Consumer Protection Mission (Detail)

Ad-Com International, Inc.; Anthony Catalano; Lorraine Corrales

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Ad-Com and corporate officers Anthony Catalano and Lorraine Corrales violated the Franchise Rule by failing to give investors required pre-purchase information. The defendants sold business ventures consisting of investments in pay-per-call information or entertainment programs that consumers access by calling 900-numbers. The Commission is seeking a court order that would include consumer redress or disgorgement of illegal profits to the U.S. Treasury and that would bar the defendants from similar deceptive practices in the future.

American Business Supplies, Inc.; Interstate Office Systems, Inc.;
Nationwide Office Products, Inc.; Michael Chierico

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that the defendants, office supply telemarketers, violated the Telemarketing Sales Rule by telephoning small businesses and nonprofit organizations, using deceptive means to get the name and address of a person to list on invoices, and sending unordered office supplies and invoices charging inflated prices. When victims of the scheme complained or tried to return the goods, they were allegedly harassed or charged substantial "restocking" or shipping fees. The Commission is seeking permanent injunctive relief and consumer redress.

American Exchange Group, Inc.; Todd Bishop; William S. Kelly

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that American Exchange, a telemarketer, falsely promised consumers that they would receive valuable awards or gifts if they purchased magazine subscriptions or other items and falsely told them that the awards would be worth more than the cost of the purchases. The complaint also alleged that the defendants violated the Telemarketing Sales Rule by failing to disclose that no purchase was required to enter the promotion or to win a prize. The Commission is asking the court for a permanent injunction and consumer redress.

American Inventors Corporation (AIC);
American Institute for Research and Development, Inc. (AIRD);
Ronald Boulerice; John Hoime; John L. Samson

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that the defendants ran a deceptive invention promotion scheme that bilked consumers nationwide out of thousands of dollars each over a 20-year span. The complaint alleged that the firms and their principal officers made a variety of false claims and failed to disclose key information in the course of inducing consumers to purchase patenting and marketing services. A federal district court issued a preliminary injunction, which requires the defendants to make certain disclosures to their customers as to success rates and earnings, continues a freeze on the defendants' assets, prohibits them from making misrepresentations, and orders them not to destroy documents, pending the outcome of a trial.

Amstar Finance Corporation; Amstar Investment Corporation; Bibekanand Satpathy

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that the defendants used deceptive credit practices in offering advance-fee loans. The defendants offer market brokerage services for business loans and venture capital to consumers for advance fees averaging $3,000. The Commission is seeking a permanent injunction and consumer redress.

Bell Connections, Inc.; Michael Berman (d/b/a Discount Filing Services);
Donald Lee Dayer; Jimmie Justus; Erwin Allen Strauss

The Commission is seeking a permanent injunction for four individuals and two related companies that offered application preparation services for paging licenses available through the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which regulates the radio frequencies used by pagers. According to the Commission complaint, the defendants charged consumers ten or more times the FCC charges for the application process and made a number of false statements, including that paging licenses were profitable investments, that buyers could lease or sell their licenses to existing paging systems, and that the fees Bell charged were to cover work required by the FCC such as engineering studies. FCC regulations prohibit applicants from obtaining licenses for profitable resale.

Best Marketing, Inc.; Edward H. Hexter (a/k/a David D. Best)

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Best Marketing and its president/director deceptively telemarketed to small businesses, telling them that they would win a premium if they ordered certain speciality items and representing that the premiums were worth more than the cost of the orders. In fact, the complaint alleged, the prizes the businesses received were worth less than what they paid for the purchases; in addition, the defendants failed to disclose that no purchase was required to win a prize. The Commission is seeking a court order for permanent injunctive relief and consumer redress.

Bureau 2000 International, Inc.; Malibu Media, Inc.; Krystee Carr; Dave Ryder

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Bureau 2000, Malibu Media, and their corporate officers violated the Franchise Rule by failing to give investors required pre-purchase information. The defendants sold business ventures consisting of investments in pay-per-call information or entertainment programs that consumers access by calling 900-numbers. The Commission is seeking a court order that would include consumer redress or disgorgement of illegal profits to the U.S. Treasury and that would bar the defendants from similar deceptive practices in the future.

