Justice for $57.25 million. The Government’s complaint against Greenway, which was only recently revealed to the public, cites numerous admissions by Greenway’s employees that its software did not satisfy the requirements of the Meaningful Use program. The complaint alleges that despite knowing the problems with its software, Greenway falsely represented to users that the software was fully compliant with the Meaningful Use program.

If you are or were a customer, user or business partner of Greenway who relied on Greenway’s assurances that Prime Suite, SuccessEHR, or Intergy satisfied the requirements of the Meaningful Use program, we invite you to complete the contact form below or call us toll-free at 1 800 541-7358.

Contact a Consumer Protection Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser is a national law firm that represents consumers and small businesses throughout the United States in fraud and deceptive practices lawsuits, including healthcare providers in a lawsuit against eClinicalWorks, a large EHR vendor. The information you provide will assist our investigation. We will review and evaluate your complaint for free and without any obligation on your part.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone Day

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please describe your experience with Greenway Health:


Fleetcor

Truckstop

Lieff Cabraser and co-counsel represent a family-owned trucking company on behalf of a class of plaintiffs in federal fraud litigation against Fleetcor over allegations that despite being sold as a cost-saving device, Fleetcor’s “Fuelman” gas card was a predatory scheme to charge clients more than the face amount of gas at pumps.

As detailed in the Complaint, the Fuelman card was more expensive than the price at the pump because of Fuelman’s allegedly deceptive fees and charges, often several dollars for each trip to the pump. This was so even though Fleetcor promised its customers that they would pay “No fees for set-up, transactions, or annual membership.” The improper and predatory fees included “Minimum Program Administration Fees,” “Clean Advantage Fees,” and miscellaneous “Other Charges.”

Contact Lieff Cabraser

We are interested in learning of any problems you have had with Fleetcor “Fuelman” gas cards and related charges. The information you provide will assist in holding Fleetcor accountable for its alleged fraud and predatory conduct. Please use the form below to contact us. We will review your claim without any charge or obligation on your part.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please describe your experience with Fleetcor's "Fuelman" gas cards:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

Westgate Resorts

Timeshare Log Cabins in the Mountains

On September 26, 2018, Lieff Cabraser and co-counsel filed a consumer fraud lawsuit in federal court in the Eastern District of Tennessee on behalf of purchasers of timeshare interests at the Westgate Smoky Mountain Resort in Gatlinburg, Tennessee, against Westgate Resorts, Ltd. and its related entities.

The complaint in the lawsuit alleges that Westgate engages in fraudulent conduct, fails to disclose material facts and required disclosures, and fails to provide purchasers adequate use and enjoyment of the timeshares they have purchased, all in violation of Tennessee state law. The complaint alleges that as part of its scheme, Westgate utilizes a closing folio that contains a “secret pocket” which closing agents often use to hide key disclosures.

The complaint also alleges that because Westgate oversells its units, restricts their availability, and uses many of the units for nightly rentals and for soliciting new buyers, units are often completely unavailable for “owners” during the times they intend to use them. In short, according to the complaint, Westgate’s scheme leaves purchasers with nothing but the obligation to pay additional fees and charges.

Contact Lieff Cabraser

If you have experienced these kinds of problems at Westgate Resorts, we welcome the opportunity to speak with you. Use the form below or call us at 1 800 541-7358 for a free, no-obligation review of your case.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please describe your experience with Westgate:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

Wells Fargo Bank Fees for Unwanted Bank Products

Bank

Wells Fargo is alleged to have charged customers monthly fees for years for dozens of products they didn’t want and didn’t understand

Lieff Cabraser is investigating consumer complaints that Wells Fargo charged potentially hundreds of thousands of banking customers monthly fees for unwanted pet insurance, legal services and other add-on services the customer did not consent to or use.

The new complaints come after Wells Fargo is already reeling in the wake of multiple other customer fraud scandals, including the creation of millions of similarly unconsented and unwanted bank customer credit accounts. These new monthly add-on product charges are being investigated by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which is focusing on how much customers were deceived, customer awareness of the products added to their monthly bills, and their ability to cancel the add-on products.

The bank claims it stopped selling these more than 85 consumer add-on products some time in 2017, but is only now notifying its customers. However, as the Wall Street Journal has reported, “some products are being terminated immediately, while others aren’t being renewed after they expire.”

