Reply to DC suing Amazon because Amazon avoids crime-ridden area of DC.

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "DC suing Amazon because Amazon avoids crime-ridden area of DC. "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/12/amazon-secretly-slowed-deliveries-deceived-anyone-who-complained-lawsuit-says/

Amazon cancelled first-party delivery management because parts of DC are too dangerous.

DC Attorney big mad. [/quote]

DC is suing Amazon because they're charging some people full membership but not providing full services. I don't know why you would think that's ok.[/quote]
Why does the DC AG think that people should not read the terms and conditions before?[/quote]

Why would you think the terms and conditions (which everybody knows nobody reads) override local law?[/quote]

Please cite the DC law that requires Amazon to deliver [i]anything[/i], [i]anywhere[/i]. [/quote]

You can read the complaint your own self, here: https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/DC-v-Amazon-Complaint-12-4-24.pdf

The main law at issue is the Consumer Protection Procedures Act (“CPPA”), D.C. Code § 28-3909

From the complaint:

[i]Businesses operating in the District
have every right to take measures to protect their employees and contractors. But when those
decisions materially diminish the quality of the goods and services that District consumers are
paying for—and that businesses have assured District consumers they will receive—[b]businesses
cannot implement those decisions in secret. On the contrary, businesses have an obligation to be
transparent about those decisions[/b] so that District consumers can make informed purchasing
decisions and can have confidence that they receive the full benefit of what they have paid for.[/i][/quote]
The bolded is the DC AGs interpretation of the law and facts. It doesn’t represent the actual law and facts. [/quote]

The service is prime - i.e free fast delivery, so:

§ 28–3904. Unfair or deceptive trade practices.
It shall be a violation of this chapter for any person to engage in an unfair or deceptive trade practice, whether or not any consumer is in fact misled, deceived, or damaged thereby, including to:
...

(f) fail to state a material fact if such failure tends to mislead;

(f-1) use innuendo or ambiguity as to a material fact, which has a tendency to mislead;"

If your response to customer inquiries is to say nothing has changed, then it seems like a violation 
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics