'Must Be Stopped': New Nationwide Class Action Targets 'Junk Fees'
"With our clients, we are taking a stand for families across the country and are committed to securing damages for affected families and injunctive relief to prevent further harm," plaintiffs lawyer Shana Khader said.
November 01, 2024 at 03:36 PM
4 minute read
Class ActionsA New Jersey company has been hit with a class action lawsuit that claims it charges exorbitant transaction fees when it processes children's school lunch payments.
The three named plaintiffs and the putative class are represented by Esther Berezofsky and Michael Quirk of Motley Rice, along with Wesley Griffith of Cutter Law in Sacramento, California; Shana H. Khader, Katherine Aizpuru and F. Peter Silva of Tycko & Zavar in Washington, D.C.; and Janet R. Varnell, Brian W. Warwick and Christopher J. Brochu of Varnell & Warwick in Tampa, Florida.
Defendants PAMS Lunch Room and PCS Revenue Control Systems, which does business as Pay PAMS, are among the largest operators in the nation's school lunch payment-processing industry, according to the suit. Both operate from the same address in Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
The filing follows a scathing Consumer Financial Protection Bureau report, which found the school lunch payment-processing industry charges parents $100 million in "junk fees" annually.
The suit says the defendants are in violation of New Jersey's Consumer Fraud Act and the state's Truth-in-Consumer Contract Warranty and Notice Act. It seeks to represent all individuals who have used PayPAMS, and those paid the company's fees over the past six years.
According to the suit, school districts increasingly refuse to accept cash or checks for payment of school lunches, or only accept such payments during hours that are inconvenient to working parents.
Districts contract with third-party payment processors with the expectation that the companies will lower school district processing costs and increase administrative efficiency, according to the complaint.
But payment processors actually increase prices to families by charging far more than their processing cost, the suit claims.
"American families' school lunch dollars should go to paying for food—not to line PayPAMS' pockets," plaintiffs counsel Khader claimed in a statement. "With our clients, we are taking a stand for families across the country, and are committed to securing damages for affected families and injunctive relief to prevent further harm."
PayPAMS' CEO and president did not respond to messages about the suit.
The Math
When PayPAMS contracts with a school district, the district typically agrees to pay a set amount for its services.
For example, California's Sweetwater Union High School District pays approximately $22,000 per year to PayPAMS to process lunch payments.
Additionally, the agreements allow PayPAMS to charge parents a per-transaction fee, which the company controls.
In practice, the defendants allegedly abuse this discretion, according to the suit.
The CFPB found that PayPAMS charged parents $1.95 to $2.40 per transaction, regardless of the amount or type of transaction. However, the cost to a payment processor for a credit, debit or prepaid card transaction is around 1.53% of the transaction, while the cost for an electronic transfer between banks using the Automated Clearing House network is between $0.26 and $0.50 per transaction.
Therefore, if a parent wants to add $25 to her child's lunch account at a school charging $1.95 per transaction, that transaction would cost PayPAMS about $0.38. But the company nets about $1.57, the suit claims.
Some school districts using PayPAMS allegedly have even higher transaction fees.
In the Arlington Independent School District in Texas, for instance, the company's contract allows it to charge a 5.6% fee per transaction. That would mean that on a $50 transaction, PayPAMS would charge $2.80 in fees and make $2.42, or more than seven times its costs, the suit claimed.
In Florida's Miami-Dade County Public Schools and Oregon's Multnomah Education Service District, PayPAMS charges per-transaction fees of $1.95.
'Usurious Profiteering'
The suit also cited a letter to Secretary of Agriculture Thomas Vilsack by eight U.S. senators after the CFPB issued its report.
The letter called on the Department of Agriculture to prohibit such fees by school lunch payment processors.
Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, Raphael Warnock of Georgia, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and and Brian Schatz of Hawaii signed the Sept. 18 letter.
Their letter stated, "These fees represent usurious profiteering by payment processors and must be stopped."
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 All9 Class Actions: Multiple Law Firms File Suits After Data Breach at Water Company
3 minute readClass Action Lawsuit Targets 40 Private Colleges and Universities Over Alleged Price-Fixing
3 minute readBitcoin Mining Company That Enlisted Davis Polk Beats Investor Class Action
4 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 3Mass. Judge Declares Mistrial in Talc Trial: 'Court Can't Accommodate This Case'
- 4It's Time Law Firms Were Upfront About Who Their Salaried Partners Are
- 5Greenberg Traurig Initiates String of Suits Following JPMorgan Chase's 'Infinite Money Glitch'
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