Common Violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act

The Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (DTPA) is one of the most powerful tools available for consumers in Texas to protect themselves from fraud, unfair business practices, and deceptive tactics by businesses. Under the DTPA, consumers can hold companies accountable for engaging in misleading, fraudulent, or unfair trade practices that cause harm. Whether you’ve experienced false advertising, been misled by a sales pitch, or suffered financial loss due to deceptive conduct, the DTPA provides a legal framework to seek restitution and damages.

Understanding what constitutes a violation of the DTPA is key to recognizing whether your situation qualifies for a claim. Below, our Marshall attorneys at the Carlile Law Firm explore some of the most common violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act that businesses may commit and how they affect consumers.

Deceptive Trade Practices Act

Frequent Violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act

DTPA protects consumers from unfair, deceptive, and fraudulent business practices. Unfortunately, Texas businesses sometimes engage in activities that violate this law, leaving consumers vulnerable to financial harm.

These violations can take many forms, including:

False or Misleading Advertising

One of the most common violations under the DTPA is false or misleading advertising. Businesses are prohibited from making statements about their products or services that are deceptive or untrue. This can include exaggerated claims about a product’s quality, features, benefits, or pricing.

Examples of false advertising include:

  • Advertising a product as “free” when it comes with hidden fees or charges.
  • Claiming that a product can perform certain functions when it cannot.
  • Misleading statements about a product’s origin or quality.

If a business is found guilty of false advertising, consumers may be entitled to recover damages for any financial harm caused by the misleading information.

Misrepresentation of Goods or Services

Misrepresentation occurs when a business intentionally or negligently provides false information about a product or service’s characteristics, benefits, or quality.

This violation can cover a wide range of scenarios, such as:

  • Misleading descriptions of a car’s condition when selling it as “new” or “certified pre-owned.”
  • Selling goods with defects but representing them as fully functional.
  • Claiming that services will be provided at a certain quality but failing to meet those standards.

Misrepresentation can lead to significant financial losses for consumers, and under the DTPA, those harmed can seek compensation for actual damages and possible mental anguish damages if the conduct was especially egregious.

Breach of Warranty

A warranty assures the seller that a product will meet specific standards or be defect-free. Under the DTPA, businesses can be liable for breaching express or implied warranties.

For example:

  • A seller offering a warranty on a product but failing to repair or replace a defective item.
  • A business claims that an appliance has a 2-year warranty but denies service under that warranty.
  • Selling a used car “as is” but misrepresenting the vehicle’s condition, thereby violating an implied warranty of merchantability.

Consumers who have been subjected to breaches of warranty may be entitled to recover damages under the DTPA, including repair or replacement costs and the full purchase price if the product or service is unfit for use.

Unconscionable Conduct

Unconscionable conduct refers to actions by a business that are so unfair, one-sided, or oppressive that they shock the conscience. This can occur in consumer contracts, transactions, or sales and often involves situations where a business takes advantage of a vulnerable consumer.

Examples of unconscionable conduct include:

  • Pressuring a person into signing a contract with unreasonable terms they cannot fully understand.
  • Charging excessively high interest rates or fees disproportionate to the service or product.
  • Taking advantage of a consumer’s limited knowledge or financial situation to impose unfair terms.

Unconscionable conduct violates the DTPA because it creates an unfair advantage for businesses at the expense of consumers. Those subjected to such practices may have a strong case for a claim under the DTPA.

Failure to Honor a Contract or Service Agreement

The DTPA also covers instances where a business fails to fulfill its promises or obligations under a contract.

For instance:

  • Failing to deliver a product or service after agreeing to do so.
  • Charging a consumer for services that were never rendered.
  • Not honoring a service agreement or refund policy.

Consumers harmed by a business’s failure to honor its contractual obligations may seek damages under the DTPA, including the cost of the product or service and any other losses incurred due to the breach.

Deceptive Sales Tactics

Deceptive sales tactics are a broad category of violations under the DTPA. These include a variety of misleading or unethical sales techniques designed to trick or pressure consumers into making a purchase.

Common deceptive sales tactics include:

  • Using high-pressure sales techniques to force a decision.
  • Hiding or downplaying the actual cost of a product or service.
  • Offering products on “sale” that are never sold at the advertised higher price.

These tactics are designed to mislead the consumer into making a purchase they might not have otherwise made. The DTPA allows consumers to pursue claims against businesses that engage in such practices.

Failure to Provide Accurate Information in Real Estate Transactions

Real estate transactions are another area where DTPA violations commonly occur.

Real estate agents, sellers, or contractors may violate the DTPA by:

  • Misrepresenting the condition or value of a property.
  • Concealing defects in a property that are not immediately visible or disclosed.
  • Providing inaccurate or misleading information regarding the financing of a home purchase.

Consumers harmed in a real estate transaction due to these deceptive practices may have grounds for filing a DTPA claim.

Fraudulent or Deceptive Debt Collection Practices

Debt collection practices in Texas are subject to strict regulations. Under the DTPA, a business may be in violation if it uses fraudulent or deceptive tactics to collect debts.

This can include:

  • Threatening to sue a consumer without the intention of actually filing a lawsuit.
  • Using misleading or false statements to coerce a consumer into paying a debt.
  • Contacting a consumer at unreasonable hours or without proper notice.

Consumers subjected to deceptive debt collection practices may seek relief under the DTPA.

Contact Our Experienced Attorney at Carlile Law Firm, LLP Today

If you believe you have been a victim of deceptive trade practices, contact our experienced Harrison County attorneys who can help you navigate the legal process and seek the compensation you deserve. The DTPA provides strong consumer protections, so don’t hesitate to take action if a business’s deceptive practices have harmed you.

Case results

2017 CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT

Negligence – Man injured in car wreck Total Gross Settlement $950,000.00

2015 CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT

Negligence – Woman injured in car wreck Total Gross Settlement $940,000.00

2015 CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT

Negligence – Man injured in car wreck Total Gross Settlement $450,000.00

2014 CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT

Products liability, negligent design, personal injury

2018 JURY VERDICT OF $41.55 MILLION

Wrongful Death and Negligence – negligent hiring, training, and supervision.

2017 JURY VERDICT OF $58,055.47

Negligence – Car wreck. Larry McCathran V. Justin Griffin

2015 JURY VERDICT $39,500.00

Breach of Contract – Property dispute. Bobby and Thyra Miller v. Leoriss Thomas

2013 JURY VERDICT OF $52,000.00

Negligence – property damage to home. Jim and Linda Cary v. Chandler

2003 JURY VERDICT OF $75,000

Nuisance – land contamination and toxic tort.

2002 JURY VERDICT OF $870,000

Wrongful Death and Products Liability – silica dust inhalation.

What Our Clients Say
LATEST BLOG POSTS
November 21, 2024 The Impact of Divorce on Child Custody in Texas: Understanding Parental Rights

Going through a divorce is challenging enough, but when children are involved, the emotional and legal complexities increase significantly. In Texas, child custody—or conservatorship—is a critical issue that must be addressed before a divorce can be...

November 14, 2024 Common Violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act

The Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (DTPA) is one of the most powerful tools available for consumers in Texas to protect themselves from fraud, unfair business practices, and deceptive tactics by businesses. Under the DTPA, consumers...

November 7, 2024 How to Maximize Your Settlement After a Texas Commercial Vehicle Wreck

If you’ve been involved in a commercial vehicle crash in Texas, you may be facing significant medical bills, lost wages, and emotional distress as a result of the incident. Commercial vehicle collisions often involve large trucks,...

Schedule A Consultation

"*" indicates required fields

Name*
Describe what would you like to discuss during your consultation
Hidden