Tag: Consumer Protection

The Federal Trade Commission and State of Wisconsin are taking action against Wisconsin auto dealer group Rhinelander Auto Center, its current and former owners, and general manager Daniel Towne for deceiving consumers by tacking hundreds or even thousands of dollars in illegal junk fees onto car prices and for discriminating against American Indian customers by charging them higher financing costs and fees.

The defendants have agreed to proposed court orders that will require Rhinelander’s current owners and Towne to stop their unlawful practices and provide $1.1 million to be used for refunds to consumers.

In October 2024, the Federal Trade Commission sent more than $1 million in refunds to consumers who were allegedly harmed by Rhinelander Auto Center’s junk fees and discriminatory practices.

In November 2022, the FTC announced it stopped internet phone service provider Vonage from taking consumers’ money without their consent and creating obstacles to those who try to cancel their service. Under a proposed court order agreed to by Vonage, the company will be required to pay $100 million to refund consumers harmed by its actions, make its cancellation process simple and transparent, and stop charging consumers without their consent. In October 2023, the FTC sent nearly $100 million in refunds to consumers who lost money as a result of internet phone service provider Vonage imposing junk fees and creating obstacles to those who try to cancel their service. 

The Federal Trade Commission sued to stop four related defendants from deceptively marketing their 1 Virus Buster Invisible Mask (Invisible Mask) that purportedly creates a three-foot barrier of protection against 99.9 percent of all viruses and bacteria, including COVID-19 – without any scientific proof that the product actually works.

A court has granted the Federal Trade Commission’s request to preliminarily halt a scheme in which the defendants operated hundreds of websites that promised a quick and easy government service, such as renewing a driver’s license, or eligibility determinations for public benefits. Following an evidentiary hearing, the court held that the FTC was likely to prevail in proving that “the websites were patently misleading.”