Price gouging protections in effect in Virginia ahead of winter storm
Items and services covered by these protections include, but are not limited to, water, ice, food, generators, batteries, home repair materials and services and tree removal services. The basic test for determining if a price is unconscionable is whether the post-disaster price grossly exceeds the price charged for the same or similar goods or services during the 10 days immediately prior to the disaster.
Violations of Virginia's Anti-Price Gouging Act are enforceable by the Office of the Attorney General through the Virginia Consumer Protection Act.
Complaints should be reported for investigation to the Office of the Attorney General Consumer Protection Section, with the exception of claims related to gasoline and motor fuel prices, which are handled by the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
Consumers can contact Attorney General Miyares' Consumer Protection Section for additional information or to file a complaint: — By phone: (800)-552-9963 — By email: consumer@oag.state.va.us — Online Complaint Form
More information can be found at www.oag.state.va.us/consumer-protection/.
Contact Greg Jordan at gjordan@bdtonline.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
4 hours ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Scores Major Legal Win in Accessing Sensitive Data of Millions
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A divided federal appeals court has ruled that the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) can access sensitive personal data held by several federal agencies, rejecting claims that the move violates privacy protections. In a 2-1 decision issued on Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit vacated a lower court's preliminary injunction that had blocked DOGE-related personnel from obtaining administrator-level access to information at the Treasury Department, the Office of Personnel Management and the Department of Education. The ruling remands the case for further proceedings. Newsweek has contacted DOGE for comment via email outside regular office hours. The Justice Department declined to comment following the ruling. Why It Matters A divided federal appeals court ruling in favor of DOGE could significantly shift the balance between privacy protections and executive authority. The decision to grant embedded cross-agency teams broad, administrator-level access to sensitive personal data—including Social Security numbers, tax records and health information—strengthens the president's ability to direct internal modernization efforts across the federal bureaucracy. It also sets a potential precedent that could make it harder for unions, advocacy groups and individuals to challenge similar data-access policies in the future, narrowing judicial oversight when efficiency initiatives intersect with privacy concerns. Anti-DOGE protesters outside the Theodore Roosevelt Federal Building headquarters of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in Washington, D.C., on February 5. Anti-DOGE protesters outside the Theodore Roosevelt Federal Building headquarters of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management in Washington, D.C., on February 5. Alex Wong/Getty What To Know The case stems from an executive order that President Donald Trump signed on January 20, which created DOGE to modernize "Federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity." The order directed agency heads to establish internal DOGE teams and provide "full and prompt access" to unclassified systems and records. Initially headed by Elon Musk, DOGE has been a controversial element of Trump's second term, overseeing spending and staffing cuts across agencies and facing multiple lawsuits. As a special government employee, Musk could serve in the role for only 130 days, and his tenure as the head of DOGE ended in May shortly before a public disagreement with the president. In February, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman granted a temporary restraining order and later a preliminary injunction limiting DOGE affiliates' access to certain data. The appeals court stayed that injunction in April pending appeal. The plaintiffs—a coalition that includes the American Federation of Teachers, several other labor unions and individual recipients of government benefits—had argued that granting DOGE affiliates such access violated the federal Privacy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). They said the data involved could include Social Security numbers, citizenship information, tax records, health histories and other personal identifiers. Judge Julius Richardson, joined by Judge G. Steven Agee, concluded that the plaintiffs had not shown a likelihood of success on the merits sufficient to justify preliminary relief. Writing for the majority, Richardson said, "The Privacy Act does not prohibit sharing information with those whose jobs give them good reason to access it." He also compared DOGE's broad modernization mandate to that of a consultant who must first survey systems to determine necessary improvements. The opinion also questioned whether the plaintiffs had standing to sue, noting that they had not alleged their specific records had been accessed, and whether the actions at issue constituted "final agency action" under the APA. The court further observed that the Privacy Act's civil remedies might preclude APA-based claims for equitable