{"id":185221,"date":"2026-04-04T06:30:07","date_gmt":"2026-04-04T06:30:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/185221\/"},"modified":"2026-04-04T06:30:07","modified_gmt":"2026-04-04T06:30:07","slug":"governor-hochul-signs-chapter-amendment-to-the-new-york-fair-business-practices-act-hinshaw-culbertson-consumer-crossroads","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/185221\/","title":{"rendered":"Governor Hochul Signs Chapter Amendment to the New York FAIR Business Practices Act | Hinshaw & Culbertson – Consumer Crossroads"},"content":{"rendered":"

In a prior Consumer Crossroads blog post,<\/a> we reported that Governor Hochul had signed the Fostering Affordability and Integrity Through Reasonable Business Practices Act (the \u201cFAIR Business Practices Act\u201d) into law as Chapter 708 of the 2025 Session Laws.[1]<\/a><\/p>\n

In connection with her approval of the FAIR Business Practices Act, Governor Hochul issued an Approval Memorandum stating that she had reached an agreement with the state legislature to enact amendments that would:<\/p>\n

\t\t\u201censure that the bill does not override existing case law concerning the \u2018consumer oriented standard\u2019\u201d; and
\n\t\t\u201cclarify that the private right of action . . . applies only to deceptive practices and deceptive acts, with the Attorney General solely having the power to bring claims for unfair and abusive acts and practices, with such terms defined and to be interpreted in a manner consistent with federal law.\u201d[2]<\/a><\/p>\n

Recently, on March 27, 2026, Governor Hochul signed into law, as Chapter 94 of the 2026 Session Laws, a \u201cchapter amendment\u201d that implements the agreed-upon amendments.[3]<\/a><\/p>\n

Changes Implemented by the Chapter Amendment<\/p>\n

Repeal of Purpose and Intent Section<\/p>\n

The chapter amendment repeals Section 348 of the General Business Law, which had been added by the FAIR Business Practices Act to state the purpose and intent of Article 22-A of the General Business Law. Among other things, the purpose and intent section repealed by the chapter amendment included language: (i) stating that the article \u201celiminates atextual exceptions imposed by the courts . . . that have limited the attorney general\u2019s power to enforce the statute to acts that are \u2018consumer-oriented\u2019 or that have an impact on the public at large\u201d;[1]<\/a> and (ii) asserting that \u201c[t]he attorney general has a special responsibility to create a fair marketplace for all\u201d including \u201cbusinesses and non-profits as well as individuals.\u201d[2]<\/a><\/p>\n

Amendment to the Definition of an Unfair Act or Practice<\/p>\n

Relatedly, the chapter amendment deleted the following language from the New York definition of an unfair act or practice: \u201cprovided, however, that the substantial injury of a person or persons other than consumers shall also be deemed a \u2018substantial injury\u2019 for purposes of\u201d Section 349 of the General Business Law.[3]<\/a><\/p>\n

This amendment ensures that the New York definition of an unfair act or practice will be defined and interpreted in a manner consistent with the definition of an unfair act or practice in Section 5 of the FTC Act. See 12 U.S.C. \u00a7 45(n). As amended, Section 349(1) of the General Business Law now defines an act or practice as unfair \u201cwhen it causes or is likely to cause substantial injury which is not reasonably avoidable and is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition. The term \u2018substantial injury\u2019 as used in this subdivision shall have the same meaning as the term \u2018substantial injury\u2019 in the federal trade commission act, 15 U.S.C. Section 41 et seq.\u201d<\/p>\n

Preservation of Consumer-Oriented Conduct Limitation; Private Right of Action Clarification<\/p>\n

Consistent with the Approval Memorandum, the chapter amendment also repealed General Business Law Section 349(b)(3), which had stated that \u201c[a]n act or practice made unlawful by this section is actionable by the attorney general regardless of whether or not such act or practice is consumer-oriented.\u201d[4]<\/a><\/p>\n

