Ad Law Access https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access Updates on advertising law and privacy law trends, issues, and developments Wed, 01 May 2024 18:02:00 -0400 60 hourly 1 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Issues Federal Preemption Determinations Regarding State Gift Card Laws https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-issues-federal-preemption-determinations-regarding-state-gift-card-laws https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-issues-federal-preemption-determinations-regarding-state-gift-card-laws Tue, 30 Apr 2013 14:12:47 -0400 The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) recently released its final determinations concerning whether Maine and Tennessee unclaimed property laws were preempted by the federal gift card law prohibiting expiration of gift card funds within five years of issuance. The decisions represented the first time that the CFPB used its authority to issue preemption determinations. More information, along with other developments in consumer finance law, is available at

http://www.consumerfinancelawblog.com/

]]>
CFPB Finds State Unclaimed Property Law Preempted by Federal Credit CARD Act https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/cfpb-finds-state-unclaimed-property-law-preempted-by-federal-credit-card-act https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/cfpb-finds-state-unclaimed-property-law-preempted-by-federal-credit-card-act Tue, 30 Apr 2013 14:07:14 -0400 Last week, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued its final determination regarding whether Maine and Tennessee unclaimed property laws were preempted by the federal Credit Card Accountability and Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 (“the Credit CARD Act”). Both state laws provided that certain gift cards would be deemed abandoned as early as two years after purchase and thus require the issuer to transfer the value of the card to the state as unclaimed property. The CFPB was tasked with deciding whether those laws conflicted with the requirement under the Credit CARD Act that gift card funds not expire for at least five years after issuance. Gift card issuers and sellers have been watching these matters with the hope that the inconsistency between federal and state gift card law requirements might be eliminated by the CFPB.

The CFPB distinguished the two states laws on the basis of whether the card issuer was required to continue to honor the gift card after the funds were deemed abandoned and turned over to the state. Under Maine law, as interpreted by the Office of the State Treasurer for Maine and communicated to the CFPB, the issuer was required to continue to honor the card even after the issuer had transferred the underlying funds to the state as abandoned property. The CFPB reasoned that “[b]ecause the Maine Act does not interfere with consumers’ ability to use their gift cards at the point-of-sale for at least as long as they are guaranteed that right” under federal law, the Maine law did not conflict with federal law and was not preempted.

While the CFPB acknowledged that the Maine law potentially subjects the card issuer to duplicative liability on the same card, it noted that this was the case notwithstanding the federal provision because “the Maine Act itself requires abandoned gift cards to be honored indefinitely.” The CFPB further explained that it expressed no view on potential constitutional due process issues of requiring an issuer to honor abandoned gift cards when those funds had already been transferred to the state. The CFPB explained that it could not opine on such concerns because its role was limited to a determination on federal preemption.

With regard to the Tennessee law, the CFPB explained that, unlike the Maine law, it did not require the issuer to continue to honor the card after the funds had been transferred to the state. To the contrary, Tennessee law expressly provided that Tennessee assumed custody and responsibility for the underlying funds after transfer and therefore permitted the issuer to decline to honor funds once transferred to the state. As such, the CFPB reasoned that consumers attempting to reclaim their property would be required to submit an unclaimed property claim form to Tennessee’s Department of Treasury. Because such a requirement requiring consumers to seek refund from the state conflicted with the Credit CARD Act’s mandate to permit use of funds for at least five years after card issuance, the Tennessee law was in direct conflict with, and thus preempted by, federal law.

We will continue to monitor the case, as the CFPB’s determinations may be destined for appeal. More information on developments in gift card laws is available at www.adlawaccess.com.

]]>
Groupon Reaches Settlement in Gift Card Lawsuits https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/groupon-reaches-settlement-in-gift-card-lawsuits https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/groupon-reaches-settlement-in-gift-card-lawsuits Thu, 05 Apr 2012 11:52:08 -0400 Last year, we discussed a class action lawsuit against Groupon alleging that the company’s deals violate California and federal gift card laws. The plaintiffs argued that Groupon’s deals constitute gift cards, and that the expiration on the deals violate federal and state laws that restrict expiration dates. Although Groupon denies they violated any law, the company recently reached a proposed settlement of several consolidated lawsuits in California.

