FROM: U.S. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Because of continuing violations of federal labor law, the NLRB has issued a broad cease-and-desist order against the publisher of the Santa Barbara News-Press and ordered it to bargain in good faith with the union representing its employees. The Board also extended the union’s certification period by one year and ordered Ampersand Publishing, LLC, to reimburse the union for past bargaining expenses.
A three-member panel of the Board noted that its September 27 ruling against Ampersand was the second in two years, and that the publisher has failed to bargain in good faith with the Graphics Communications Conference of the International Brotherhood of Teamster despite an overwhelming vote in favor of the union by employees. Instead, the Board found, Ampersand submitted proposals that would have allowed the publisher to unilaterally set wages, discipline employees and hire and fire employees.
The Board also found, in agreement with Administrative Law Judge Clifford H. Anderson, that the publisher committed numerous other violations, including unlawfully firing and suspending an employee for union and concerted activities, laying off an employee without providing the Union with notice or an opportunity to bargain, failing to grant unit employees traditional merit increases without bargaining with the union, transferring unit work to non-union freelance journalists, and offering employees the services of its attorneys if contacted by a Board agent investigating unfair labor practice charges.
"By bargaining in bad faith with the Union for the entire certification year and beyond, while simultaneously engaging in serious and widespread unfair labor practices, the Respondent has both precluded any progress in bargaining and undermined the Union’s bargaining strength and support among unit employees," the Board found.
In addition to extending the certification period and ordering reimbursement of bargaining expenses, the Board ordered the publisher to stop moving union work to non-union contract employees, to rescind (on request) a unilaterally-imposed one-story-per-day productivity standard, and to offer reinstatement to two employees and make them whole for lost earnings.
In its earlier decisionagainst Ampersand Publishing, issued in August 2011, the Board found the publisher had fired numerous News-Press journalists because of their union activity and ordered it to: offer reinstatement to eight employees, including six who hung a banner from a footbridge urging motorists to cancel their newspaper subscription and two others who were ostensibly fired for ‘biased reporting’; rescind discriminatory evaluations of four union supporters; rescind suspension notices sent to eleven employees; and make all harmed employees whole with backpay awards
Friday, October 19, 2012
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
GLOBELFX CLUB, INC. TO PAY FINE FOR CONCEALING FACTS AND MAKING MISREPRESENTATIONS TO NATIONAL FUTURES ASSOCIATION
FROM: U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION,
Federal Court in Florida Imposes $350,000 Penalty against GlobeFX Club, Inc. and
Jeremy Munson Globe for Making False Statements to the National Futures
Association
Court permanently bars defendants from commodities industry
Washington, DC – The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) obtained a federal court consent order of permanent injunction requiring defendants GlobeFX Club, Inc. (GFC) and Jeremy Munson Globe, both of Homestead, Fla., jointly and severally to pay a $350,000 civil monetary penalty for concealing material facts and making false statements or misrepresentations to the National Futures Association (NFA) during an investigation and audit.
The order, entered on October 4, 2012, by Judge Paul C. Huck of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, also imposes permanent trading and registration bans against the defendants and permanently prohibits them from violating the Commodity Exchange Act, as charged.
The consent order stems from a CFTC complaint filed on March 17, 2011 (see CFTC Press Release 6006-11, March 21, 2011). The complaint charges that from February to March 2009, GFC, through Globe, made false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements to the NFA during an NFA investigation and audit of GFC. According to the order, Globe told the NFA that GFC had never operated a pool or managed client accounts. This statement by Globe was false, the order finds. Also, in written correspondence to the NFA and orally, Globe continually denied that GFC operated a commodity pool, received client funds, managed client accounts, or had a trading account in the name of the firm, and Globe claimed GFC’s disclosure document was approved by the NFA. These statements were also false, the order finds.
CFTC Division of Enforcement staff responsible for this case are Tracey Wingate, Timothy J. Mulreany, Sophia Siddiqui, Michael Amakor, Paul Hayeck, and Joan Manley.