Career Assistance Planning, Inc. (d/b/a College Assistance Planning,
College Assistance Program, and C.A.P.);
David Chaim Levy; Donna M. Levy (a/k/a Donna Holleger); Becky Burch Settles

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that the defendants offered fraudulent scholarship search services. According to the complaint, the defendants supplied lists of unsuitable or expired scholarships or no lists at all, misrepresented or did not honor their refund policy, and debited consumers' bank or credit accounts without authorization. The Commission obtained a temporary restraining order and is seeking a court order permanently barring the defendants from similar schemes and requiring them to give refunds to their customers.

Career Information Services, Inc.; CIS Associates, Inc.;
William Phillips; David Lee Smith

The Commission obtained a court order freezing more than $2 million in corporate and individual assets pursuant to a preliminary injunction against Career Information Services, its successor CIS Associates, and two corporate officers. The Commission complaint alleged that the defendants ran a deceptive job services scheme, which included misleading classified ads and nondisclosure of charges for 900-number telephone calls. The injunction prohibits the defendants from making false or misleading statements in connection with providing employment advisory services and requires them to disclose the cost of any pay-per-call service they offer, as required by the 900-Number Rule. The Commission is seeking a permanent injunction and consumer redress.

Careers, Inc. (d/b/a Career Marketing Services, Inc., Jobtech,
Professional Model and Talent, Inc., and United Careers, Inc.);
Daniel T. Faulkner; Nicholas S. Mancino

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Careers and two of its officers deceptively marketed employment services for airline jobs nationwide. The Commission said that the company led consumers to believe that it was affiliated with one or more airlines and had special access to job openings, and that for an upfront fee of $135, they would soon be employed in their chosen geographic areas. However, the Commission alleged that few, if any, consumers obtained jobs in their chosen areas. A proposed settlement of these allegations would prohibit the defendants from making false or misleading statements in connection with offering employment services and would require payment of $350,000 in redress.

Christopher Ebere Nwaigwe (a/k/a Christopher Maige, Michael Morge,
and Michael Norge)

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Christopher Nwaigwe, operating under a variety of personal and business names such as "National Scholarship Program," offered fraudulent scholarship search services. According to the complaint, the defendant supplied lists of unsuitable or expired scholarships or no lists at all. The Commission obtained a temporary restraining order and is seeking a court order permanently barring the defendant from similar schemes and requiring him to give refunds to his customers.

College Assistance Services, Inc.; Conni Canella; Linda Love

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that the defendants falsely represented themselves as a scholarship clearinghouse and charged an upfront fee, guaranteeing that students would receive scholarships worth at least $1,000. According to the complaint, the defendants supplied a list of college aid sources that included contests, loans, and programs with expired deadlines. In addition, the defendants did not give refunds unless students complied with certain conditions. The Commission obtained a temporary restraining order and is seeking a permanent injunction and consumer redress.

Commercial Electrical Supply, Inc.; Michael C. Spence (d/b/a American Industrial Supplies, Commercial Distributors, Crown Electrical Supply, and Kemtech Industries)

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Commercial Electrical and Michael Spence (doing business under a number of names) violated the Telemarketing Sales Rule. According to the complaint, the defendants telephoned small businesses and nonprofit organizations and then sent unordered supplies, followed by invoices charging inflated prices. When victims of the scheme complained, they were allegedly harassed, and when they tried to return the goods, they were charged substantial "restocking" or shipping fees. The Commission obtained a temporary restraining order and an asset freeze. The Commission is seeking permanent injunctive relief and consumer redress.

Direct Link, Inc.; Suzanne Bannister

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Direct Link and its president engaged in the fraudulent marketing of employment services. According to the complaint, the defendants falsely advertised available jobs and charged consumers upfront fees, but few if any consumers received the job placement assistance promised. The Commission is seeking a court order permanently barring the challenged practices and ordering the defendants to pay redress for injured consumers.

Diversified Marketing Service Corporation; Magazine Club Billing Service, Inc.; National Marketing Service, Inc.;
Neighborhood Periodical Corporation (NPC) of the Midwest, Inc.;
C.H. Kuykendall; H.G. Kuykendall, Jr.; H.G. Kuykendall, Sr.

