Tag: deceptive/misleading conduct

The FTC has filed a lawsuit against an online business opportunity scheme that it alleges has falsely claimed its “cutting edge” AI-powered tools would help consumers quickly earn thousands of dollars a month in passive income by opening online storefronts. According to the complaint, the scheme has defrauded consumers of at least $25 million.

According to the FTC’s complaint, the operators of the scheme charge consumers tens of thousands of dollars to start online stores on ecommerce platforms such as Amazon, Walmart, Etsy, and TikTok, while also requiring them to spend tens of thousands more on inventory. Ascend’s advertising content claimed the company was a leader in ecommerce, using proprietary software and artificial intelligence to maximize clients’ business success.

The operators of Ascend Ecom, an online business opportunity that allegedly cost consumers millions of dollars, will be banned from selling business opportunities and required to turn over assets to the Federal Trade Commission under the terms of a proposed court order.

In January 2025, the FTC sued Florida-based Evoke Wellness, LLC and Evoke Health Care Management and their officers Jonathan Mosley and James Hull for using a combination of deceptive Google search ads and telemarketing to masquerade as other substance use disorder treatment providers. The FTC announced the settlement of the case in June 2025, with the defendants being barred from the deceptive conduct and agreeing to pay a $1.9 million civil penalty.

The Federal Trade Commission filed suit against Zaappaaz, the operators of wrist-band.com and other online storefronts, for failing to deliver on promises that they could quickly ship products like face masks, sanitizer, and other personal protective equipment (PPE) related to the coronavirus pandemic.

The lawsuit alleges that the company violated the FTC’s Mail, Internet and Telephone Order Rule (Mail Order Rule), which requires that companies notify consumers of shipping delays in a timely manner and give consumers the chance to cancel orders and receive prompt refunds.

The FTC has charged a business opportunity scheme with falsely claiming to help consumers build an “AI-powered Ecommerce Empire” by participating in its training programs that can cost almost $2,000 or by buying a “done for you” online storefront for tens of thousands of dollars. The scheme, known as Ecommerce Empire Builders (EEB), claims consumers can potentially make millions of dollars, but the FTC’s complaint alleges that those profits fail to materialize.

As a result of the FTC’s complaint, a federal court issued an order temporarily halting the scheme and putting it under the control of a receiver. The FTC’s case against the scheme is ongoing and will be decided by a federal court. 

In May 2025, EEB and its owner, Peter Prusinowski (also known as Peter Pru), agreed to a court order that bans them from selling business opportunities and require them to turn over assets to the FTC to be used for refunds to consumers.

Online cash advance company Cleo AI has agreed to pay $17 million to settle the Federal Trade Commission’s allegations that the company deceived consumers about how much money they could get and how fast that money could be available. The complaint, filed in federal district court along with the proposed settlement order, also alleges that Cleo made it difficult for consumers to cancel Cleo’s subscription service.

As a result of a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit, Publishers Clearing House (PCH) has agreed to a proposed court order will require it to pay $18.5 million to consumers who spent money and wasted their time, and make substantial changes to how it conducts business online.

In a complaint against PCH, the FTC charges that the company uses “dark patterns” to mislead consumers about how to enter the company’s well-known sweepstakes drawings and made them believe that a purchase is necessary to win or would increase their chances of winning, and that their sweepstakes entries are incomplete even when they are not. The FTC also charges that the company has added surprise shipping and handling fees to the costs of products, misrepresented that ordering is “risk free,” used deceptive emails as part of its marketing campaign, and misrepresented its policies on selling users’ personal data to third parties prior to January 2019. Many consumers affected by these practices are older and lower-income.

In April 2025, the FTC sent more than $18 million in refunds to consumers harmed by misleading claims made by Publishers Clearing House (PCH).