The Approval Memorandum also sought clarification that the private right of action is limited to deceptive practices and deceptive acts. To this end, the chapter amendment amends Section 349(h) of the General Business Law by adding the word \u201cdeceptive\u201d before \u201cpractice\u201d wherever it appears so that the private right of action provision now refers to \u201cany deceptive act or deceptive practice.\u201d[5]<\/a><\/p>\n

Miscellaneous<\/p>\n

Finally, the chapter amendment increases the waiting period before the attorney general may commence an action or proceeding from five business days to ten calendar days.[6]<\/a> Specifically, except in cases where the attorney general seeks preliminary relief and finds that prior notice is not in the public interest, the attorney general must notify a prospective defendant of her intent to commence an action or proceeding under Section 349 and afford the prospective defendant an opportunity to show in writing, within ten calendar days after receipt of the notice, why an action or proceeding should not be instituted against such person.<\/p>\n

Key Takeaways<\/p>\n

Even with the substantive changes made by the chapter amendment, the FAIR Business Practices Act has significantly expanded the enforcement authority of the Attorney General under the New York State law proscribing deceptive acts and practices. Most notably, the FAIR Business Practices Act has enhanced the enforcement authority of the Attorney General in the following ways:<\/p>\n

\t\tAdding authority to bring actions based on \u201cunfair\u201d and \u201cabusive\u201d acts and practices;
\n\t\tAs with the existing deception authority, the new unfairness and abusiveness authority is not limited to acts and practices relating to consumer financial products and services; and
\n\t\tAdding language purportedly authorizing the Attorney General to bring actions against New York businesses based on acts affecting non-New York residents, and against non-New York businesses based on acts affecting New York residents.<\/p>\n

Now that the dust has settled and the chapter amendment has been enacted, we anticipate considerable UDAAP enforcement activity from the New York State Attorney General. The scope of future enforcement activity will be expanded as a result of the enforcement authority enhancements made by the FAIR Business Practices Act.<\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> See, e.g., Genesco Entertainment v. Koch,\u00a0593 F. Supp. 743, 752-53 (S.D.N.Y. 1984);\u00a0Oswego Laborers Loc. 214 Pension Fund v. Marine Midland Bank, N.A,\u00a085 N.Y.2d 20, 25-26 (1995).<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law \u00a7 348, repealed by 2026 N.Y. Laws Ch. 94, \u00a7 1.<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a>\u00a02026 Laws 2026 Ch. 94, \u00a7 2. According to the introducer\u2019s memorandum in support of the New York FAIR Business Practices Act, the above-quoted provision encompassing injury to persons other than consumers apparently was intended to make the state definition of \u201cunfairness\u201d applicable to businesses and non-profits as well as consumers.\u00a0See\u00a02025 N.Y.S. 8416,\u00a0New York State Senate Introducer\u2019s Memorandum in Support, at 2.<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law \u00a7 349(b)(3), repealed by 2026 N.Y. Laws Ch. 94, \u00a7 3.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> 2026 N.Y. Laws Ch. 94, \u00a7 2 (amending N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law \u00a7 349(h)).<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> 2026 N.Y. Laws Ch. 94, \u00a7 2 (amending N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law \u00a7 349(c)).<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a> 2025 N.Y. ALS 708, 2025 N.Y. Laws 708, 2025 N.Y. Ch. 708.<\/p>\n

[8]<\/a> Approval Memorandum No. 83 Chapter 708 of 2025.<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a> 2026 N.Y. ALS 94, 2026 N.Y. Laws 94, 2026 N.Y. Ch. 94 (hereinafter cited as \u201c2026 N.Y. Laws Ch. 94\u201d).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"In a prior Consumer Crossroads blog post, we reported that Governor Hochul had signed the Fostering Affordability and…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":185222,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[9,11,10,49,51,50],"class_list":{"0":"post-185221","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-new-york","8":"tag-new-york","9":"tag-new-york-headlines","10":"tag-new-york-news","11":"tag-new-york-state","12":"tag-new-york-state-headlines","13":"tag-new-york-state-news"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185221","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=185221"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185221\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/185222"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=185221"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=185221"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ny\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=185221"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}