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Diversified, three related companies, and their officers violated the Telemarketing Sales Rule by debiting consumers' checking accounts for packages of magazine subscriptions without the consumers' authorization or even knowledge in some instances. The defendants placed unsolicited calls to consumers and obtained bank account numbers, allegedly using a variety of misrepresentations, including false claims about the costs of the subscriptions. The Commission is seeking permanent injunctive relief and consumer redress or disgorgement.

EDJ Telecommunications, Inc. (d/b/a International Marketing);
Judy L. Burr (a/k/a Judith L. Burr); David L. Ramos

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that EDJ Telecommunications and its officers orchestrated a telemarketing scheme involving the fraudulent promotion of prizes. According to the Commission, the defendants promised consumers valuable prizes if they purchased certain merchandise, but the prizes were never delivered or were worth a fraction of their claimed value. A proposed settlement also filed in court includes a permanent injunction and requires payment of $377,000 in consumer redress.

Empress Corporation (d/b/a American Publishers Exchange, Inc.); Scott Cooke

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Empress and Scott Cooke used deceptive sales practices and misrepresentations in telemarketing magazine subscriptions. According to the Commission, the company promised consumers valuable prizes or awards that were never delivered or were worth a fraction of their claimed value. The Commission is seeking permanent injunctive relief and consumer redress or disgorgement.

Falcon Crest Communications, Inc.; Republic Communications Corp.;
Joseph Caridi; Joel H. Cohen; Nicholas DeRico (a/k/a Nicholas Vasti);
Jordan Drew; Gary Paperman (a/k/a Gary Perry)

A federal district court temporarily halted the deceptive sales practices and froze the assets of Falcon Crest, its principals and salesmen, for selling bogus brokerage services to consumers holding federal paging and mobile radio licenses. According to the Commission complaint, the defendants represented themselves to clients as experienced and highly successful license brokers and charged upfront, nonrefundable fees, but delivered few, if any, offers to buy or lease the licenses consumers held. The defendants also include Falcon Crest's parent company, Republic Communications. The Commission is seeking a permanent injunction and consumer redress.

Family Publishers Clearing Center (d/b/a American Publisher Clearing Center and American Publishers Clearing Center);
American Enterprise List, Inc. (d/b/a Warner List and Warner Lists, Inc.);
Kenneth Caparoni; Philip Katz; Sheldon Katz; Michael Weiss

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Family Publishers and related companies solicit consumers, telling them that they are "guaranteed to win" seemingly valuable prizes; however, when consumers call to claim the prizes, they are told they must pay several hundred dollars for magazine subscriptions to be eligible. In addition, the complaint alleged that the company misrepresented the nature and value of its prizes and failed to disclose that no purchase was required to enter the promotion or to win a prize. The Commission is seeking a permanent injunction against the companies and their principals and redress for consumers.

Financial Freedom Report, Inc.; American Home Business Association, Inc.; Elevã, Inc.; FFR Marketing, Inc.; FreeCom Communications, Inc.; Silent SalesForce, Inc.;
Annette S. Brazell; Robert V. Brazell; Dana P. Gull; Don S. Gull;
Kelly Haroldsen; Mark O. Haroldsen

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that these six companies and six individuals, who were officers, directors, and/or shareholders in some or all of the companies, misrepresented the earnings potential to consumers who purchased their "starter kits" for home businesses such as selling distressed merchandise, T-shirts, or vitamins. According to the complaint, the defendants used program-length television commercials, mailings, and seminars to induce consumers to purchase the starter kits by making claims that each of the business ventures was a proven money-maker. The Commission has asked the court to order a permanent halt to the alleged misrepresentations and an asset freeze to preserve funds for consumer redress.

Fortuna Alliance, LLC; Augustine Delgado; Monique Delgado; Donald R. Grant;
Gail Oliver; Libby Gustine Welch

In its largest law enforcement action against fraud on the Internet, the Commission filed a complaint alleging that Fortuna promoted a hard-core investment fraud scheme, which was actually a pyramid scheme. Advertising over the Internet through their World Wide Web page, the defendants promised participants in the scheme a $5,000-per-month return on a $250 investment and encouraged multiple investments. The Commission obtained a court order temporarily halting the scheme, freezing the defendants' assets, and appointing a receiver. The Commission is seeking an order permanently halting these activities and providing redress for consumers.