Under the proposed settlement, class members who purchased Groupon vouchers between November 2008 and December 1, 2011 will be able to redeem expired vouchers, and if they are unable to do so, obtain a refund from an $8.5 million settlement fund. If a merchant refuses to redeem a settlement voucher, the class member will be entitled to receive a refund of the purchase price plus 20% of the promotional value.

Groupon also agreed to make changes to how it structures and advertises its deals. For example, Groupon agreed to clearly and conspicuously that any expiration dates apply only to the promotional value of the deal, and that the purchase price portion of the deal does not expire until the voucher is redeemed or refunded. And they agreed to limit the number of its annual Daily Deals that expire less than 30 days from the date of issuance.

Gift cards and deal vouchers may be subject to a patchwork of laws that are spread out across all states and the federal level, and it’s not always easy to figure out which laws apply or how to comply with them. Plaintiff’s lawyers are taking advantage of this confusion and filing lawsuits against these types of deals. Accordingly, companies should take a close look at any offers that combine pre-payment with an expiration date in order to evaluate their risk of being a target of these types of suits.

]]>
Court Approves Settlement in Gift Card Lawsuit https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/court-approves-settlement-in-gift-card-lawsuit https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/court-approves-settlement-in-gift-card-lawsuit Wed, 09 Mar 2011 12:00:06 -0500 This week, a California Superior Court approved a settlement agreement in a class-action lawsuit alleging that Amway Corporation and its related companies violated gift card laws. Amway’s gift cards included a notation instructing consumers to "redeem before" a certain date. The plaintiffs argued that this notation violated a California law that prohibits expiration dates on gift cards. As part of the settlement, Amway agreed to stop using the “redeem before” language and to allow consumers to redeem or replace more than $20 million worth of expired gift cards.

Approximately half the states have laws that either restrict or prohibit expiration dates, and a federal law mandates that gift cards must be valid for at least five years. As we’ve noted before (click here, for example), consumers and plaintiffs' lawyers are taking a close look at how gift cards are marketed and sold and have been quick to file lawsuits against perceived violations. Companies should examine their gift card offers in order to evaluate their risk of being a target of these types of suits.

]]>
Recent Lawsuits Allege Groupon and LivingSocial Violate Gift Certificate Laws https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/recent-lawsuits-allege-groupon-and-livingsocial-violate-gift-certificate-laws https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/recent-lawsuits-allege-groupon-and-livingsocial-violate-gift-certificate-laws Thu, 17 Feb 2011 10:06:10 -0500 Last month, consumers filed a class action lawsuit against Groupon, alleging that the company’s deals violate California and federal gift certificate laws. This month, a similar lawsuit was filed against LivingSocial, alleging that the company’s deals violate Washington and federal gift certificate laws.

Approximately half the states have laws that either restrict or prohibit expiration dates. In addition, a recent federal law requires gift certificates to be valid for at least 5 years. The plaintiffs in these cases are arguing that the Groupon and LivingSocial deals constitute gift certificates and that the expiration on the deals violate federal and state laws. In addition, the plaintiffs in the LivingSocial lawsuit are arguing that the no cash back provision on the company’s deals violates a Washington law that requires issuers to give cash back, under certain circumstances.

These lawsuits demonstrate that plaintiff’s lawyers are attempting to stretch gift certificate laws to cover various types of offers that don’t fit the traditional mold of gift certificates. Companies should take a close look at any offers that combine pre-payment with an expiration date in order to evaluate their risk of being a target of these types of suits.

]]>
UPDATE: New Gift Card Rules To Take Effect on August 22, 2010 and Disclosure Requirements Will Now Take Effect on January 31, 2011 https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/update-new-gift-card-rules-to-take-effect-on-august-22-2010-and-disclosure-requirements-will-now-take-effect-on-january-31-2011 https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/update-new-gift-card-rules-to-take-effect-on-august-22-2010-and-disclosure-requirements-will-now-take-effect-on-january-31-2011 Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:47:57 -0400 This is an update to an earlier post regarding the Federal Reserve Board’s final rules implementing the gift card provisions of the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 (“CARD Act”). On July 27, 2010, H.R. 5502 was signed into law, extending the effective date of disclosure requirements under the CARD Act from August 22, 2010 to January 31, 2011, for qualifying gift cards produced prior to April 1, 2010. You may recall that the rules restrict fees and expiration dates on various types of gift certificates and cards, and require sellers and issuers to make specific disclosures.