Contact a Bank Fraud Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

If you believe you were charged monthly fees for unwanted add-on products, please use the form below or call us today at 1 800 541-7358. Lieff Cabraser’s consumer protection lawyers welcome the opportunity to review your case without charge or obligation. The information you provide will help us hold Wells Fargo fully accountable for any of these most-recently alleged improper and illegal practices.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone Day

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please describe your experience with Wells Fargo add-on banking products:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

Private Parking Citation Fraud

Parking lot

Lieff Cabraser, a national law firm with decades of experience representing and recovering money for victims of fraud, is investigating SP+, a parking lot operator, and Citation Collection Systems (operated by T2 Systems), for issuing private and illegitimate parking fines, collecting personally identifiable information from state departments of motor vehicles in violation of federal law, and then sending predatory mailings in an effort to collect payment.

Contact a Consumer Fraud Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

If you received a mailing from SP+ or Citation Collection Services instructing you to pay a parking citation, we would welcome the opportunity to speak with you. The notice you received in the mail may read “Courtesy Notice for Parking Violation.” You also may have received a letter that appeared to originate from a collections agency. Regardless of the form of the mailing, you also may have been asked to make payment at www.violationnotices.com.

The information you provide will assist us in holding these entities accountable for their deceptive conduct. There is no charge for our review of your case, and calls are confidential. Please use the form on this page or call us toll-free today at 1 800 541-7358.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Location where you received citation (address preferred or name of parking area with city and state):

Please describe the notice you received in the mail regarding the citation and any other helpful details:

Did you pay the citation?

Comments or additional information:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

Church & Dwight Vitafusion B Folic Acid Underreporting

vitamin b complex gummy

Lieff Cabraser is investigating consumer complaints that Church & Dwight Co. understates the amount of folic acid in its Vitafusion B Complex Adult Vitamin Gummies dietary supplements, making those Vitafusion B Gummies potentially health-threatening. This deceptive business practice of understating the folic acid is viewed as a fraud that breaches various warranties surrounding the Vitafusion product and provides unjust enrichment to Church & Dwight at consumers’ expense.

VITAFUSION B FOLIC ACID DANGERS
If you or a family member have been taking Church & Dwight Vitafusion B Gummies and are concerned about the alleged fraud or potentially dangerous health effects, please contact a consumer protection lawyer at Lieff Cabraser today about your case.

New Jersey corporation Church & Dwight produces and sells many dietary supplements, including Vitafusion B. Testing conducted on behalf of consumers indicates that Vitafusion B contains more than three times the amount of folic acid per serving indicated on the product label, an overabundance is potentially harmful. The Office of Dietary Supplements at the National Institute of Health notes that such elevated consumption of folic acid can increase the risk of heart attack, increase the risk of certain precancerous tumors becoming malignant, and exacerbate anemia.

Contact a National Consumer Protection Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

If you or a family member have been taking Church & Dwight Vitafusion B Gummies and are concerned about the alleged fraud or potentially dangerous health effects, we invite you to contact a consumer protection lawyer at Lieff Cabraser about your case. There is no charge or obligation, and the information you provide will help us hold Church & Dwight accountable for any fraud or injuries to consumers.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please describe your experience with Vitafusion B Gummies:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

American Airlines Improper/Illegal Ticket Change Fees

airplane

Lieff Cabraser is investigating passenger complaints that American Airlines is charging travelers a $200 ticket change fee when they try to change their plane tickets less than 24 hours after the original purchase, in apparent violation of applicable rules and laws.

Contact a Consumer Protection Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

If you are an American Airlines passenger and have been charged this kind of $200 change fee within the first 24 hours after purchasing tickets, we urge you to contact a consumer protection lawyer at Lieff Cabraser about your potential case by using the form below or calling us today at 1 800 541-7358. The information you provide will help us hold American Airlines accountable for improper ticket fee charges and any other violations of the rules governing plane ticket purchases in the U.S.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone Day

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please describe your experience with American Airlines ticket adjustment charges:

Comments or additional information:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

New York Health Insurance Late Payments

Health Insurance Fraud Investigation

Lieff Cabraser is investigating complaints by many New Yorkers that health insurance companies are failing to timely pay health insurance claims.

Patients in New York often find themselves visiting medical doctors and other medical practice groups that are not “in network” with their health insurance company, and therefore have to submit an “out of network” claim for benefits and reimbursement. Though insurance companies usually only pay a percentage of the total out-of-network medical visit compared to in-network providers, many New Yorkers prefer the freedom to see their provider of choice, including providers that may not be “in network” with any insurance company.

