Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices

What this area of law covers

Massachusetts has one of the strongest consumer protection statutes in the country. Chapter 93A — often called the “Consumer Protection Act” or simply “93A” — prohibits unfair and deceptive acts and practices in trade or commerce. The statute is deliberately broad. It does not list every form of misconduct it covers; instead, it gives consumers and the courts the authority to identify unfair and deceptive conduct as it actually appears in the marketplace.

In practice, that breadth is the point. A statute that tried to enumerate every possible form of business fraud would always be one step behind the businesses committing it. Chapter 93A is written to be flexible — to cover the contractor who takes a deposit and never returns to do the work, the repair shop that bills for work it never performed, the merchant who ships nothing after the credit card is charged, and the new variations that have not been invented yet.

The statute provides for actual damages, the possibility of double or treble damages where the violation is willful or knowing, and recovery of attorney’s fees and costs. The fee-shifting provision is one of the reasons individual consumers can realistically pursue 93A claims against well-resourced businesses.

The cases I handle

Consumer fraud is the largest area of my practice. The reach of Chapter 93A is broad enough that the cases come from a wide range of industries. Businesses I have used 93A against successfully include:

• Home improvement contractors

• Repair shops

• Storage facilities

• Insurance companies

• Debt collectors

• Internet-based merchandise sellers

• Law firms

The recurring patterns across these industries tend to be similar: a business takes a consumer’s money and fails to deliver what was promised; performs work that is materially defective and refuses to make it right; substitutes lesser goods or services than the contract specifies; bills for work not performed; misrepresents what is being sold; or uses its position to extract more than the agreement entitled it to. Whether the defendant is a contractor, a repair shop, an insurer, or a law firm, the underlying analysis under 93A is largely the same.

Home improvement contractor cases are among the matters I handle most frequently. Massachusetts has specific statutes layered on top of 93A — including the Home Improvement Contractor Act — that strengthen consumer rights against contractors significantly, and most contractor cases benefit from being framed under both.

I include law firms in the list above without elaboration because clients sometimes ask. The answer is that if the facts support a claim, the identity of the defendant does not change the analysis. I take those cases when they come.

What I do not handle in this area

I do not take cases involving the sale of automobiles — yo-yo financing, dealer misrepresentation, undisclosed prior damage, lemon law claims, or related matters. Auto sales litigation is its own specialty, and clients are better served by lawyers who focus on it. If you reach out about an auto sales matter, I will tell you that directly and, where I can, point you toward a Massachusetts attorney who handles that work.

What 93A representation actually looks like

Chapter 93A has a procedural feature that distinguishes it from most consumer protection litigation: the demand letter. Before filing suit on most 93A claims, the consumer must send the business a written demand identifying the unfair or deceptive practice and describing the injury. The business then has thirty days to respond with a reasonable settlement offer. If the business fails to respond, or its offer is unreasonable in light of the injury, the consumer can file suit — and the failure to make a reasonable offer becomes evidence that the conduct was willful, opening the door to multiple damages.

The demand letter stage is where many 93A cases resolve. A well-drafted demand that accurately describes the violation and the damages often produces a reasonable settlement without litigation. When it does not, the same letter becomes the foundation of the lawsuit that follows.

I draft demand letters carefully, with the case I would file if the demand is rejected fully in mind. That is the part of this practice where experience matters most: the letter that gets results is the letter that the defendant’s attorney reads and understands is the opening of a real case, not a bluff.

If you think you may have a 93A claim

The threshold for an unfair or deceptive practice under Chapter 93A is lower than the standard for common-law fraud. You generally do not have to prove intentional deception. Conduct that is materially misleading, that takes unfair advantage of consumers, or that violates other consumer protection laws can satisfy the standard. If a business has taken your money and not delivered, has misrepresented what it was selling, or has used its position to extract more than the agreement entitled it to, there is a reasonable possibility 93A applies.

The right way to find out is to describe the situation in detail and let me look at it. Initial consultations are free and confidential.