Consumers Stand Behind Their PC Richard FACTA Receipt Class Action Lawsuit

A group of consumers fired back against P.C. Richard & Son after the company filed a motion to dismiss a proposed receipt class action lawsuit initiated against the company last year.

The consumers argued in their response that P.C. Richard was in error by claiming in its motion to dismiss that the consumers had no standing.

Plaintiffs Kathleen O’Shea and Sandeep Trisal originally filed the P.C. Richard class action lawsuit in November 2015, accusing the company of printing the expiration dates of credit cards and debit cards in violation of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act (FACTA).

The plaintiffs state that even after the lawsuit was filed, the company continued to print illegal receipts for consumers.

Plaintiffs: Receipt Class Action Lawsuit Passes Spokeo Test

In the motion to dismiss filed by P.C. Richard in October, the company said that the consumers lacked standing to bring the proposed receipt class action lawsuit. They stated that the plaintiffs did not sufficiently allege harm, citing last May’s decision by the Supreme Court in Spokeo.

The group of consumers argued that Spokeo simply reiterated the existing law – namely, that injuries sustained must be concrete and particularized to establish Article III standing.

O’Shea and Trisal say that their suit can be distinguished from Spokeo for a number of reasons.

“[U]nlike Spokeo, in the present case, plaintiffs’ [first amended complaint] does not allege mere ‘procedural violations.’ To the contrary, plaintiffs have properly alleged that defendants violated plaintiffs’ substantive federal rights.”

The plaintiffs went on to say, “As the Supreme Court has held, the violation of a federal substantive right is sufficient in and of itself to confer Article III standing: ‘A plaintiff seeking to vindicate a statutorily created private right need not allege actual harm beyond the invasion of that private right.’”

Consumers argue that FACTA was established to protect individuals’ rights that have typically been found in common law – specifically, the invasion of privacy of consumers. Plaintiffs also argue the court should defer to the policy decisions made by Congress.

The consumers point out that after the Spokeo ruling, a number of courts have ruled in FACTA receipt class action lawsuit cases that when companies fail to follow the provisions set forth in FACTA, this was considered a concrete injury.

“[O]ther courts have likewise found that FACTA provides a federal substantive right which is violated and ‘concrete’ when the offending receipt is printed,” the plaintiffs argue.

With respect to showing that P.C. Richard willfully violated provisions of FACTA, the plaintiffs reiterated that the company had several years to comply with the legal requirements of the act but chose to violate it nonetheless, and therefore put consumers at risk for identity theft and fraud.

The consumers said the company also ignored a pre-suit cease and desist letter detailing its violations of FACTA.

The P. C. Richard FACTA Receipt Class Action Lawsuit is O’Shea v. P.C. Richard & LLC, et al., Case No. 2:16-cv-09069 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Free FACTA Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you made one or more purchases and the retailer provided you with a receipt that contained more than the last five digits of your credit or debit card number or the expiration date, you may be eligible for a free class action lawsuit investigation and to pursue compensation for these FACTA violations.

Get Started