 |
GEORGIA CODE (Last Updated: August 20, 2013) |
 |
Title 10. COMMERCE AND TRADE |
|
|
Chapter 1. SELLING AND OTHER TRADE PRACTICES |
|
|
Article 15. DECEPTIVE OR UNFAIR PRACTICES |
|
|
Part 2. FAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES ACT |
| § 10-1-390. Short title |
| § 10-1-391. Purpose and construction of part |
| § 10-1-392. Definitions; when intentional violation occurs |
| § 10-1-393. Unfair or deceptive practices in consumer transactions unlawful; examples |
| § 10-1-393.1. Office supply transactions; solicitations for telephone directory listings |
| § 10-1-393.2. Requirements for health spas |
| § 10-1-393.3. Prohibited use of purchaser's credit card information by merchant |
| § 10-1-393.4. Pricing practices during state of emergency |
| § 10-1-393.5. Prohibited telemarketing, Internet activities, or home repair |
| § 10-1-393.6. Unlawful telemarketing transactions; criminal penalty |
| § 10-1-393.7. Solicitation during final illness; penalty |
| § 10-1-393.8. Protection from disclosure of an individual's social security number |
| § 10-1-393.9. Registration of private child support collectors; surety bond or alternative |
| § 10-1-393.10. Filing of contracts for collection; requirements for contracts; role of collector; cancellation of contract; forwarding of payments |
| § 10-1-393.11. Display of disclosure statement concerning kosher foods; required information; exception |
| § 10-1-393.12. Definitions; contract with residential roofing contractor |
| § 10-1-393.13. Oversight by administrator of certain telemarketing practices; definitions; conduct by telephone solicitors; class actions |
| § 10-1-394. Adoption of federal rules prohibiting unfair or deceptive practices; application of Chapter 13 of Title 50 |
| § 10-1-395. Appointment and duties of administrator; Consumer Advisory Board; relations with other regulatory agencies |
| § 10-1-396. Acts exempt from part |
| § 10-1-397. Authority of administrator to issue cease and desist order or impose civil penalty; judicial relief; receivers |
| § 10-1-397.1. Initiation or intervention by administrator |
| § 10-1-398. Stay of cease and desist order; hearing |
| § 10-1-398.1. Appeal from order of administrator |
| § 10-1-399. Civil or equitable remedies by individuals |
| § 10-1-400. Limitation on recovery in case of bona fide error |
| § 10-1-401. Limitation of actions; right to set off damages or penalties not limited |
| § 10-1-402. Assurances of voluntary compliance |
| § 10-1-403. Investigations; demands for evidence |
| § 10-1-404. Administrator's subpoena and hearing powers; procedural rules; court enforcement orders; self-incrimination; confidentiality |
| § 10-1-405. Civil penalties; individual liability |
| § 10-1-406. Duty of prosecuting attorneys |
| § 10-1-407. Part not exclusive |
REFS & ANNOS
TITLE 10 Chapter 1 Article 15 Part 2 NOTE
CROSS REFERENCES. --Restrictions on sale or advertising of used motor vehicles displayed or parked, 40-2-39.1.
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES AND REGULATIONS. --Negative Option Plans, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia, Office of Consumer Affairs, Chapter 122-4.
Preservation of Consumers' Claims and Defenses, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia, Office of Consumer Affairs, Chapter 122-5.
LAW REVIEWS. --For article explaining the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act, proposed in Georgia in 1973, see 10 Ga. St. B.J. 409 (1974). For article surveying Georgia cases dealing with commercial law from June 1977 through May 1978, see 30 Mercer L. Rev. 15 (1978). For article, "Corporate Software Piracy: Is Your Client (or Your Firm) Liable?," see 22 Ga. St. B.J. 30 (1985).
For note, "Consumer Protection in Georgia: The Fair Business Practices Act of 1975," see 25 Emory L. J. 445 (1976).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
O.C.G.A. PT. 2, ART. 15, CH. 1, T. 10 IS CUMULATIVE OF OTHER LAWS AND IS NOT EXCLUSIVE. Pendigrass v. Edmonds, 247 Ga. 508, 277 S.E.2d 247 (1981).
CLAIM UNDER PART NOT ADJUDICATED BY DISMISSAL OF FEDERAL SUIT. --Where an accord and satisfaction agreed to between the parties was expressly limited to certain truth-in-lending claims under 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq. and 12 C.F.R. § 226.1 et seq. between the parties, the dismissal of the suit brought under that federal Act did not operate as an adjudication of a cause of action under this part, since the two statutes are predicated upon different goals and remedies. Standish v. Hub Motor Co., 149 Ga. App. 365, 254 S.E.2d 416 (1979) (see O.C.G.A. Pt. 2, Art. 15, Ch. 1, T. 10).
"INTENTIONALLY DECEIVING" BUYER NOT REQUIRED. --A car dealer violated this part where, although the dealer had allegedly not "intentionally deceived" a buyer, the dealer had ample reason to know the dealer had misrepresented to the buyer the actual mileage of a car. When the dealer had purchased the vehicle, the dealer received an odometer disclosure statement, signed by the dealer's employee, indicating the vehicle had been driven in excess of 20,000 miles, but furnished the buyer with a statement showing the vehicle's mileage as 4,172 miles, and later informed the state that this mileage figure was inaccurate. Crown Ford, Inc. v. Crawford, 221 Ga. App. 881, 473 S.E.2d 554 (1996).