Federal Court in Florida Imposes $350,000 Penalty against GlobeFX Club, Inc. and
Jeremy Munson Globe for Making False Statements to the National Futures
Association
Court permanently bars defendants from commodities industry
Washington, DC – The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) obtained a federal court consent order of permanent injunction requiring defendants GlobeFX Club, Inc. (GFC) and Jeremy Munson Globe, both of Homestead, Fla., jointly and severally to pay a $350,000 civil monetary penalty for concealing material facts and making false statements or misrepresentations to the National Futures Association (NFA) during an investigation and audit.
The order, entered on October 4, 2012, by Judge Paul C. Huck of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, also imposes permanent trading and registration bans against the defendants and permanently prohibits them from violating the Commodity Exchange Act, as charged.
The consent order stems from a CFTC complaint filed on March 17, 2011 (see CFTC Press Release 6006-11, March 21, 2011). The complaint charges that from February to March 2009, GFC, through Globe, made false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements to the NFA during an NFA investigation and audit of GFC. According to the order, Globe told the NFA that GFC had never operated a pool or managed client accounts. This statement by Globe was false, the order finds. Also, in written correspondence to the NFA and orally, Globe continually denied that GFC operated a commodity pool, received client funds, managed client accounts, or had a trading account in the name of the firm, and Globe claimed GFC’s disclosure document was approved by the NFA. These statements were also false, the order finds.
CFTC Division of Enforcement staff responsible for this case are Tracey Wingate, Timothy J. Mulreany, Sophia Siddiqui, Michael Amakor, Paul Hayeck, and Joan Manley.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
FORMER OWNERS OF DME WHOLESALE COMPANY ARRESTED FOR ALLEGED MEDICARE FRAUD
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Former Owners of Los Angeles DME Wholesale Company Arrested and Charged with Participating in $16.6 Million Medicare Fraud Scheme
WASHINGTON – The former owners of a durable medical equipment (DME) wholesale company located in Ontario, Calif., were arrested late yesterday at Los Angeles International Airport in connection with a DME fraud scheme that resulted in the submission of over $16.6 million in false claims to Medicare and are expected to appear this afternoon in Los Angeles federal court.
The arrest was announced by Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney André Birotte Jr. of the Central District of California; Glenn R. Ferry, Special Agent-in-Charge for the Los Angeles Region of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG); and Timothy Delaney, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office.
Rajinder Singh Paul, 69, and his wife, Baljit Kaur Paul, 65, were arrested on conspiracy and health care fraud charges at the airport as they returned from a trip abroad. According to the indictment unsealed upon their arrests, Rajinder and Baljit Paul owned and operated a DME wholesale supply company called Major’s Wholesale Medical Supply Inc., which was located in Ontario. Between 2002 and 2009, according to the indictment, when they were terminated from Major’s after selling its assets to a new owner, Rajinder and Baljit Paul sold primarily high-end power wheelchairs to DME supply companies for approximately $850 to $1,000 per wheelchair. The DME companies, many of which were allegedly fraudulent, billed these power wheelchairs to Medicare at a cost of $3,000 to $6,000 per wheelchair.
According to the indictment, in order to attract and keep the DME companies’ business and prevent Medicare from withholding money that the companies would use to pay Major’s, Rajinder and Baljit Paul provided over 170 DME companies with backdated, altered, and fabricated invoices which reflected that the companies had purchased power wheelchairs and DME from Major’s earlier than they had. Rajinder and Baljit Paul also allegedly provided the DME companies with false invoices for DME that the companies never purchased from Major’s. Rajinder Paul, Baljit Paul, or employees acting at their direction, allegedly created these false invoices using invoice numbers from old invoices or serial numbers from DME that Major’s had already sold or not yet received from its manufacturers. The DME companies then allegedly used these backdated, altered, and fabricated invoices to defraud Medicare or thwart Medicare audits.
In addition, the indictment alleges that the Pauls provided the DME companies with false inventory purchase agreements that showed the companies had credit limits with Major’s which were higher than the credit limits that Major’s actually extended to the companies. The DME companies then submitted these false inventory purchase agreements to Medicare to meet one of the Medicare regulations necessary for the companies to obtain and maintain their Medicare billing privileges, namely, that the companies had contracts with DME wholesalers and other parties to purchase the DME that they billed to Medicare.
