Added Fees on Gift Cards is Holiday Peeve! But is the Business Practice Unlawful?

For years, businesses have taken advantage of consumers with predatory fees added to gift cards and gift certificates. But this Holiday Season, extra fees on gift cards will get businesses on Santa’s Naughty List!

The New York State Legislature passed a Bill amending section 396-I of the general business law, which bans businesses from charging additional fees on gift cards. The fees mentioned in the Bill include activation fees, retroactive fees, redemption fees, service fees, dormancy fees, latency fees, administrative fees, handling fees, access fees, periodic fees, renewal fees, re-loading fees, or any fee of any kind for gift cards.

The Bill goes further in its consumer protections.  Businesses are banned from selling gift cards where the balance declines over time or declines for nonuse. And if signed into law, it will be unlawful for businesses to sell gift cards with expiration dates unless it’s a promotional gift certificate that expires nine years after its issued and the expiration date is clearly stated.

Perhaps the most joyous aspect of this holiday-timed Bill is, consumers will be given the ability to redeem for cash value the remaining balance on a gift card if the remaining value is less than five dollars. However, there is an exception if the gift card is an open loop or promotional certificate.

While the holidays may be on our minds, it’s important to note that the Bill covers several types of gift cards that can be used across many types of businesses all year round.

Governor Hochul has until December 8^th to sign the Bill into law.  Once signed, the law will come into effect in one year.

If caught in violation of the law, businesses can be held liable for compensatory damages, punitive damages, penalties and attorneys’ fees being awarded to the victim. If you believe that you were subjected to this kind of unlawful business practice by a merchant, your lawyer will be able to determine its involvement during the lawsuit and leverage the business’s non-compliance with the NYS Bill to win your case.

New NYC COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate will Require All Private-Sector Workers to be Vaccinated

New York City Mayor de Blasio announced, through the media, new vaccine mandate requirements for New York City’s five boroughs.  Starting December 27^th all private-sector workers will be required to show proof of vaccination. This is the first vaccine mandate in the nation that applies to all private sector workers. Approximately 184,000 businesses will be affected. Mayor de Blasio called the new measures a “preemptive strike” in facing the new challenges associated with the Omicron variant, the colder weather affecting the delta variant, and holiday gatherings.

Additional measures include, requiring children ages 5-11 to show proof of one vaccine dose for indoor dining, fitness, and entertainment and requiring individuals 12 and older to show proof of two vaccine doses unless they received the Johnson & Johnson single vaccine dose. These measures are effective as of December 14th.

Mayor de Blasio called the measures universal in their enforcement and is confident that this expansion to “Key to NYC” Program will overcome any legal challenge.

Mayor de Blasio said the city’s health commissioner has put these new vaccine requirements into place. However, New York City’s Department of Health has not yet published the order detailing the requirements of the new mandate.

Issues involving the enforcement of these private-sector vaccine mandates will likely be something mayor-elect Eric Adams will have to deal with next year.

Second Circuit Holds that Requiring Teachers to Submit a Letter from a Religious Leader in Support of a Request for a Reasonable Accommodation is Unconstitutional

The 15 public school teachers who challenged New York City’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate live to fight another day in court.

The teachers have refused to comply with the City’s mandate arguing that compliance with the COVID-19 vaccine mandate is a violation of their religious rights under the First Amendment’s free exercise clause.

The Court determined that the reasonable accommodation standards in the City's vaccine mandate was unconstitutional as applied to the 15 teachers because the mandate required employees who requested a religious exemption to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate to submit a letter from a religious leader confirming the validity of the employee's religious beliefs. If the religious leader had well-documented public comments in support of taking the vaccine, the request for exemptions would be denied.

The Court reasoned as follows:

Denying an individual a religious accommodation based on someone else's publicly expressed religious views-even the leader of her faith-runs afoul of the Supreme Court's teaching that "[i]t is not within the judicial ken to question the centrality of particular beliefs or practices to a faith, or the validity of particular litigants' interpretations of those creeds."

However, the Court declined to extend protections against the mandate to all teachers stating that the mandate itself was "a reasonable exercise of the state's power to act to protect the public health."

Based on this decision, employers should only consider the employee's specific religious beliefs (in determining whether they are "sincerely held") when processing a reasonable accommodation request. Someone else's belief  - even if it is a religious leader - is irrelevant. 

Artificial Intelligence Decides if You're Hired! Is It Discriminatory?

Wonder why you were denied the last job or promotion you applied for? 

Wonder no more, because there is a good chance that it wasn't a human's decision. In fact, Artificial Intelligence "AI" has become the judge on who is hired or who is promoted for most employers and employment agencies. However, AI isn't perfect and may be infringing on your anti-discrimination rights if it's not properly programmed and regularly audited. 

That is why AI or Automated Employment Decision Tool "AEDT" has been the target of much scrutiny. Experts point out that AEDT are prone to bias in their hiring and promotion process. Biases include racial, sexual, and ethnic discrimination, amongst so many other protected categories. This problem has become so worrisome that New York City is putting in place an amendment to the New York City Administrative Code to curb the use of AI in hiring. 

Such amendment was approved by the New York City Counsel on November 10th, 2021. It can be read here.  The purpose of the Bill is to require employers and employment agencies to assess employees and candidates without the use of machine learned biases. The effects of such machine learned biases are discriminatory in nature.

Now, the Bill is on the Mayor's desk and goes into effect on January 1, 2023.

The Bill is limited to regulating AI decisions that screen candidates for employment or screen employees for promotion. This limitation is not without exception. An AEDT is allowed if the tool has undergone an independent bias audit no more than one year prior to it use. The audit's summary then must become publicly available on the employers' or employment agencies' website.

