Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 50-625 (2026)

Waiver; agreement to forego rights; settlement of claims

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

50-625. Waiver; agreement to forego rights; settlement of claims. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this act, a consumer may not waive or agree to forego rights or benefits under this act.

(b) A claim, whether or not disputed, by or against a consumer may be settled for less value than the amount claimed.

(c) A settlement in which the consumer waives or agrees to forego rights or benefits under this act is invalid if the court finds the settlement to have been unconscionable at the time it was made. The competence of the consumer, any deception or coercion practiced upon the consumer, the nature and extent of the legal advice received by the consumer, and the value of the consideration are relevant to the issue of unconscionability.

History: L. 1973, ch. 217, § 3; January 1, 1974.

KANSAS COMMENT, 1973

Unlike the UCC (K.S.A. 84-1-102(3)), which broadly permits variation by agreement, this act starts from the premise that a consumer may not in general waive or agree to forego rights or benefits under it. Compare K.S.A. 84-9-501(3). Waiver or other variation is specifically provided for in some sections, such as section 50-640(a)(5) relating to home solicitation transactions in an emergency; in the absence of such a provision, however, waiver or agreement to forego must be part of a settlement and settlements are subject to review as provided in this section.

Law Review and Bar Journal References:

"Survey of Kansas Law: Consumer Law," John C. Maloney, 27 K.L.R. 197, 211 (1979).

"The Untapped Potential of the Kansas Consumer Protection Act," Amy Fellows, 74 J.K.B.A. No. 4, 24 (2005).

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Refusal of trial court to give requested instructions not clearly erroneous; allegations of violation of Kansas Consumer Protection Act. Kiser v. Gilmore, 2 Kan. App. 2d 683, 691, 587 P.2d 911.

2. Cited in showing legislative intent to impose absolute and non-delegable duties on one party to contract. State v. Mwaura, 4 Kan. App. 2d 738, 741, 610 P.2d 662.

3. Delay of over three months in notifying plaintiff that order for a limited production car could not be filled held a deceptive practice. Willman v. Ewen, 6 Kan. App. 2d 321, 324, 627 P.2d 1190.

4. A consumer may not in general waive or forego rights hereunder. Watkins v. Roach Cadillac, Inc., 7 Kan. App. 2d 8, 14, 637 P.2d 458 (1982).

5. Offer to settle in excess of what plaintiffs owed under GM protection plan not an unconscionable act. Farrell v. General Motors Corp., 249 Kan. 231, 241, 815 P.2d 538 (1991).

6. A contractual provision is unenforceable under the Kansas consumer protection act if the provision purports to waive or forego a consumer's right or benefit under the act. Kansas City Grill Cleaners, LLC v. BBQ Cleaner, LLC, 57 Kan. App. 2d 542, 548, 454 P.3d 608 (2019).


