The legal library gives you easy access to the FTC’s case information and other official legal, policy, and guidance documents.
Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records (Appendix of Office Locations)
Dissenting Statement of Commissioners Noah Joshua Phillips and Christine S. Wilson Before the Subcommittee on Competition Policy, Antitrust, and Consumer Rights of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary
16 CFR Part 1: Procedures for Review of Civil Sanctions Imposed Under the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act
Policy Statement on Enforcement Related to Gig Work
2209001 Informal Interpretation
2209002 Informal Interpretation
Tate’s Auto Center
A group of auto dealerships in Arizona and New Mexico must cease business operations as part of a court-approved settlement resolving Federal Trade Commission charges that the dealerships deceived consumers and falsified information on vehicle financing applications.
In a case filed in 2018, the FTC alleged that Tate’s Auto Center of Winslow, Inc.; Tate’s Automotive, Inc.; Tate Ford-Lincoln-Mercury, Inc. (doing business as Tate’s Auto Center); Tate’s Auto Center of Gallup, Inc.; and Richard Berry, an officer of the dealerships, falsified consumers’ income and down payment information on vehicle financing applications and misrepresented important financial terms in vehicle advertisements. The case continues against Berry and relief defendant Linda Tate.
The Federal Trade Commission is sending payments totaling more than $415,000 to 3,508 consumers who financed a car or truck at a Tate’s Auto dealership after January 1, 2013, and later had the vehicle repossessed. Tate’s Auto, which operated dealerships in Arizona and New Mexico, allegedly deceived consumers about payment information and falsified information on consumers’ financing applications.
FTC, CFPB Submit Amicus Brief Defending Consumers’ Ability to Dispute Inaccurate Items on Credit Reports
2209005 Informal Interpretation
ALG-Health LLC, et al., U.S. v.
The Federal Trade Commission referred a complaint to the Department of Justice alleging that Adam J. Harmon and two companies he controls falsely told consumers that personal protective equipment they marketed during the pandemic, as well as light fixtures they sold, were made in the United States. The complaint alleged that Harmon and ALG made numerous false and misleading claims that their PPE products were all or virtually all made in the United States, even though the products were wholly imported, or incorporated significant imported materials or subcomponents. The defendants also falsely stated that their products were U.S.-origin respirators, certified by the National Institute for Occupational Safety (NIOSH). Under the proposed order, Harmon and his companies must: stop making deceptive U.S.-origin labeling and advertising claims, provide substantiation for all Made in USA and COVID-19-related claims, and pay a $157.683.37 civil penalty.