But how will you know if the employer or employment agency is using AEDT on you? The law enforces notification guidelines that will inform employees and candidates of its use.

If caught in violation of the law, employers and employment agencies face fines of up to $500 for the 1st violation, and fines between $500 to $1,500 for each subsequent violation. Plus, they may be exposed to a discrimination lawsuit with compensatory damages, punitive damages, penalties and attorneys' fees being awarded to the victim. If you believe that you were discriminated against by an AI / AEDT, your lawyer will be able to determine it's involvement during the lawsuit and leverage the company's non-compliance with the NYC Bill to win your case. 

Real Estate Brokerage - 11/18/2021 NYS Board of Real Estate meeting summary

On November 18, 2021, the NYS Board of Real Estate continued its mission of optimizing the regulation of real estate brokers in our state by holding its meeting. 

To remind real estate brokers and salespersons, the public is welcome at these meetings where the public can bring comments from the floor. Its encouraged that Lieb School students attend these meetings to have your voices heard.

"[T]he Board has general authority to promulgate rules and regulations affecting real estate brokers and salespersons in order to administer and effectuate the purposes of Article 12-A of the Real Property Law."

A complete video of the meeting is available on youtube.

In summary, the following was discussed:

• Exam Results - January through September 2021:
• Salesperson = 20,046 applicants with a pass rate of 54%
• Broker = 1,477 applicants with a pass rate of 57%Order U
• License Enforcement - July through November 2021:
• Complaints = 273
• Investigations Completed = 188
• Closed (no violations) = 26
• Closed (warning / instruction letter) = 31
• Closed (private resolution) = 7
• Closed (abandoned) = 16
• Closed (duplicate) = 9
• Closed (insufficient evidence) = 51
• Closed (civil matter jurisdiction) = 7
• Hold (licensee action required prior to renewal) = 13
• Referred for Disciplinary Prosecution - 28
• Live distance education is still permitted 

The 2022 meetings are February 17th (1pm); July 21st (1pm); and November 17th (1pm). 

Lieb School - Condo Course HANDOUT

For Lieb School students taking the live class tonight at our Smithtown Training Center.

DOWNLOAD HANDOUT HERE. 

Attention NY Businesses - Emergency Regulation Issued to Implement NY HERO Act's Exposure Prevention Standard

As you may recall, on May 5, 2021, the NY HERO Act was signed into law in order to protect employees against exposure and disease during a future airborne infectious disease outbreak. The HERO Act requires employers to take certain measures to protect their employees in the event of future airborne infectious disease outbreaks, which includes requiring employers to have an exposure prevention plan in place in the event of a future outbreak.

As previously reported on this Blog, regulation 12 NYCRR 840.1 entitled "Airborne Infections Disease Exposure Prevention Standard" was proposed over the summer to assist employers in adopting an exposure prevention plan. 

Although 12 NYCRR 840.1 has not yet been approved, the New York State Dept. of Labor has enacted an emergency regulation so that 12 NYCRR 840.1 can be immediately adopted. 

Regardless of whether or not 12 NYCRR 840.1 is ultimately approved, employers should still have an exposure prevention plan in place. However, to err on the side of caution and to avoid a whirlwind of possible future lawsuits, employers should comply with the requirements set forth 2 NYCRR 840.1, especially in light of the Dept. of Labor's recent actions in proposing an emergency regulation to adopt 12 NYCRR 840.1.

Clearly, the Dept. of Labor is gravely concerned about the possibility of future airborne infectious disease outbreaks and their patience is running thin.

If you agree or disagree with the Dept. of Labor's emergency regulation, you can make your voice heard by emailing Michael Paglialonga, Dept. of Labor, at regulations@labor.ny.gov, by December 31, 2021. 

Foreclosure Protection Enhanced by Federal Regulators

On November 10, 2021, Federal Regulators issued a statement that lenders will no longer be afforded leniency with complying with mandatory mortgage servicing practices.

 

As background, Federal Regulators had previously issued an April 2020 Joint Statement, in response to COVID, that they would not take supervisory or enforcement action against mortgage servicers for failing to meet certain borrower-protective timing requirements so long as the servicers made good faith efforts to provide those required notices or disclosures and took the related actions within a reasonable period.

 

Now, as of November 10, 2021, Agencies will apply their respective supervisory and enforcement authorities, to address noncompliance or violations of Regulation X’s mortgage servicing rules.

 

Borrowers, who are looking for leverage in negotiating mortgage modifications, short sales, and deed-in-lieu workouts should be brushing up on Regulation X today.

  

Utility Customers Now Protected from Harassment on Unpaid Balances

With the foreclosure and eviction moratoriums coming to an end in January 2022, New Yorkers are about to feel pinched in their housing costs, which may turn into utility billing issues.

 

New Yorkers just received increased rights and beginning on December 8, 2021, utility companies are prohibited from engaging in harassment, oppression, or other abuses towards residential customers in connection with deferred payment agreements and the collection of unpaid balances.

 

Bill A3359 was signed by Governor Hochul on November 8, 2021 and amends §53-a of the Public Service Law.

It's Official, Unlawful Debt Collection Practices Will Not Be Tolerated!

As you may recall, a proposed bill (A2382) was submitted to Gov. Hochul last month, seeking to amend the CPLR & Judiciary Law concerning predatory debt collection practices & consumer actions, as discussed in our blog here.

On November 8, 2021, Gov. Hochul signed bill A2382 into law. 

"When bad actors try and take advantage of consumers, New York will fight back. I'm proud to be signing legislation that will protect New Yorkers from unscrupulous practices by debt collectors and utility companies."  -Gov. Hochul. 

This is huge news considering the new legislation will undoubtedly protect debtors from abusive debt collection practices. 

How big of an impact will this new legislation have on overall debt collection practices in New York? 

Stay tuned....