Previous | Next

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: Stechschulte v. Jennings, 298 P.3d 1083 (Kan. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Stechschulte v. Jennings, 298 P.3d 1083 (Kan. 2013). · cites it 2× “Violation of the KCPA The KCPA provides that an “aggrieved consumer” may maintain a private right of action against a supplier if: (1) the supplier willfully failed to state a material fact; or (2) the supplier willfully failed *28 to state, concealed, suppressed, or omitted a…”
Unruh v. Purina Mills, LLC, 221 P.3d 1130 (Kan. 2009). · cites it 2× “The court later granted them leave to amend their petition to include claims for breach of the Kansas Consumer Protection Act (KCPA), K.S.A. 50-625 et seq. Unruh and Carter never filed and served an amended petition which included their KCPA claims, though a proposed amended…”
Kiser v. Gilmore, 587 P.2d 911 (Kan. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 4× “The competence of the consumer, any deception or coercion practiced upon the consumer, the nature and extent of the legal advice received by the consumer, and the value of the consideration are relevant to the issue of unconscionability.”
Schneider v. Liberty Asset Mgmt., 251 P.3d 666 (Kan. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “50-625, the statute covering waiver of KCPA claims, states in relevant part: “(a) Except as otherwise provided in this act, a consumer may not waive or agree to forego rights or benefits under this act. “(b) A claim, whether or not disputed, by or against a consumer may be…”
Farrell v. Gen. Motors Corp., 815 P.2d 538 (Kan. 1991). “K.S.A. 50-625 provides: “(a) Except as otherwise provided in this act, a consumer may not waive or agree to forego rights or benefits under this act.”
Watkins v. Roach Cadillac, Inc., 637 P.2d 458 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “K.S.A. 50-625(a) so states. Although he purchased the car at the end of the lease period, plaintiff did not intend a settlement nor was a settlement considered or discussed by the parties.”
State v. Mwaura, 610 P.2d 662 (Kan. Ct. App. 1980). “58-2547 [prohibiting certain provisions in a rental agreement including waiver of rights under the Kansas Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, payment of the other party’s attorney fees, and exculpation of any liability under the law]; K.S.A. 50-625(«) [providing that a consumer…”
Willman v. Ewen, 634 P.2d 1061 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “Under K.S.A. 50-625, “a consumer may not waive or agree to forego rights or benefits under this act.”
Kansas City Grill Cleaners v. BBQ Cleaner (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 11× “50-638(b), and a nonwaiver or agreement to forego rights or benefits statute, K.S.A. 50-625. These statutes individually and jointly provide a consumer with certain prerogatives in prosecuting a consumer protection action in Kansas.”
In re: Lane Andrew Patmon & Amy Elizabeth Patmon; Kenneth Ritz v. Lane Andrew Patmon; Lane Andrew Patmon v. Sandhills (Bankr. D. Kan. 2026). · cites it 3× “56 Kan. Stat. Ann. § 50-625. 57 The KCPA’s venue provision states: Every action pursuant to this act shall be brought in the district court of any county in which there occurred an act or practice declared to be a violation of this act, or in which the defendant resides or the…”
Omaha Creek Trailer Sales, Inc. & Beau Barclay v. Lane Andrew Patmon; Lane Andrew Patmon v. Sandhills Global, Inc. d/b (Bankr. D. Kan. 2026). · cites it 3× “55 Kan. Stat. Ann. § 50-625 . 56 The KCPA’s venue provision states: Every action pursuant to this act shall be brought in the district court of any county in which there occurred an act or practice declared to be a violation of this act, or in which the defendant resides or the…”
Harris v. My Credit Guy LLC (D. Ariz. 2025). “See Millet, 2006 19 WL 2583100 , at *4; Kan. Stat. Ann. § 50-625 . This Court could not locate a comparable 20 Minnesota statute.”
— K.S.A. § 50-625(a) — 5 cases
Stechschulte v. Jennings, 298 P.3d 1083 (Kan. 2013). “Violation of the KCPA The KCPA provides that an “aggrieved consumer” may maintain a private right of action against a supplier if: (1) the supplier willfully failed to state a material fact; or (2) the supplier willfully failed *28 to state, concealed, suppressed, or omitted a…”
Watkins v. Roach Cadillac, Inc., 637 P.2d 458 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “K.S.A. 50-625(a) so states. Although he purchased the car at the end of the lease period, plaintiff did not intend a settlement nor was a settlement considered or discussed by the parties.”
Kansas City Grill Cleaners v. BBQ Cleaner (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). “50-638(b), and a nonwaiver or agreement to forego rights or benefits statute, K.S.A. 50-625. These statutes individually and jointly provide a consumer with certain prerogatives in prosecuting a consumer protection action in Kansas.”
In re: Lane Andrew Patmon & Amy Elizabeth Patmon; Kenneth Ritz v. Lane Andrew Patmon; Lane Andrew Patmon v. Sandhills (Bankr. D. Kan. 2026). “56 Kan. Stat. Ann. § 50-625. 57 The KCPA’s venue provision states: Every action pursuant to this act shall be brought in the district court of any county in which there occurred an act or practice declared to be a violation of this act, or in which the defendant resides or the…”
Omaha Creek Trailer Sales, Inc. & Beau Barclay v. Lane Andrew Patmon; Lane Andrew Patmon v. Sandhills Global, Inc. d/b (Bankr. D. Kan. 2026). “55 Kan. Stat. Ann. § 50-625 . 56 The KCPA’s venue provision states: Every action pursuant to this act shall be brought in the district court of any county in which there occurred an act or practice declared to be a violation of this act, or in which the defendant resides or the…”
— K.S.A. § 50-625(c) — 2 cases
Kiser v. Gilmore, 587 P.2d 911 (Kan. Ct. App. 1978). “The competence of the consumer, any deception or coercion practiced upon the consumer, the nature and extent of the legal advice received by the consumer, and the value of the consideration are relevant to the issue of unconscionability.”
Kansas City Grill Cleaners v. BBQ Cleaner (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). “50-638(b), and a nonwaiver or agreement to forego rights or benefits statute, K.S.A. 50-625. These statutes individually and jointly provide a consumer with certain prerogatives in prosecuting a consumer protection action in Kansas.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.