Gift Certificates, Store Gift Cards, and General-Use Prepaid Cards

Generally, the rules restrict fees, expiration dates, and impose certain disclosure requirements for (A) gift certificates, (B) store gift cards, and (C) general-use prepaid cards, as these terms (collectively, “gift cards”) are defined in the CARD Act.

Definitions

(A) Gift Certificates – are defined in the CARD Act as a card, code, or other device that is: (i) redeemable at a single merchant or an affiliated group of merchants that share the same name, mark, or logo; (ii) issued in a specified amount that may not be increased or reloaded; (iii) purchased on a prepaid basis in exchange for payment; and (iv) honored upon presentation by such single merchant or affiliated group of merchants for goods or services.

(B) Store Gift Cards – these types of cards are commonly known as “closed-loop cards”, and are essentially the same as Gift Certificates, but are reloadable or may be increased in value. The CARD Act specifically defines these cards as electronic promises, plastic cards, or other payment codes or devices that are: (i) redeemable at a single merchant or an affiliated group of merchants that share the same name, mark, or logo; (ii) issued in a specified amount, whether or not that amount may be increased in value or reloaded at the request of the holder; (iii) purchased on a prepaid basis in exchange for payment; and (iv) honored upon presentation by such single merchant or affiliated group of merchants for goods or services.

(C) General-Use Prepaid Cards – commonly referred to as “open-loop cards”, are defined in the CARD Act as cards or other payment codes or devices issued by any person that are: (i) redeemable at multiple, unaffiliated merchants or service providers, or automated teller machines; (ii) issued in a requested amount, whether or not that amount may, at the option of the issuer, be increased in value or reloaded if requested by the holder; (iii) purchased or loaded on a prepaid basis; and (iv) honored, upon presentation, by merchants for goods or services or at automated teller machines.

Exclusions

Gift Certificates, Store Gift Cards, and General-Use Prepaid Cards, do not include an electronic promise, plastic card, or payment code or device that is: (i) used solely for telephone services; (ii) reloadable and not marketed or labeled as a gift card or gift certificate; (iii) a loyalty, award, or promotional gift card, as defined by the Federal Reserve Board; (iv) not marketed to the general public; (v) issued in paper form only (including for tickets and events); or (vi) redeemable solely for admission to events or venues at a particular location or group of affiliated locations, including services or goods obtainable at the event/venue after admission or in conjunction with admission to such events/venues.

Fees

Under the rules to the CARD Act, no person may impose a dormancy, inactivity, or service fee with respect to Gift Certificates, Store Gift Cards, or General-Use Prepaid Cards unless all of the following occur:

  1. No Activity for 1 Year – fees are only imposed if there has been no activity for 1 year prior to imposing the fee; and
  2. 1 Fee Per Month – only 1 fee is imposed per calendar month; and
  3. Disclosures – disclosures regarding fees must be clearly and conspicuously stated on gift cards, and disclosures must be provided to purchasers before issuance.

The rules additionally prohibit fees for replacing or reissuing an expired Gift Certificate, Store Gift Card, or General-Use Prepaid Card if the remaining funds remain valid. This is to ensure consumers may access and use the underlying funds for a full 5-year period.

Expiration

Expiration dates are also prohibited for Gift Certificates, Store Gift Cards, or General-Use Prepaid Cards except if:

  1. Expiration of Funds from Date of Issuance – the expiration date of the funds underlying the Gift Certificate is 5 years or more from the Gift Certificate’s issuance date, or
  2. Expiration of Funds from Date of Last Load – for Store Gift Cards or General- Use Prepaid Cards, the expiration date of the funds underlying the gift card is 5 years or more after the date of the last load of funds.

Disclosure Requirements

The rules to the CARD Act also require the disclosure of permitted expiration dates and of all other fees, such as initial issuance fees and cash-out fees. These disclosures must be provided on or with the Gift Certificate, Store Gift Card, or General-Use Prepaid Card prior to purchase. Additionally, a toll-free number and, if available, a web site – that a consumer may use to obtain fee information or to order a replacement – must be disclosed on the Gift Certificate, Store Gift Card, or General-Use Prepaid Card.