The indictment alleges that as a result of this scheme, the Pauls and the owners and operators of certain of the companies that Rajinder and Baljit Paul provided with fraudulent invoices submitted approximately $16,662,143 in false claims to Medicare, and received approximately $9,743,609 on those claims.
Rajinder and Baljit Paul are each charged with one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and one count of making false statements. The conspiracy count carries a maximum potential penalty of 10 years in prison, and the false statements count carries a maximum potential penalty of five years in prison. Each count also carries a maximum $250,000 fine.
The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Jonathan T. Baum of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section. The case is being investigated by the FBI, HHS-OIG, and the California Department of Justice, and was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, supervised by the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California.
The charges and allegations contained in the indictment are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
Since its inception in March 2007, strike force operations in nine locations have charged more than 1,480 defendants who collectively have billed the Medicare program for more than $4.8 billion. In addition, HHS’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with the HHS-OIG, are taking steps to increase accountability and decrease the presence of fraudulent providers.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Former Owners of Los Angeles DME Wholesale Company Arrested and Charged with Participating in $16.6 Million Medicare Fraud Scheme
WASHINGTON – The former owners of a durable medical equipment (DME) wholesale company located in Ontario, Calif., were arrested late yesterday at Los Angeles International Airport in connection with a DME fraud scheme that resulted in the submission of over $16.6 million in false claims to Medicare and are expected to appear this afternoon in Los Angeles federal court.
The arrest was announced by Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney André Birotte Jr. of the Central District of California; Glenn R. Ferry, Special Agent-in-Charge for the Los Angeles Region of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG); and Timothy Delaney, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office.
Rajinder Singh Paul, 69, and his wife, Baljit Kaur Paul, 65, were arrested on conspiracy and health care fraud charges at the airport as they returned from a trip abroad. According to the indictment unsealed upon their arrests, Rajinder and Baljit Paul owned and operated a DME wholesale supply company called Major’s Wholesale Medical Supply Inc., which was located in Ontario. Between 2002 and 2009, according to the indictment, when they were terminated from Major’s after selling its assets to a new owner, Rajinder and Baljit Paul sold primarily high-end power wheelchairs to DME supply companies for approximately $850 to $1,000 per wheelchair. The DME companies, many of which were allegedly fraudulent, billed these power wheelchairs to Medicare at a cost of $3,000 to $6,000 per wheelchair.
According to the indictment, in order to attract and keep the DME companies’ business and prevent Medicare from withholding money that the companies would use to pay Major’s, Rajinder and Baljit Paul provided over 170 DME companies with backdated, altered, and fabricated invoices which reflected that the companies had purchased power wheelchairs and DME from Major’s earlier than they had. Rajinder and Baljit Paul also allegedly provided the DME companies with false invoices for DME that the companies never purchased from Major’s. Rajinder Paul, Baljit Paul, or employees acting at their direction, allegedly created these false invoices using invoice numbers from old invoices or serial numbers from DME that Major’s had already sold or not yet received from its manufacturers. The DME companies then allegedly used these backdated, altered, and fabricated invoices to defraud Medicare or thwart Medicare audits.
In addition, the indictment alleges that the Pauls provided the DME companies with false inventory purchase agreements that showed the companies had credit limits with Major’s which were higher than the credit limits that Major’s actually extended to the companies. The DME companies then submitted these false inventory purchase agreements to Medicare to meet one of the Medicare regulations necessary for the companies to obtain and maintain their Medicare billing privileges, namely, that the companies had contracts with DME wholesalers and other parties to purchase the DME that they billed to Medicare.
The indictment alleges that as a result of this scheme, the Pauls and the owners and operators of certain of the companies that Rajinder and Baljit Paul provided with fraudulent invoices submitted approximately $16,662,143 in false claims to Medicare, and received approximately $9,743,609 on those claims.
Rajinder and Baljit Paul are each charged with one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and one count of making false statements. The conspiracy count carries a maximum potential penalty of 10 years in prison, and the false statements count carries a maximum potential penalty of five years in prison. Each count also carries a maximum $250,000 fine.
