Legal Library: Search

In September 2016, nutritional supplement marketer NutraClick agreed to settle FTC charges that it lured consumers with “free” samples of supplements and beauty products and then violated the law by charging them a recurring monthly fee without their consent. Four years later, in September 2020, the FTC filed a complaint alleging the company and its two principals were continuing to deceptively market their products, in violation of the FTC order. The settlement order, announced simultaneously with the complaint, bans the defendants from negative option marketing and requires them to pay more than $1 million for consumer redress. 

A Rhode Island company and its owner will be permanently prohibited from misrepresenting they are affiliated with the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) as part of a settlement resolving Federal Trade Commission charges they misled consumers in the early days of the coronavirus pandemic. Ponte Investments, LLC, and its owner John C. Ponte were charged by the FTC in April 2020 with misleading small businesses to think they had an affiliation with the SBA and could offer companies access to the coronavirus relief programs administered by the agency.

A Florida-based company that has promoted its Isoprex supplement to older adults as a miracle cure for pain and joint inflammation has agreed to a settlement with the FTC that bars the company from continuing to make its unproven claims. In September 2020, the FTC announced it was sending refunds totaling more than $76,000 to consumers who bought the deceptively marketed product.

Approximately $147 million is being mailed to 33,000 consumers in the second distribution of refunds resulting from the law enforcement actions brought against Western Union by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. Affected consumers are receiving compensation for 100 percent of their verified losses. This is the second refund distribution resulting from the agencies’ actions against Western Union. DOJ is still reviewing petitions from consumers who were harmed by Western Union’s practices, and will be providing opportunities for consumers who have not yet applied for refunds to file claims.