Information

Check back for future posts on further details of the rules, including posts specific to loyalty, award or promotional gift cards and preemption analysis for state gift cards laws.

]]>
Financial Reform Negotiations Conclude https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/financial-reform-negotiations-conclude https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/financial-reform-negotiations-conclude Fri, 25 Jun 2010 14:59:19 -0400 After working through the night, the Congressional conference committee tasked with negotiating a final financial reform bill voted 27-16 to approve the bill and send it back to each chamber for a final vote on the conference report.

Recaps of the long day and night of negotiations and the final bill are available from Poltico, the Wall Street Journal, and American Banker, among many others.

With regard to certain of the issues we have been following closely here, in the end, auto dealers will be exempt from the purview of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, but payday lenders and other non-bank financial service providers will be subject to the new regulator. In addition, the Federal Reserve will be permitted to cap interchange fees, except for those on cards issued by governments.

The bill includes myriad other important provisions related to mortgage lending, the activities of banks, insurance regulation, corporate governance, and more. The Wall Street Journal provides an overview of some of the “major” provisions. Over the coming weeks and months we will be taking a closer look at certain aspects of the final bill and their implications, for example, increased litigation risk for financial service providers, including merchants and retailers.

]]>
RETAILERS: New Colorado Consumer Protection Law Requires Redemption of Gift Cards with a Cash Value of $5 or Less https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/retailers-new-colorado-consumer-protection-law-requires-redemption-of-gift-cards-with-a-cash-value-of-5-or-less https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/retailers-new-colorado-consumer-protection-law-requires-redemption-of-gift-cards-with-a-cash-value-of-5-or-less Thu, 20 May 2010 17:57:48 -0400 On April 29, 2010, Colorado Governor Bill Ritter signed a consumer protection bill which requires gift card issuers to redeem the card, upon request, if the remaining value is $5 or less. In addition, it bans retailers, restaurants and others from selling gift cards that have any type of fee, including a service fee, a dormancy fee, an inactivity fee or a maintenance fee. This new law will apply to gift cards issued on or after August 11, 2010.

Under this law, “gift card” is defined as a prefunded tangible or electronic record of a specific monetary value evidencing an issuer’s agreement to provide goods, services, credit, money, or anything of value. A gift card includes a tangible card, electronic card, stored-value card, or certificate or similar instrument, card, or tangible record, all of which contain a microprocessor chip, magnetic chip, or other means for the storage of information and for which the value is decremented upon each use.

A gift card does not include a prefunded tangible or electronic record issued by, or on behalf of, any government agency, a gift certificate that is issued only on paper, a prepaid telecommunications or technology card, or a card that is donated or sold below face value at a volume discount to an employer or charitable organization for fundraising purposes. Likewise, a card or certificate issued to a consumer pursuant to an awards, loyalty, or promotional program for which no money or other item of monetary value was exchanged is expressly excluded from the definition of a gift card.

In addition, this new law does not apply to gift cards that are usable with multiple sellers of goods or services, but expressly applies to a gift card usable only with affiliated sellers of goods or services.

A violation of this new law will be deemed a violation of Colorado’s deceptive trade practice law.

Once the law is effective, Colorado will join a handful of other states with laws requiring redemption of gift cards with less than a certain cash value. Under California law, as just one example, any gift certificate with a cash value of less than $10 is redeemable in cash for its cash value.

]]>
The Federal Reserve Board's Final Gift Card Rules for the CARD Act https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/the-federal-reserve-boards-final-gift-card-rules-for-the-card-act https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/the-federal-reserve-boards-final-gift-card-rules-for-the-card-act Wed, 19 May 2010 11:14:57 -0400 Recently, the Federal Reserve Board announced the final rules that amend Regulation E to implement the gift card provisions of the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 (“CARD Act”). The rules restrict fees and expiration dates on various types of gift certificates and cards, and require sellers and issuers to make specific disclosures. These restrictions and requirements will apply to qualifying gift cards sold on or after August 22, 2010.

