Howling Mad: Lawsuit Says Pet Store Tricked Client Into Leasing Puppy at 100 Percent Interest
A lawsuit has been filed on behalf of a woman who claimed The Dog House misled her into a puppy lease agreement that was deceptive, unclear, confusing and had an interest rate of more than 100 percent.
January 23, 2019 at 05:50 PM
4 minute read
A woman who claims she went to a pet shop looking for a puppy but left with an unfair leasing agreement and a steep 100 percent interest rate has sued the store and two leasing companies.
Twenty-year-old Christina Diskin filed an amended lawsuit Tuesday in New London Superior Court, claiming the store misled her into purchasing Athena, a pug-beagle mix, last July. Diskin claimed the fair market value of the 13-week-old puppy was between $300 and $600, but said she ended up with a $3,789 lease agreement with the store, The Dog House.
Diskin, a Norwich resident, electronically signed documents, including a lease agreement, on the store's computer. Her 35-page lawsuit says the actions of the Manchester-based store are “immoral and unethical.”
“No one told the plaintiff she was signing a lease agreement,” her complaint claimed. “No one printed the documents or went over the terms, including the payments, interest rates. … The lease was emailed to her after the transaction.”
The lease, the lawsuit says, “is unclear, deceptive and confusing,” and Diskin says the more than 100 percent interest rate “is unconscionable and unjustifiable under any circumstances.” The lawsuit says The Dog House violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act and the federal Consumer Leasing Act.
Scott Camassar, a partner with the North Stonington-based Law Firm of Stephen M. Reck and Scott D. Camassar, represents Diskin.
“My client is besides herself. She is embarrassed and upset that she is even in this position,” Camassar told the Connecticut Law Tribune Wednesday. “She feels she will not be able to afford the dog and might have to surrender her if she can't make payments.”
Diskin works at Mohegan Sun Casino as a cook.
“My main concern is to get her out of this bad deal, but we also want to raise awareness. We want this lawsuit to serve as a warning to other consumers so they do not get in this situation,” Camassar said. At a minimum, the attorney said, “they should have walked her through the key terms of the agreement and explained the exact arrangements. You can't just bury information in a document on a computer screen and expect people will understand it.”
Camassar continued: “What they did was disgusting, It's completely outrageous and unfair and deceptive. People should go to a pet store and not feel like they will get ripped off. It's supposed to be a happy occasion.”
Camassar said three states—New York, California and Nevada—prohibit pet leasing. A bill to do the same died last year in committee, but Camassar hopes lawmakers revisit the idea during the current legislative session.
“My client feels taken advantage of,” Camassar said.
The lawsuit seeks an undetermined amount of punitive damages and a declaration that the lease signed be void. It cites six counts: negligence against the pet store and the two leasing companies, My Pet Funding LLC and Monetery Financial Services LLC.
As of Wednesday afternoon, The Dog House had not assigned an attorney to the case. And the store's owner, Christopher Carty, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
My Pet Funding, based in Virginia, is represented by Wiggin & Dana counsel Matthew Brown, who did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday.
Monetery Financial Services, based in Oceanside, California, is represented by Paul Mitchell of Buffalo, New York-based Lippes Mathias Wexler Friedman. Mitchell declined to comment Wednesday.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudge Awards $48.6 Million to Frontier Airlines in COVID-19 Breach of Contract Suit
With Employment Law in National Spotlight, Contractor Scores in Trade Secrets Lawsuit
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250