Many New Yorkers are unaware that all of the below-listed insurance companies that do business in New York are required to promptly reimburse you following any out-of-network insurance claim submission for reimbursement. Failure of the insurance company to repay you within 30 days (or 45 days, if the claim was submitted by regular mail) is a violation of New York law and may entitle you to compensation that includes interest on the amount of money the insurance company failed to timely pay to you.

We are investigating these allegations with respect to numerous insurance companies doing business in New York, including:

  • Aetna
  • Capital District Physicians
  • CIGNA Health and Life Insurance Company
  • CIGNA Life Insurance Company of New York
  • Combined Life Insurance Company of New York
  • Community Blue (aka HealthNow)
  • Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield
  • Empire HealthChoice Assurance, Inc
  • Excellus
  • Health Republic Insurance of New York, Corp.
  • HealthNow New York Inc.
  • HIP Health Maintenance Organization
  • Independent Health Association, Inc.
  • Oscar Insurance Corporation
  • Oxford Health Plans (NY), Inc.
  • UnitedHealthcare of New York, Inc.

Contact a Consumer Protection Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

If you, or you on behalf of a loved one, have submitted a health insurance claim to be reimbursed after seeing an out-of-network provider, and the claim was not paid for 45 or more days after your submission, please contact us so that we can evaluate your claim to see if you would be entitled to compensation.

We are also interested in speaking with out-of-network medical providers who provide ‘balance billing’ options to their patients and similarly experience a delay in the payment of submitted insurance claims.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone Day

Telephone Eve

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please list your insurer:

Comments or questions:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

QuoteWizard Robocall and Text Complaints

Pile of different modern smartphones.

Lieff Cabraser represents a proposed nationwide class of consumers in litigation alleging that QuoteWizard is violating consumer privacy laws via unconsented text messages and automated “robocalls” to consumers across the U.S. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) prohibits abusive telephone practices by lenders and marketers, and places strict limits on the use of autodialers to call or send texts or robocalls to cell phones. Lieff Cabraser has spearheaded a series of groundbreaking class actions under the TCPA that have led to over $280 million in settlements for consumers.

If you have been harassed by such calls or messages from QuoteWizard, contact a Lieff Cabraser consumer protection lawyer today. You can use the form below or call us toll-free at 1 800 541-7358. There is no charge or obligation for our review of your complaint.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Was the call/message sent to a cell phone, landline, or text message?

If you received a call, did the call use a prerecorded message?

Total number of calls/texts received:

Comments & questions:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

Ford Super Duty Diesel Emissions Complaints

Diesel Pollution Fraud

Lieff Cabraser is investigating consumer complaints that Ford Motor Company illegally installed “defeat devices” in its model year 2011-2017 F-250 and F-350 diesel Super Duty trucks to evade emissions standards.

Ford advertised the trucks as their “cleanest ever” and claimed they achieved “best in class” fuel economy. In reality, Ford’s Super Duty diesel trucks pollute well above legal limits and can achieve the touted fuel efficiencies only by substantially reducing emissions controls in actual road use. On-road and laboratory testing indicates that under normal conditions, the trucks emit Nitrous Oxide (NOx) up to five times the legal limit; with increased payload (towing), the trucks emit up to 15 times the legal limit; and at low temperatures, the trucks emit up to 30 times the legal limit.

If these allegations are correct, Ford’s Super Duty trucks are not only producing excess emissions with harmful effects on public health, but Ford is also defrauding consumers by charging them thousands of dollars extra for “clean” vehicles that are not in fact clean, and that cannot achieve the advertised fuel efficiency without producing dangerous emissions far in excess of promised amounts and legally permitted limits.

Contact a Consumer Protection Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

If you purchased or leased a Ford Super Duty diesel truck, we encourage you to contact a consumer protection lawyer at Lieff Cabraser. We welcome the opportunity to learn of your experiences with the vehicle and answer your questions. We will review your claim for free, confidentially, and with no obligation on your part. The information you provide will help us hold Ford accountable for its alleged violations of environmental protection laws and any deceptions perpetrated upon its customers.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone Day

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

What model year is your Ford Super Duty diesel truck?

In what state did you purchase or lease the vehicle?

Was the vehicle purchased new, used, or leased?

When did you acquire the vehicle?

Do you still possess the vehicle?