Scope

Generally, the rules restrict fees, expiration dates, and impose certain disclosure requirements for (1) gift certificates, (2) store gift cards, and (3) general-use prepaid cards, as these terms (collectively, “gift cards”) are defined in the CARD Act. The rules state that the CARD Act’s scope is intended to extend to gift cards that are sold or issued to consumers primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. Gift cards which qualify under the rules as loyalty, award, or promotional gift cards are exempt from the fee and expiration date rules but must still follow strict disclosure requirements.

Exclusions

The rules also provide specific exclusions, meaning none of its provisions apply to gift cards used solely for telephone services, cards that are reloadable and not marketed or labeled as a gift card or certificate, cards not marketed to the general public, cards issued in paper form only, or cards redeemable solely for admission to specific events or venues. Although the rules exclude several categories of gift cards, the exclusions should be interpreted narrowly to ensure that consumers receive the full protection contemplated by the CARD Act.

Preemption

The lingering issue of how the CARD Act should be treated along with the patch-work of state gift card laws that regulate dormancy fees, inactivity charges or fees, service fees, expiration dates, or escheatment is addressed in the rules as well. State laws that provide greater protection for consumers than the CARD Act, are not preempted according to the rules. Because the question of what is meant by “greater protection” is still unclear, the rules provide a mechanism by which parties may request a preemption determination by the Board with respect to a particular state’s escheat law. Due to the ambiguity surrounding state gift card law preemption, gift card issuers and sellers should continue to track or consult legal counsel regarding current state gift card laws and pending legislation in all states.

Information

Check back for future posts on the details of the rules, including posts specific to loyalty, award or promotional gift cards, fee and expiration date restrictions, disclosure requirements, and preemption analysis for state gift cards laws.

Kelley Drye Partner David Ervin contributed to this post. Click here for a post from the Kelley Drye Advertising Group's "Ad Law Access Blog" for further information regarding the Federal Reserve gift card rules.

]]>
Federal Reserve Issues Gift Card Rules https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/federal-reserve-issues-gift-card-rules https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/federal-reserve-issues-gift-card-rules Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:09:42 -0400 Last week, the Federal Reserve Board announced final rules that restrict the application of fees and expiration dates to store gift cards, gift certificates, and general-use prepaid cards. The rules are issued under Regulation E and become effective August 22, 2010.

The rules apply to gift certificates, store gift cards, and general-use prepaid cards, as those terms are defined in the Credit CARD Act. Covered products include retail gift cards, which can be used to buy goods or services at a single merchant or affiliated group of merchants, and network-branded gift cards, which are redeemable at any merchant that accepts the card brand. The rule does not apply to other types of prepaid cards, including reloadable prepaid cards that are not marketed or labeled as a gift card or gift certificate, and prepaid cards received through a loyalty, award, or promotional program.

The rules prohibit imposition of dormancy, inactivity, or service fees unless (1) there has been at least one year of inactivity on the certificate or card, (2) no more than one such fee is charged per month, and (3) the consumer is given clear and conspicuous disclosures about the fees. The rules also prohibit the sale or issuance of a gift certificate, store gift card, or general-use prepaid card that has an expiration date of less than five years after the date a certificate or card is issued or the date funds are last loaded.

Keep in mind that in addition to the new federal rules, gift cards are subject to a patchwork of state laws. Indeed, the new rules provide that a state law is not preempted due to inconsistency with federal law if the state law is more protective of consumers. Unfortunately, then, issuers still need to make sure that any cards that are marketed across the country comply with all of the relevant state laws.

]]>
REMINDER: New Credit Card Regulations Take Effect Today; Gift and Debit Card Rules to Follow https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/reminder-new-credit-card-regulations-take-effect-today-gift-and-debit-card-rules-to-follow https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/reminder-new-credit-card-regulations-take-effect-today-gift-and-debit-card-rules-to-follow Mon, 22 Feb 2010 09:03:49 -0500 Major provisions of a new law related to credit and gift cards take effect today. The Credit CARD Act, which was signed by President Obama in May 2009, marked the culmination of several legislative efforts to reform certain practices of card issuers. The law provisions related to credit cards, discussed in this Kelley Drye client advisory, are comprehensive and include new restrictions and requirements related to, among other things, rates, fees, billing and payment practices, disclosures and marketing, as well as additional rules specific to young consumers and college students.

