Displaying 161 - 180 of 434
Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc. and CrossAmerica Partners LP Agree to Pay $3.5 Million Civil Penalty to Settle FTC Allegations that they Violated 2018 Order
FTC Requires Divestitures as Condition of Tri Star Energy, LLC’s Acquisition of Certain Assets of Hollingsworth Oil Company, Inc., C & H Properties, and Ronald L. Hollingsworth
16 CFR Part 423: Care Labeling Rule: Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
FTC Seeks Public Comment on Proposed Repeal of the Care Labeling Rule
FTC Seeks Public Comment as Part of its Review of the Prohibition of Energy Market Manipulation Rule
FTC Approves Final Orders Settling Charges that Rent-to-Own Operators Restrained Competition through Reciprocal Purchase Agreements
Aaron's Inc., In the Matter of
Rent-to-own operators Aaron’s Inc., Buddy’s Newco, LLC, and Rent-A-Center, Inc. agreed to settle FTC charges that they negotiated and executed reciprocal purchase agreements in violation of federal antitrust law. The complaints allege that from June 2015 to May 2018, Aaron’s, Buddy’s, and Rent-A-Center each entered into anticompetitive reciprocal agreements with each other and other competitors. The three proposed consent agreements prohibited the rent-to-own companies and their franchisees from entering into any reciprocal purchase agreement or inviting others to do so, and from enforcing the non-compete clauses still in effect from the past reciprocal purchase agreements. After a public comment period, the Commission announced the final consent agreements.
Progressive Leasing
Progressive Leasing, a company that markets rent-to-own payment plans in tens of thousands of retail stores nationwide, will pay $175 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges it misled consumers about the true price of items purchased through its plans.
Fashion Nova Will Pay $9.3 Million for Consumer Refunds To Settle FTC Charges It Violated Rules On Shipping, Refunds
Rent-To-Own Payment Plan Company Progressive Leasing Will Pay $175 Million to Settle FTC Charges It Deceived Consumers About Pricing
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter Regarding FTC v. Progressive Leasing
AAFE Products/BNRI Corporation
In September 2017, a group of online marketers agreed to pay more than $2.5 million to settle FTC charges that it deceived consumers with “free” and “risk-free” trials for cooking and golfing products. According to a complaint filed in March 2017, the defendants offered “free” products, without clearly disclosing that by accepting the “free” product consumers were agreeing to be charged each month for a subscription if they did not cancel. They also allegedly misrepresented their return, refund and cancellation policies. The order setting the FTC’s complaint barred the defendants from misrepresenting the cost of any good or service, that consumers will not be charged, that consumers can get something for a processing or shipping fee with no further obligation, and that a product or service is free. In April 2020, the FTC announced it was sending refund checks totaling $488,629 to defrauded consumers.
Williams-Sonoma, Inc.; Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order to Aid Public Comment
Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request (Pre-sale Availability Rule)
Telestar Consulting, Inc.
The Federal Trade Commission is sending refunds totaling more than $6.9 million to small businesses, non-profits, and government agencies targeted by an office supply telemarketing scam that charged them for products they did not order. The FTC alleged that defendants’ victims included child care centers, schools, and police and fire departments.
Statement of Chairman Joseph Simons and Commissioner Noah Joshua Phillips Concerning the Rent-to-Own Swaps Matter
Rent-to-Own Operators Settle Charges that They Restrained Competition through Reciprocal Purchase Agreements
Displaying 161 - 180 of 434