The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Jonathan T. Baum of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section. The case is being investigated by the FBI, HHS-OIG, and the California Department of Justice, and was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, supervised by the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California.
The charges and allegations contained in the indictment are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
Since its inception in March 2007, strike force operations in nine locations have charged more than 1,480 defendants who collectively have billed the Medicare program for more than $4.8 billion. In addition, HHS’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, working in conjunction with the HHS-OIG, are taking steps to increase accountability and decrease the presence of fraudulent providers.
Monday, October 15, 2012
TEXAS MAN PLEADS GUILTY IN $374 MILLION MEDICARE FRAUD SCHEME
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Owner of Texas Home Health Services Company Pleads Guilty, Admits Role in $374 Million Fraud Scheme
WASHINGTON - A Dallas-area home health services company owner today admitted his role in a $374 million home health fraud scheme in which he and others conspired to bill Medicare for unnecessary services that were never performed. Cyprian Akamnonu, 64, of Arlington, Texas, entered his guilty plea to one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud before U.S. District Judge Sam A. Lindsay in Dallas federal court.
The guilty plea was announced by Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department's Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas Sarah R. Saldaña; Special Agent in Charge Diego G. Rodriguez of the FBI’s Dallas Field Office; Special Agent in Charge Mike Fields of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General's (HHS-OIG) Dallas Regional Office; and the Texas Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU).
According to court documents, beginning in at least January 2006, Akamnonu, along with his wife Pat Akamnonu, owned and operated Ultimate Care Home Health Services, Inc. Cyprian Akamnonu admitted that he directed his wife and others to recruit Medicare beneficiaries from Dallas neighborhoods for home health services they did not need and for which they did not qualify. Once the beneficiaries were recruited, Cyprian Akamnonu would take prescriptions for home health services to the offices of Medistat Group Associates, P.A., owned and operated by co-defendant Jacques Roy, M.D.
Cyprian Akamnonu admitted he brought the prescriptions to Roy because he and Roy had a fraudulent arrangement whereby Ultimate provided Roy with beneficiaries to bolster Medistat’s patient roster in exchange for Roy’s certification for skilled nursing services of any beneficiary brought to him. Roy’s office manager, co-defendant Teri Sivils, and others would allegedly then sign these prescriptions on Roy’s behalf. Cyprian Akamnonu admitted to paying Sivils cash to sign the prescriptions.
Cyprian Akamnonu admitted that once he obtained signed prescriptions, nurses acting at his direction would perform cursory visits for the beneficiaries they had recruited that bore little relationship to the skilled nursing services which Roy had purportedly prescribed. Ultimate would then bill Medicare, at Cyprian Akamnonu’s direction, for skilled nursing services that were not necessary and were not performed.
Court documents show that from January 2006 through November 2011, Roy or another Medistat physician allegedly certified over 78% of the beneficiaries serviced by Ultimate. Ultimate billed over $43 million to the Medicare program for these beneficiaries. Roy, in turn, allegedly incorporated these beneficiaries into his own practice and billed over $2.4 million for services related to them.
At sentencing, Cyprian Akamnonu faces a maximum potential penalty of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine on the conspiracy count. Sentencing is currently scheduled for Feb. 4, 2013. As part of his plea agreement, he has also agreed not to contest the forfeiture of 21 real properties, four automobiles, and funds in a number of personal and business accounts connected to proceeds of the fraud.
His six co-defendants, including his wife, await trial on related charges, currently set for June 2013. The charges and allegations contained in the indictment against them are merely accusations and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael Elliott and Mindy Sauter of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas, and Deputy Chief Sam Sheldon and Trial Attorney Ben O’Neil of the Criminal Division's Fraud Section. The case was investigated by the FBI and HHS-OIG and was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, supervised by the Criminal Division's Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Texas.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Owner of Texas Home Health Services Company Pleads Guilty, Admits Role in $374 Million Fraud Scheme
WASHINGTON - A Dallas-area home health services company owner today admitted his role in a $374 million home health fraud scheme in which he and others conspired to bill Medicare for unnecessary services that were never performed. Cyprian Akamnonu, 64, of Arlington, Texas, entered his guilty plea to one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud before U.S. District Judge Sam A. Lindsay in Dallas federal court.