relief. Richardson's opinion cited a June U.S. Supreme Court order in a separate case that allowed DOGE access to Social Security Administration data while litigation continued. "This case and that one are exceedingly similar," Richardson wrote, adding that the precedent informed the court's equitable discretion. In dissent, Judge Robert King argued that the district court acted "quickly—but extremely carefully" in blocking DOGE's access given the scope and sensitivity of the data. King warned that the executive order had granted "unfettered, unprecedented, and apparently unnecessary access" to personal information for millions of Americans and criticized the majority for adopting what he described as a "heightened standard" for likelihood of success. The unions involved, which include the National Federation of Federal Employees and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. What People Are Saying Aman George, senior counsel at Democracy Forward, commenting on a different federal court ruling that declined to block DOGE's access to health and labor data, said in a news release on June 27: "While today's decision is disappointing, the court made clear it shares our deep concerns. We are committed to continuing this case and holding the administration accountable for exposing millions of Americans' private records to politically motivated operatives with no legal authority to access them." Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, sharply criticized the Supreme Court's June decision, writing in dissent: "In essence, the 'urgency' underlying the government's stay application is the mere fact that it cannot be bothered to wait for the litigation process to play out before proceeding as it wishes." What Happens Next The appeals court's decision does not end the litigation. The case returns to the district court for further proceedings on the plaintiffs' underlying claims. The outcome represents a significant legal victory for the administration's DOGE initiative, reinforcing earlier high-court signals that agency-embedded DOGE teams may access certain records to perform modernization work. Still, the broader legal battle over the scope of such access—and its compatibility with privacy protections—remains unresolved.
Politico
8 hours ago
- Politico
Andrew Cuomo tries out a new persona: Underdog candidate
Cuomo's scaled down team — a coterie of longtime aides remain while consultants have left ahead of the general election — is opening up access to him with reporters after running a press-allergic primary campaign. They are eager to show Cuomo's interactions with New Yorkers, all documented in short videos posted online , a reverse from his paltry retail efforts during the primary. The former governor's new-look campaign, which reported more than $1 million in cash on hand, still has financial resources to last until November. But many of his wealthy backers, like ex-Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who contributed to a Cuomo-allied super PAC, have been publicly silent about his general election effort. The former governor must also contend with the presence of Mayor Eric Adams in the field. Adams, a fellow moderate, shares an overlapping base of support, including Black and Jewish voters. Cuomo and the mayor have tried in vain to convince the other to drop out and unite the field against Mamdani. Cuomo is not running with the same institutional support he's enjoyed for much of his political career, which seemingly ground to a halt in 2021 after a state attorney general report found he sexually harassed 11 women; he's denied any wrongdoing. Despite resigning in disgrace, Cuomo quickly raked in cash and endorsements from the city's political and business elite when he launched his primary run in March, as his advisers insisted he was the all-but-inevitable next mayor of the nation's largest city. Cuomo's team privately believed Mamdani's anti-Israel views, hard-left policies like government-run grocery stores and inexperience would make him an easy primary opponent to dispatch. It didn't work out. The former governor got pummeled by Mamdani, whose focus on affordability vaulted his once afterthought of a candidacy ahead of better known and more experienced candidates. Cuomo retreated in July to make his pitch to the Hamptons elite and directly to voters that he deserved another shot in the general election. Significant endorsements of Cuomo's retooled campaign, however, have not materialized. 'A huge part of his appeal was his sense of inevitability,' said Democratic strategist Alyssa Cass, who advised former Comptroller Scott Stringer's mayoral campaign. 'Once Superman's lost his cape, it's hard to get it back. In politics, no one likes a loser.' Mamdani's campaign has made changes of its own since his upset victory. He's met with wealthy business leaders to assure them his plans to sharply raise taxes on the rich to pay for his proposals like free buses won't damage the city's economy.
Bloomberg
13 hours ago
- Bloomberg
China Rapeseed Meal Surges After Duty on Canada Canola Imports
Rapeseed meal prices in China jumped the most in two years on supply concerns after Beijing decided to place levies on imports of canola from top grower Canada following an anti-dumping probe. Most-active futures surged as much as 6.4% — the biggest intraday gain since July 2023 — on the Zhengzhou Commodity Exchange, before surrendering some gains. Rapeseed is known as Canola in Canada.
