Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

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.

A Canadian company, RevenueWire, and its CEO, Roberta Leach, will pay $6.75 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges they laundered credit card payments for, and assisted and facilitated, two tech support scams previously sued by the FTC. According to the FTC, RevenueWire entered into contracts with payment processors to obtain merchant accounts to process credit card charges for its own sales of eBooks and software. The contracts prohibited RevenueWire from submitting third-party sales through its merchant accounts. In reality, however, RevenueWire used its accounts to process credit card charges and collect payments from consumers on behalf of ICE and Vast, two companies that allegedly used tech support scams to bilk consumers out of millions of dollars.

Polyurethane foam producers FXI Holdings, Inc. and Innocor, Inc. have agreed to divest polyurethane foam pouring plants in three regional markets to Future Foam, Inc., to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that FXI’s proposed $850 million acquisition of Innocor would violate federal antitrust law. The FTC alleges that the combination of FXI and Innocor would substantially lessen competition for low-density conventional polyurethane foam used in home furnishings in three regional markets: the Pacific Northwest (Oregon and Washington); the Midwest states of Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio; and Mississippi. To remedy the proposed transaction’s anticompetitive effects, the proposed order requires the companies to divest FXI’s foam-pouring plant in Kent, Washington and Innocor’s foam-pouring plants in Elkhart, Indiana and Tupelo, Mississippi to Future Foam no later than 10 days after the close of the acquisition. On April 20, 2020, the Commission voted 5-0 to approve the final order settling the charges.

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.

Veterinary service providers Compassion First and National Veterinary Associates, or NVA, have agreed to divest facilities in three locations to MedVet Associates, LLC, to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that Compassion First’s proposed $5 billion acquisition of NVA would violate federal antitrust law. According to the complaint, as proposed, the acquisition would harm competition in and around Asheville, N.C., and Greenville, S.C.; between Norwalk, Conn., and Yonkers, N.Y.; and  in and around Fairfax and Manassas, Va. for various specialty and emergency veterinary services, by eliminating close, head-to-head competition between the parties. Under the proposed settlement agreement, the order requires Compassion First and NVA to divest one clinic in each of the three geographic markets.

The Federal Trade Commission is mailing checks totaling more than $1 million to individuals targeted by a business opportunity scheme that promised consumers big profits from selling on Amazon.

Retina-X Studios, LLC, reached a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission over allegations that the company and its owner failed to secure the data collected by its “stalking” apps and ensure the apps were used for legitimate purposes.