Genesis One Corporation (d/b/a Bureau One); Alex Bass; Rose Kistorian

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Genesis One, doing business as Bureau One, and its corporate officers violated the Franchise Rule by failing to give investors required pre-purchase information and by making false earnings claims. The defendants sold business ventures consisting of investments in pay-per-call information or entertainment programs that consumers access by calling 900-numbers. The Commission won a temporary restraining order and is seeking a court order that would include consumer redress or disgorgement of illegal profits to the U.S. Treasury and that would bar the defendants from similar deceptive practices in the future.

Glendale Associates; Crown Credit Services; Star Financial Services
(Patricia Esme Popp, d/b/a all three businesses)

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Patricia Popp, operating under three business names, violated the Telemarketing Sales Rule by offering advance-fee loans. The defendant markets debt-consolidation, business, automobile, and residential loans. The Commission is seeking a permanent injunction and consumer redress.

Global E; Alexander & Associates; CMS; Interstate, Inc.; MAG Group; Net Sales; Adelino Calvo, Jr.; Robert R. Silvers; Tod A. Silvers (a/k/a Tod Alexander)

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that three individuals, operating as Global E and under five other business names, marketed credit cards for advance fees in violation of the Telemarketing Sales Rule. The Commission is seeking a permanent injunction and consumer redress.

Gold Leaf Publishing & Distributing Company, Inc. (William Szabo, d/b/a)

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that William Szabo, doing business as Gold Leaf, violated the Franchise Rule by failing to give investors required pre-purchase information and by making false earnings claims. The defendant sold business ventures consisting of investments in pay-per-call information or entertainment programs that consumers access by calling 900-numbers. The Commission is seeking a court order that would include consumer redress or disgorgement of illegal profits to the U.S. Treasury and that would bar Szabo from similar deceptive practices in the future.

Ideal Concepts, Inc.; Michael Garganese

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that Ideal Concepts and its president used a deceptive prize-promotion scheme in telemarketing to consumers nationwide, many of them senior citizens. In the scheme, consumers received unsolicited telephone calls telling them that they had been selected to receive valuable prizes or awards if they purchased certain merchandise. According to the complaint, the prizes or awards were never delivered or were worth a fraction of their claimed value. The Commission is seeking permanent injunctive relief and consumer redress or disgorgement.

Ideal Credit Referral Services, Ltd.; CAF Phone Systems; Direct Telemarketing, Inc.; Elite Credit Referral Services, Ltd.; New Consolidated Consultants, Inc.;
Universal Client Services, Inc.; Cindy W. Forde (a/k/a Cindy Williams);
Stephen Mark Fraser; Donald Patrick Hugh; Dion William Lockhart; Karl Morris; David Wayne Panella; Englhieberth (Bert) Smith; Maria Tilotta Smith

The Commission filed a complaint alleging that six companies and eight individuals, operating out of Canada, violated the Telemarketing Sales Rule by marketing advance-fee loans. This case marks the first time the Commission has sued a foreign telemarketing "boiler room." The Commission is seeking a permanent injunction and consumer redress, and the Province of British Columbia has initiated law enforcement proceedings against the same defendants.

Incentive International (9013-0980 Quebec Inc., d/b/a Incentive International,
Incentives International, and Pegasus Industries); Joshua Baazov; Ofer Baazov

The Commission filed a complaint against this Canadian firm and two principals, alleging that Incentive International engages in cross-border telemarketing fraud, calling senior citizens in the United States and telling them they have won valuable prizes. In fact, according to the Commission complaint, consumers receive premiums worth a fraction of the hundreds or thousands of dollars they spend on purchases from the company. The company allegedly also fails to disclose the odds of winning each potential prize and the fact that no purchase is required to win a prize. The Commission is seeking a permanent injunction and consumer redress.

Infinity Multimedia, Inc.; Quality Marketing Associates, Inc.;
William B. Chappie (a/k/a William Bruno Chapple, Chappie Czaplewski,
William Brono Czaplewski, Ken Olson, and Bill Stack); Joseph A. Wentz

The Commission filed a complaint against two companies and two individuals, alleging that they made false earnings claims and used other deceptive practices in selling their prepackaged distributorships, in violation of the Franchise Rule. The Commission subsequently negotiated an agreement that includes consumer redress with three of the four defendants, who marketed CD-ROM display rack businesses. The allegations against the individual defendant Chappie are still pending. The Commission took over the defendants' World Wide Web page to provide information about the case to consumers who access the page.