|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 4856 | Consumer Products | 06/30/2006
Lawyers plan to seek financial compensation for more than 14 million Americans who paid too much for heating and cooking fuel because British Petroleum (BP) oil company allegedly manipulated the market for propane.
BP is alleged to have made $20 million in illegal profits by cornering the US market for propane gas in early 2003 and 2004, according to a lawsuit filed by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The lawsuit seeks repayment of at least the $20 million in allegedly illegal profits plus financial restitution and damages, which could amount to many tens of millions more, according to officials working on the case. The CFTC lawsuit claims that, because of the market manipulation by traders and executives working for BP’s North America, the price of propane was forced up by more than 50 per cent to some 90 cents a gallon in late February 2004. Propane consumption is high in February as many rural homes and businesses not connected to the piped natural gas network rely on the liquefied fuel to provide heat. The lawsuit seeks to recover the $20 million BP made in illegal profits. At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints. Other Consumer Products Cases of Interest A statewide class action has been filed in Florida against mortgage service specialist, Green Tree Servicing, LLC. The action is brought on behalf of all Florida residents whose mortgage was transferred to Green Tree for servicing and who did not receive a notice of transfer within the federally mandated 15 day period. The action is brought under the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and seeks a minimum of $1000 in statutory damages per class member as well as compensatory damages where appropriate. The court has rendered a $10 million judgment against Canadian company Danier Leather, Inc., (Toronto:DL.TO) in favor of investors who purchased the company’s common stock pursuant to the its May 1998 IPO. The action alleged that the defendants intentionally misled the investing public with an inaccurate prospectus, when it predicted it would have $17.4-million in fourth-quarter revenue and a $384,000 loss in fiscal year 1998. Persons eligible to take part in the action should contact attorneys for the class as soon as possible. The HomeTeam Pest Defense Company, a subsidiary of Centex Corporation, provides built-in home pest treatments through a tubes-in-the-wall or tubes-in-the-floor pest defense system. However, some individuals who have the tubes-in-the-wall or tubes-in-the-floor pest defense system have found it to be an ineffective system. Independent tests of the tubes-in-the-wall or tubes-in-the-floor pest defense system have also questioned the effectiveness of the system. Our office is currently investigating the tubes-in-the-wall or tubes-in-the-floor pest defense system. If you have this system in your home and believe that it is not working, please call to speak with a lawyer about our investigation at 1-866-467-1400, ext. 100, or you can make a claim on this page. Ashley Peach of Illinois filed a class action suit against Wal-Mart on June 16, 2004, alleging the cashier at Wal-Mart failed to return a $1.39 balance on her gift card.
In the complaint, sometime after Mother’s Day in May 2004, Peach purchased shampoo, conditioner, and other toiletries from the Granite City Wal-Mart, using two separate $10 gift cards to pay for the purchase that totaled $18.61. In November, 2004, a class action was filed against DirectTV by DirecTV customer Phillip Cohen. Several class actions have been filed against nutritional supplement manufacturer NBTY, Inc., (NYSE: NTY) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between April 22, 2004, and June 16, 2004. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. |
IT'S FREE
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