CITED in Lancaster v. Eberhardt, 141 Ga. App. 534, 233 S.E.2d 880 (1977); DeLoach v. Foremost Ins. Co., 147 Ga. App. 124, 248 S.E.2d 193 (1978); Colonial Lincoln-Mercury Sales, Inc. v. Molina, 152 Ga. 379, 262 S.E.2d 820 (1979); Armstrong Cork Co. v. World Carpets, Inc., 597 F.2d 496 (5th Cir. 1979); Greenbriar Dodge, Inc. v. May, 155 Ga. App. 892, 273 S.E.2d 186 (1980); Martin Luther King, Jr. Ctr. for Social Change, Inc. v. American Heritage Prods., Inc., 508 F. Supp. 854 (N.D. Ga. 1981); Remler v. Shiver, 200 Ga. App. 391, 408 S.E.2d 139 (1991).
RESEARCH REFERENCES
Am. Jur. Proof of Facts. --Violation of the Truth-In-Lending Act and Regulation Z, 73 POF3d 275.
ALR. --Consumer picketing to protest products, prices, or services, 62 ALR3d 227.
Scope and exceptions of state deceptive trade practice and consumer protection Acts, 85 ALR3d 399.
Practices forbidden by state deceptive trade practice and consumer protection Acts, 89 ALR3d 449.
Implied warranty coverage for service transactions under state consumer protection and deceptive trade statutes, 72 ALR4th 282.
Coverage of leases under state consumer protection statutes, 89 ALR4th 854.
What constitutes Truth in Lending Act violation which "was not intentional and resulted from bona fide error not withstanding maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error" within meaning of § 130(c) of Act (15 USCA § 1640(c)), 153 ALR Fed. 193.
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES AND REGULATIONS. --Negative Option Plans, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia, Office of Consumer Affairs, Chapter 122-4.
Preservation of Consumers' Claims and Defenses, Official Compilation of the Rules and Regulations of the State of Georgia, Office of Consumer Affairs, Chapter 122-5.
LAW REVIEWS. --For article explaining the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act, proposed in Georgia in 1973, see 10 Ga. St. B.J. 409 (1974). For article surveying Georgia cases dealing with commercial law from June 1977 through May 1978, see 30 Mercer L. Rev. 15 (1978). For article, "Corporate Software Piracy: Is Your Client (or Your Firm) Liable?," see 22 Ga. St. B.J. 30 (1985).
For note, "Consumer Protection in Georgia: The Fair Business Practices Act of 1975," see 25 Emory L. J. 445 (1976).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS
O.C.G.A. PT. 2, ART. 15, CH. 1, T. 10 IS CUMULATIVE OF OTHER LAWS AND IS NOT EXCLUSIVE. Pendigrass v. Edmonds, 247 Ga. 508, 277 S.E.2d 247 (1981).
CLAIM UNDER PART NOT ADJUDICATED BY DISMISSAL OF FEDERAL SUIT. --Where an accord and satisfaction agreed to between the parties was expressly limited to certain truth-in-lending claims under 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq. and 12 C.F.R. § 226.1 et seq. between the parties, the dismissal of the suit brought under that federal Act did not operate as an adjudication of a cause of action under this part, since the two statutes are predicated upon different goals and remedies. Standish v. Hub Motor Co., 149 Ga. App. 365, 254 S.E.2d 416 (1979) (see O.C.G.A. Pt. 2, Art. 15, Ch. 1, T. 10).
"INTENTIONALLY DECEIVING" BUYER NOT REQUIRED. --A car dealer violated this part where, although the dealer had allegedly not "intentionally deceived" a buyer, the dealer had ample reason to know the dealer had misrepresented to the buyer the actual mileage of a car. When the dealer had purchased the vehicle, the dealer received an odometer disclosure statement, signed by the dealer's employee, indicating the vehicle had been driven in excess of 20,000 miles, but furnished the buyer with a statement showing the vehicle's mileage as 4,172 miles, and later informed the state that this mileage figure was inaccurate. Crown Ford, Inc. v. Crawford, 221 Ga. App. 881, 473 S.E.2d 554 (1996).
CITED in Lancaster v. Eberhardt, 141 Ga. App. 534, 233 S.E.2d 880 (1977); DeLoach v. Foremost Ins. Co., 147 Ga. App. 124, 248 S.E.2d 193 (1978); Colonial Lincoln-Mercury Sales, Inc. v. Molina, 152 Ga. 379, 262 S.E.2d 820 (1979); Armstrong Cork Co. v. World Carpets, Inc., 597 F.2d 496 (5th Cir. 1979); Greenbriar Dodge, Inc. v. May, 155 Ga. App. 892, 273 S.E.2d 186 (1980); Martin Luther King, Jr. Ctr. for Social Change, Inc. v. American Heritage Prods., Inc., 508 F. Supp. 854 (N.D. Ga. 1981); Remler v. Shiver, 200 Ga. App. 391, 408 S.E.2d 139 (1991).
RESEARCH REFERENCES
Am. Jur. Proof of Facts. --Violation of the Truth-In-Lending Act and Regulation Z, 73 POF3d 275.
ALR. --Consumer picketing to protest products, prices, or services, 62 ALR3d 227.
Scope and exceptions of state deceptive trade practice and consumer protection Acts, 85 ALR3d 399.
Practices forbidden by state deceptive trade practice and consumer protection Acts, 89 ALR3d 449.
Implied warranty coverage for service transactions under state consumer protection and deceptive trade statutes, 72 ALR4th 282.
Coverage of leases under state consumer protection statutes, 89 ALR4th 854.
What constitutes Truth in Lending Act violation which "was not intentional and resulted from bona fide error not withstanding maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error" within meaning of § 130(c) of Act (15 USCA § 1640(c)), 153 ALR Fed. 193.