Both claimants seek a return of the full balance paid, which raises the question of whether they establish damages justifying a return of the additional each. The court is fully satisfied that “actual damages” includes the difference between each contract price and the fee which is the maximum fee permitted under the Dating Service Law for these contracts. The girls each want to leave their father by getting married, but Henry refuses because marriage traditions require him to pay out settlements.Noel Coward's attempt to show how the ordinary people lived between the wars. § 394-c [a]; see, for example, People by Vacco v. It then follows that the legislature, by adding the “actual damage” language to the statute in 1992 did not erode New York State's commitment to protect consumers from price gouging by dating services. Logic indicates that the 1992 amendment “evened the playing field” by offering a single remedy of restitution to a consumer, which could be achieved by the alternate routes of commencing an individual suit or filing a complaint with the Attorney General. The statute's reference to “actual damages” was added to the Dating Service law in 1992 (L. Based upon the foregoing, the court awards actual damages of the face amount of the contract to each claimant, with interest to commence on the date of the contract payment.
Defendant had the obligation to assure that each client of the dating service was made aware of statutory rights by providing each with the “Dating Service Consumer Bill of Rights” (G. As to the manner of the report, it shall be accomplished by forwarding a copy of this decision to the appropriate public officials. The boilerplate printed form contracts has standard terms, reciting that plaintiff would receive a “photo shoot, video, workbook on dating, counseling, background checks, [and] dating etiquette” (para. The clients' failure to cancel their contracts is irrelevant where the contract itself does not recite a specific number of social referrals per month. § 394-c(4), which provides:“Every contract for social referral service which requires payment by the purchaser of such service of a total amount in excess of twenty-five dollars shall provide that in the event that the seller of such service does not furnish to the purchaser the specified certain number of social referrals for two or more successive months the purchaser shall have the option to cancel the contract and to receive a refund of all monies paid pursuant to the cancelled contract with the exception that the seller shall be entitled to retain as a cancellation fee fifteen per cent of the cash price or a pro rata amount for the number of referrals furnished to the purchaser, whichever is greater. § 394-c [b], “ ‘ancillary services' ․ [include] grooming, cosmetology, dating etiquette, dating counseling, or other services”) arguably should have no separate economic value (G.
The use of the Internet creates no exception from the application of consumer protection laws, where there is a New York business and a transaction located in New York (People by Vacco v.
S.2d 246 (1st Dept.2004), the Appellate Division applied the Dating Services Law to an Internet social referral service with far less expensive services and viewed any distinction regarding the use of the Internet as too insignificant to merit discussion. Second, in both cases, the defendant's form contract violated every mandate of the Dating Service Law, with the single exception that each contract did contain notice of a three day “cooling off” right to cancel (G.
Doe's contract, the personal shopper membership paragraph is stricken. Roe testified that she was introduced to no prospective suitors and met only one person who approached her after seeing her posted information; Ms.
Roe's contract bears the additional handwritten notations of “Marriage Program” and “Platinum Shopper” which indicated that the program orally assured her she would be introduced to twelve people through the program and, in Ms. § 1809, “A corporation may appear in the defense of any small claim action brought pursuant to this article ․ by any authorized officer, director or employee of the corporation provided that the appearance by a non-lawyer on behalf of a corporation shall be deemed to constitute the requisite authority to bind the corporation in a settlement or trial”).2. Match Net PLC, supra, the majority's holding that the Supreme Court pleading failed to plead proper damages under the Dating Services Law is not relevant to Small Claims matters, which is limited to a statement of a cause of action reduced “to a concise, written form” (N.