Every year the FTC brings hundreds of cases against individuals and companies for violating consumer protection and competition laws that the agency enforces. These cases can involve fraud, scams, identity theft, false advertising, privacy violations, anti-competitive behavior and more. The Legal Library has detailed information about cases we have brought in federal court or through our internal administrative process, called an adjudicative proceeding.
LendEDU, et al., In the Matter of
The FTC entered into a settlement with the operators of LendEDU.com to resolve allegations that LendEDU falsely claimed that the website provided “objective,” “accurate,” and “unbiased” information about consumer financial products, such as student loans, personal loans, and credit cards, when in fact they offered higher rankings and ratings to companies that paid for placement.
NatureCity, LLC
In October 2019, the Florida-based marketers and sellers of two aloe vera-based supplements agreed to settle FTC charges that they deceived consumers with false and unsupported claims that two products, TrueAloe and AloeCran, were effective treatments for a range of conditions affecting seniors, including chronic pain, ulcerative colitis, diabetes, and acid reflux. The court order resolving the complaint prohibits the sellters from making false and unsubstantiated health claims and requires them to pay $537,500. In May 2000, the FTC announced it was sending checks totaling more than $470,000 to consumers who bought the two supplements.
Tapplock, Inc., In the Matter of
Tapplock settled FTC allegations that it deceived consumers by falsely claiming that its Internet-connected smart locks were designed to be “unbreakable” and that it took reasonable steps to secure the data it collected from users.
First Data Merchant Services LLC
One of the biggest payment processing companies and its former executive will pay more than $40.2 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges they knowingly processed payments and laundered, or assisted laundering of, credit card transactions for scams that targeted hundreds of thousands of consumers.
The FTC alleged that First Data Merchant Services, LLC and its former vice president, Chi “Vincent” Ko, allegedly ignored repeated warnings from employees, banks, and others that they were laundering, or assisting laundering, and facilitating payments for companies that were breaking the law over a number of years.
Statement of Commissioner Rohit Chopra Regarding Miniclip and the COPPA Safe Harbors
Jasjit Gotra (Alliance Security)
In March 2018, the FTC filed a complaint and motion for preliminary injunction alleging that Alliance Security Inc., a home security installation company, and its founder, directly and through its authorized telemarketers, called millions of consumers whose numbers are on the National Do Not Call (DNC) Registry. At the same time, two of Alliance’s authorized telemarketers and their principals agreed to settle charges that they made illegal calls on Alliance’s behalf. In August 2019, the court issued two orders against the remaining defendants in the case. The first permanently bars Alliance from telemarketing and obtaining or using consumer credit reports without written authorization. The second, a preliminary injunction, imposes the same ban on the company’s CEO and founder Jasjit “Jay” Gotra. In May 2020, the FTC announced that Gotra had settled the case against him under a court order barring him from nearly all outbound telemarketing.
I Works, Inc., et al.
The Federal Trade Commission is sending refunds to individuals who lost money to a company called I Works, which operated deceptive "trial" memberships and bogus government-grant and money-making schemes in 2010.
Federal-Mogul Motorparts LLC: In the Matter of
In March 2020, Michigan-based Federal-Mogul Motorparts LLC (Federal-Mogul) agreed to settle an FTC administrative complaint alleging that it made unsubstantiated claims that its aftermarket Wagner OEX brake pads could stop a vehicle in a shorter distance in an emergency and reduce the risk of collisions, as compared to competitors’ brake pads. The proposed order resolving the FTC’s complaint prohibits Federal-Mogul from making such claims in the future, unless they are true and supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence.
Buddy's Newco, LLC, 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.
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.
Rent-A-Center, 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.
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter Regarding the Proposed Acquisition of Allergan plc by AbbVie Inc.
Statement of Chairman Joseph J. Simons, Commissioner Noah J. Phillips and Commissioner Christine S. Wilson Concerning the Proposed Acquisition of Allergan plc by AbbVie Inc.
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Rohit Chopra In the Matter of AbbVie Inc. and Allergan plc
Evonik/PeroxyChem, In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission authorized an action to block Evonik Industries AG’s proposed $625 million acquisition of PeroxyChem Holding Company, alleging the merger of the chemical companies would substantially reduce competition in the Pacific Northwest and the Southern and Central United States for the production and sale of hydrogen peroxide, a commodity chemical used for oxidation, disinfection, and bleaching.