In what state is your vehicle registered?

Comments & questions:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes


 

California Unpaid Mortgage Interest Litigation

Mortgage Fraud

Lieff Cabraser represents California homeowners in class action litigation against Bank of America alleging BofA fails to comply with a California law that requires banks to pay interest on mortgage escrow accounts.

In 2010, the United States Congress enacted the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act which included provisions to correct abusive and deceptive lending practices that contributed to the mortgage crisis, specifically with regard to the administration of escrow accounts. Recently, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected Bank of America’s assertion that the California law requiring the payment of interest on mortgage escrow accounts could not applied to it, despite Congress’s enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act.

Bank of America must now face the lawsuit that seeks to compel the bank to pay interest on the funds consumer borrowers hold in their mortgage escrow accounts. The suit also brings breach of contract claims against the bank, as plaintiff’s mortgage language specifically required Bank of America to pay escrow interest if applicable state laws require it. BofA refused to pay the required interest even though some other national banks in California do.

Contact a Consumer Protection Attorney at Lieff Cabraser

If you have a mortgage with Bank of America or any other California bank on which you suspect interest was not paid as mandated by California law, please contact us today about your case. The information you provide will assist us in learning of the full extent of the alleged fraud and in obtaining damages for affected customers, including all profits that may have been unjustly earned by the companies. We will review your complaint for free and without any obligation on your part.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

What is the name of your bank?

Please describe your experience:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes


 

Credit Suisse Deferred Broker Compensation

Bank

Lieff Cabraser represents a proposed class of former Credit Suisse financial advisers in a case challenging Credit Suisse’s alleged failure to pay millions dollars in deferred compensation after shuttering its U.S. brokerage operations in late 2015. The plaintiffs allege that Credit Suisse canceled deferred compensation owed to advisers under the false pretenses that they had supposedly voluntarily “resigned” from Credit Suisse, when in fact Credit Suisse simply ceased operating this business.

The case is Laver v. Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, N.D. Cal., No. 18-00828.

If you are a broker who has experienced Credit Suisse withholding your compensation, we welcome the opportunity to speak with you about your case. Please use the form below to contact us.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone Day

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please describe your broker experience with Credit Suisse:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes

HCA Healthcare Fraudulent Discount Billing

Health Insurance Fraud Investigation

Lieff Cabraser is investigating complaints that HCA Healthcare is overcharging patients by improperly applying its pay-now discounts. Under the pay-now option, HCA member hospitals give patients a 10% discount for making immediate payment during a hospital or emergency room visit. The charges are based on estimates, however, as the hospital doesn’t know the real charges until they send the bill to the patient’s insurer.

The alleged fraud occurs when patients overpay via those estimates — when the care ends up costing less than a patient paid via the pay-now option, HCA does not apply the discount to the overpaid amount. The chart below illustrates the problem as reflected in a sample procedure with an original estimated cost of $1,000 that is ultimately determined to cost the patient only $400.

Sample HCA Visit & Improper Pay-Now Overage Refund
Hospital estimate $1,000
Pay-now payment by patient $900 (includes 10% discount)
Adjusted visit cost $400
Amount HCA actually bills patient $400
Amount HCA should bill patient $360 (10% pay-now discount should still apply)
Improper overage to HCA $40

This is just a single example. Had the hospital’s original estimate been accurate, a patient opting for the pay-now discount would only have paid $360. But HCA ends up billing the patient $400 for the visit because HCA fails to refund properly. Patients allege the deceptive practice allows HCA to improperly pocket the 10% discount that should have been added to the refunded overpaid fee – 10% of the difference between whatever the hospital’s original estimate was and the actual visit cost.

While the individual improper overcharges can seem minor, when scaled across HCA’s 174 hospitals and 119 freestanding surgery centers any improper overbilling may reach into the millions.

Contact a Healthcare Fraud Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

If you or a family member suspect you have been improperly billed after an HCA hospital or ER pay-now payment was reduced from the hospital’s original estimate, we welcome the opportunity to speak with you about your potential case. There is no charge or obligation involved in speaking with us, and the information you provide may substantiate your own lawsuit as well as helping us hold HCA accountable for any billing fraud or other financial improprieties.


First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address

City

State

Zip

Telephone Day

Telephone Eve

How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please describe any experiences with HCA pay-now overcharges/omitted discounts:

Please sign me up for your Consumer Law newsletter. Yes