The Act directed the Federal Reserve to develop implementation guidance and requirements, which were finalized on January 12, 2010. While most credit card issuers have been working for several months to comply with the Act, the Fed rules provide further detailed guidance. For example, the rules outline factors issuers should consider when determining a consumer’s ability to repay.

Notably, the Fed rules impact Regulation Z and, therefore, do not relate to debit card overdraft fees. Those fees fall under Regulation E, which is subject to a separate ongoing rulemaking process.

Nor do the portions of the CARD Act that take effect today relate to gift cards. Another Fed rulemaking to provide guidance related to gift cards is underway. Those Fed rules should be finalized soon, and together with the gift card provisions of the Act will take effect in August 2010. We will keep you posted on further developments.

]]>
Skype Settles Class Action Over Expiration of Credits https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/skype-settles-class-action-over-expiration-of-credits https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/skype-settles-class-action-over-expiration-of-credits Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:22:28 -0500 Skype, a service that lets consumers make phone calls online, agreed to settle a class action that challenged the company's policy of expiring credits that were older than 180 days. While Skype is free for consumers who call each other over the internet, there are fees associated with various additional features. To use these features, consumer can purchase “credits.” However, if a consumer’s account remains inactive for more than 180 days, the credit is wiped out.

The plaintiffs argued that the Skype credit is essentially a gift card, and that imposing an expiration date or inactivity fees violates laws in various states. As part of the settlement, Skype will pay $1.8 million toward a settlement fund, which will provide eligible class members with electronic vouchers for Skype credit of up to $4 each. Skype also agreed to do away with its 180-day expiration policy. More information about the settlement is available on this website.

If your company sells credits for your services, check with your legal counsel before imposing expiration dates on the credits or using any mechanism that could deplete the number of credits in a consumer’s account. Gift card laws in certain states may be broad enough to apply to your credits and could restrict your ability to deplete or expire the credits.

]]>
Plaintiffs File Suits Alleging Gift Cards With Expiration Dates In Less Than 10-Point Font Violate California Law https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/plaintiffs-file-suits-alleging-gift-cards-with-expiration-dates-in-less-than-10-point-font-violate-california-law https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/plaintiffs-file-suits-alleging-gift-cards-with-expiration-dates-in-less-than-10-point-font-violate-california-law Thu, 04 Jun 2009 16:22:55 -0400 A number of class action lawsuits recently have been filed in California state court in San Diego County against a wide range of merchants as well as gift card issuers alleging, among other things, that the defendants have violated the California Civil Code by issuing gift cards that bear either an obscured expiration date, or an expiration date that is not as prominently displayed as is required under California state law. Section 1749.5 of the California Civil Code makes it unlawful to sell gift certificates or gift cards that contain an expiration date unless the expiration date appears in capital letters in at least 10-point font on the front of the gift card. So far retailers such as Saks, Staples, Borders, Visa, and American Express, among others, have been sued in separate class actions alleging violations of Section 1749.5, as well as the Business and Professions Code and the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act.

For example, in Michaelson v. Staples, Inc., Case No. 37-2009-00083487 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Diego Cty.), plaintiff alleges that an expiration date on a Staples gift card, mailed to the plaintiff as part of a promotion, was in less than 10-point font. Plaintiff alleges the card expired before he noticed the expiration date. In Robert Loiseau v. Visa U.S.A. Inc., Case No. 37-2009-00085443 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Diego Cty.), plaintiff alleges that a gift card, purchased for its face value, improperly contained an obscured expiration date, charged a processing fee, and required other allegedly unreasonable terms and conditions.

Gift cards are a tricky business when it comes to complying with the patchwork quilt of state-by-state regulations (as well as FTC oversight) over them. The permissibility of expiration dates, redemption in cash once a minimum balance has been reached, disclosures of terms and conditions, and escheatment of remaining balances are just some of the issues that businesses must confront and address. This new wave of lawsuits serves as a reminder to merchants and gift card issuers of the need to monitor state and federal regulations, as well as to periodically evaluate their gift card programs with counsel.

]]>