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.
B.E.S.T. GDR, LLC, et al., United States and State of Illinois v.
The U.S. Department of Justice, on behalf of FTC, and the state of Illinois sued Chicago-based company Premium Home Service (PHS) and its owner for fraudulently creating thousands of fake online business listings for home repair companies to deceive consumers into thinking they were choosing reputable local companies for home repairs.
Asbury Automotive Group, Inc., et al., In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission is acting against a large automotive dealer group, Asbury Automotive, for systematically charging consumers for costly add-on items they did not agree to or were falsely told were required as part of their purchase. The FTC also alleges that Asbury discriminates against Black and Latino consumers, targeting them with unwanted and higher-priced add-ons.
In an administrative complaint, the FTC alleges that three Texas dealerships owned by Asbury that operate as David McDavid Ford Ft. Worth, David McDavid Honda Frisco, and David McDavid Honda Irving, along with Ali Benli, who acted as general manager of those dealerships, engaged in a variety of practices to sneak hidden fees for unwanted add-ons past consumers. These tactics included a practice called “payment packing,” where the dealerships convinced consumers to agree to monthly payments that were larger than needed to pay for the agreed-upon price of the car, and then “packed” add-on items to the sales contract to make up that difference.
Merritt
The FTC reached a settlement with Steven and Gina Merritt, senior participants in a multilevel marketing company, over allegations that they deceived consumers about the amount of money they could earn from selling products and recruiting new participants to the MLM.
Square One Development Group Inc., et al., U.S. and State of Wisconsin v.
The U.S. Department of Justice, on behalf of the Federal Trade Commission, and the Wisconsin Attorney General, filed suit against Consumer Law Protection and related companies, along with their owners and operators, Christopher Carroll, George Reed, Louann Reed, Scott Jackson, and Eduardo Balderas for scamming consumers—mostly older adults—out of more than $90 million in a massive timeshare exit scam.
Forever Living Products International, LLC, et al., FTC v.
Forever Living will be permanently prohibited from making deceptive earnings claims to resolve Federal Trade Commission allegations that the company deceived consumers that they could earn profits from the venture when the vast majority of participants made little or no money.
Publishing.com, In the Matter of
Publishing.com LLC and its two principals will pay $1.5 million and be required to substantiate earnings claims in the future to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that the company and its operators misled consumers about how much money they were likely to earn using their products.
Concurring Statement of Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson Joined by Commissioner Mark R. Meador Regarding Lindsay Automotive Group
Xponential Fitness
In March 2026, the FTC announced that it secured a settlement against Xponential Fitness for Franchise Rule violations and related deceptive practices, including $17 million that will be returned to franchisees, which is the largest amount ever to go back to consumers in a franchise case.
The FTC alleged that Xponential Fitness, which sells franchises for popular fitness studios brands such as Club Pilates, Pure Barre, YogaSix, StretchLab, and BFT, misrepresented key information about the costs, risks, time to open and operate studios, and essential details about the company’s operations, leaving many franchisees and prospective franchisees in the dark about their investment.
LA Fitness
In August 2025, the FTC sued the operators of LA Fitness and other gyms over allegations they make it exceedingly difficult for consumers to cancel their gym memberships and related services that continued indefinitely unless cancelled. The agency is seeking a court order prohibiting the allegedly unfair conduct and money back for consumers harmed by the difficulty in cancelling memberships.
NGL
The FTC has taken action against NGL Labs, LLC and two of its co-founders, Raj Vir and Joao Figueiredo, for a host of law violations related to their anonymous messaging app, including unfairly marketing the service to children and teens.
In July 2024, the FTC took action against NGL Labs, LLC and two of its co-founders, Raj Vir and Joao Figueiredo, for a host of law violations related to their anonymous messaging app, including unfairly marketing the service to children and teens.
In January 2026, the Commission announced the claims process through which potentially defrauded consumers could see refunds from the FTC.
Seven & i Holdings Co. Ltd. (Sunoco LP), FTC v.
The Federal Trade Commission sued 7-Eleven, Inc and its parent company, Seven & i Holdings Co., Ltd., alleging the convenience store chain violated a 2018 FTC consent order by acquiring a fuel outlet in St. Petersburg, Fla. without providing the Commission prior notice.
On December 8, 2025, the FTC announced that 7-Eleven, Inc. and its parent company, Seven & i Holdings Co., Ltd., (collectively 7-Eleven) will pay $4.5 million to settle the Commission's lawsuit.
Support King, LLC (SpyFone.com), In the Matter of
The FTC approved a proposed order banning SpyFone and its CEO Scott Zuckerman from the surveillance business over allegations that the stalkerware app company secretly harvested and shared data on people’s physical movements, phone use, and online activities through a hidden device hack.
The FTC denied a petition to vacate or modify the FTC’s 2021 order.
Gateway Pet Memorial Services
The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint against Gateway Services and its subsidiary Gateway US Holdings, Inc., (collectively referred to as Gateway), which alleges that Gateway imposed noncompete agreements on almost all of its employees, which typically prohibited employees from working in the pet cremation service industry anywhere in the U.S. for one year after leaving Gateway.
Under a proposed FTC consent order, Gateway must, among other terms, immediately stop enforcing all existing noncompete agreements.
On November 25, 2025, the FTC finalized the consent order in this matter.