Tuesday, June 24, 2014

PLASTIC LUMBER MAKER SETTLES CHARGES WITH FTC OVER MISLEADING CONSUMERS

FROM:  U.S. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 
FTC Brings Second Case This Year Against Plastic Lumber Products Marketer For Misleading Environmental Claims

For the second time this year, the Federal Trade Commission has settled charges that a company that markets plastic lumber and related products misled consumers regarding the environmental attributes of its products.

Under the FTC proposed settlement, the company, American Plastic Lumber, Inc. (APL), is prohibited from making misleading statements about the amount of post-consumer recycled plastic content in its products or other environmental benefit claims and must have competent and reliable evidence to support any such claims.

“The FTC takes environmental marketing very seriously, and works hard to ensure that consumers are not misled when it comes to ‘green’ claims,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Businesses should consult the FTC’s Green Guides to understand what environmental clams they legally can and cannot make.”

APL is a California corporation, based in Shingle Springs, CA. It distributes plastic lumber products, such as picnic tables, benches, trash bins, wheel stops, and speed bumps, to end-use consumers and businesses in the construction industry.

In its administrative complaint, the FTC alleges that from at least June 2011 through June 2013, APL’s advertisements and marketing materials implied that its products – and the recycled plastics they contain – were made virtually all out of post-consumer recycled content such as milk jugs and detergent bottles. The complaint states that these claims were deceptive and misleading, and that in reality the products contained less than 79 percent post-consumer content, on average.

In addition, the complaint states, about eight percent of APL’s products contained no post-consumer recycled content at all, and nearly seven percent of the products were made with only 15 percent post-consumer content. These deceptive and unsubstantiated claims, the complaint concludes, violate Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits deceptive acts or practices in commerce.

The proposed consent order prohibits APL from making deceptive claims regarding environmental benefits for any product or package. The terms of the settlement are similar to those in the first case the FTC brought related to unsubstantiated “green” lumber claims. That case, against N.E.W. Plastics Corp., was announced in February 2014. The Commission issued the final complaint and order in April 2014.

Specifically, the proposed order prohibits APL from making representations about the recycled content, post-consumer recycled content, or any other environmental benefit of its products or packaging unless they are true, not misleading, and can be substantiated by competent and reliable evidence.  It also provides that if, in general, experts in the relevant scientific field would conclude it necessary, such evidence must be competent and reliable scientific evidence.

It further requires APL to substantiate any recycled-content claims by demonstrating that the content is made of materials that were recovered from the waste stream. Finally, the proposed order requires APL to maintain and make available to the FTC for five years all of its advertising and promotional material making claims covered by the order, materials it relied upon in making such claims, as well as any tests, reports, studies, surveys or other evidence that contradicts or calls into question any environmental claims it makes. The order will expire in 20 years.

Sunday, June 22, 2014

CREDIT REPAIR COMPANY AGREES IT WILL CEASE REPORTING FALSE DISPUTES TO CREDIT REPORTING SYSTEM

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
Credit Repair Company Agrees to Pay $400,000 Civil Penalty and Halt Illegal Credit Repair Practices

The Justice Department’s Civil Division announced today that RMCN Credit Services Inc. (RMCN), of McKinney, Texas, and the Texas residents who own it, Doug and Julie Parker, have agreed to settle a federal court case charging them with falsely disputing negative information on consumers’ credit reports and collecting illegal upfront fees from customers.  The defendants have agreed to an order that puts an end to these practices, which are illegal under the Credit Repair Organizations Act (CROA), and pay civil penalties.

“This consent order sends a strong signal to the credit repair industry that we will enforce the law against companies that abuse the credit reporting system by flooding it with false disputes,” said Assistant Attorney General Stuart F. Delery of the Civil Division.  “This conduct degrades the accuracy of credit reports and raises costs for all consumers.”

In a complaint filed on behalf of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, the United States alleged that the defendants operated a credit repair company that offered to improve consumers’ credit scores by disputing negative information on their credit reports.   The complaint alleged that RMCN and Doug and Julie Parker lodged false disputes with credit bureaus by sending “consumer” letters raising fabricated disputes over negative information in its customers’ reports.   For example, the letters made false statements such as “I was never late” or “This is not my account.”  The government’s case further alleged that these letters were not written by consumers.  According to the government’s court filings, RMCN sent more than a million dispute letters during the five-year period preceding the complaint (October 2006 to October 2011).   This forced credit bureaus and creditors to incur costs responding to bogus letters, which ultimately raised the cost of credit for all consumers.

The complaint also alleged that RMCN charged their customers for credit repair services before those services were fully performed.  In particular, the government alleged that defendants charged a significant portion of their fee before any credit repair work began.

The agreed order prohibits defendants from making any untrue or misleading statements to consumer reporting agencies or creditors, prohibits them from charging advance fees for credit repair services, and bars them from making misrepresentations in connection with the sale of any good or service.   The order also imposes a civil penalty of $2.35 million.   If the defendants pay $400,000, the remainder of the judgment will be suspended based on the defendants’ inability to pay the full amount of the penalty.

Congress enacted CROA to protect the public from unfair and deceptive advertising and business practices by credit repair organizations.   CROA prohibits credit repair companies from making false statements, or statements they reasonably should have known were false, to credit bureaus and creditors concerning consumers’ credit standing or creditworthiness.   CROA also forbids credit repair companies from charging customers for credit repair services before those services are fully performed.

In agreeing to settle this matter, defendants have not admitted that they knowingly violated CROA.

The case was handled by Trial Attorney Tim Finley of the Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch, Assistant U.S. Attorney Kevin McClendon of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Texas, and Tom Carter, Emily Robinson and Luis Gallegos of the FTC.

Thursday, June 12, 2014

DOJ, COMMERCIAL CLEANING SYSTEMS SETTLE IMMIGRATION DISCRIMINATION CLAIM

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 
Thursday, June 12, 2014

Justice Department Settles Immigration-Related Discrimination Claim Against Commercial Cleaning Systems

The Justice Department reached an agreement today with Commercial Cleaning Systems, a janitorial services company with headquarters in Denver.  The agreement resolves claims that the company discriminated against work-authorized non-U.S. citizens in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

The department’s investigation was initiated based on a referral from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.  The investigation found that Commercial Cleaning Systems required work-authorized non-U.S. citizens to present specific documentation issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in order to verify their employment eligibility, while U.S. citizens were permitted to present their choice of documentation.  The INA’s anti-discrimination provision prohibits employers from placing additional documentary burdens on work-authorized employees during the hiring and employment eligibility verification process based on their citizenship status or national origin.

Under the settlement agreement, Commercial Cleaning Systems will pay $53,500 in civil penalties, create a $25,000 back pay fund to compensate individuals who may have lost wages as a result of the company’s discriminatory document practices, and be subject to monitoring of its employment eligibility verification practices for one year.

“Discriminating against work-authorized employees because they are not citizens violates federal law and the Justice Department is committed to enforcing this law,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Jocelyn Samuels for the Civil Rights Division.  “We applaud Commercial Cleaning Systems for working cooperatively with the division to resolve this matter.”

The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) is responsible for enforcing the anti-discrimination provision of the INA.  The statute also prohibits, among other things, citizenship status and national origin discrimination in hiring, firing and recruitment or referral for a fee.  The case was handled by OSC Trial Attorney Linda White Andrews.