The guilty plea was announced by Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department's Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas Sarah R. Saldaña; Special Agent in Charge Diego G. Rodriguez of the FBI’s Dallas Field Office; Special Agent in Charge Mike Fields of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General's (HHS-OIG) Dallas Regional Office; and the Texas Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU).
According to court documents, beginning in at least January 2006, Akamnonu, along with his wife Pat Akamnonu, owned and operated Ultimate Care Home Health Services, Inc. Cyprian Akamnonu admitted that he directed his wife and others to recruit Medicare beneficiaries from Dallas neighborhoods for home health services they did not need and for which they did not qualify. Once the beneficiaries were recruited, Cyprian Akamnonu would take prescriptions for home health services to the offices of Medistat Group Associates, P.A., owned and operated by co-defendant Jacques Roy, M.D.
Cyprian Akamnonu admitted he brought the prescriptions to Roy because he and Roy had a fraudulent arrangement whereby Ultimate provided Roy with beneficiaries to bolster Medistat’s patient roster in exchange for Roy’s certification for skilled nursing services of any beneficiary brought to him. Roy’s office manager, co-defendant Teri Sivils, and others would allegedly then sign these prescriptions on Roy’s behalf. Cyprian Akamnonu admitted to paying Sivils cash to sign the prescriptions.
Cyprian Akamnonu admitted that once he obtained signed prescriptions, nurses acting at his direction would perform cursory visits for the beneficiaries they had recruited that bore little relationship to the skilled nursing services which Roy had purportedly prescribed. Ultimate would then bill Medicare, at Cyprian Akamnonu’s direction, for skilled nursing services that were not necessary and were not performed.
Court documents show that from January 2006 through November 2011, Roy or another Medistat physician allegedly certified over 78% of the beneficiaries serviced by Ultimate. Ultimate billed over $43 million to the Medicare program for these beneficiaries. Roy, in turn, allegedly incorporated these beneficiaries into his own practice and billed over $2.4 million for services related to them.
At sentencing, Cyprian Akamnonu faces a maximum potential penalty of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine on the conspiracy count. Sentencing is currently scheduled for Feb. 4, 2013. As part of his plea agreement, he has also agreed not to contest the forfeiture of 21 real properties, four automobiles, and funds in a number of personal and business accounts connected to proceeds of the fraud.
His six co-defendants, including his wife, await trial on related charges, currently set for June 2013. The charges and allegations contained in the indictment against them are merely accusations and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael Elliott and Mindy Sauter of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas, and Deputy Chief Sam Sheldon and Trial Attorney Ben O’Neil of the Criminal Division's Fraud Section. The case was investigated by the FBI and HHS-OIG and was brought as part of the Medicare Fraud Strike Force, supervised by the Criminal Division's Fraud Section and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Texas.
Sunday, October 14, 2012
JUSTICE ALLEGES 3 COMPANIES VIOLATED FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Justice Department Files Lawsuit Against Three Related Companies for Violating Fair Credit Reporting Act
The United States has filed a complaint against three related companies that bought and sold consumer credit reports, the Justice Department announced today. The government’s complaint charges these companies with violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The companies have agreed to pay a $1.2 million civil penalty to resolve these charges.
In a complaint filed Oct. 9, 2012, the United States alleged that Direct Lending Source Inc., and Bailey & Associates Advertising Inc., both Florida corporations, Virtual Lending Source LLC, based in San Diego, Calif., and the principals of all of these entities, Robert M. Bailey, Jr. and Linda Giordiano , violated the FCRA by failing to comply with provisions forbidding the sale of credit reports without a "permissible purpose." The complaint alleges that the defendants purchased thousands of "pre-screened" consumer lists, or collections of credit report data. The only permissible purpose under the Act for using such prescreened lists is to make "firm offers of credit or insurance" to consumers. However, the complaint alleges that the defendants re-sold the lists to dealers who marketed loan modification, debt relief and credit repair services rather than making firm offers of credit. According to the complaint, some of the dealers who purchased the defendants’ credit report data have become the subject of law enforcement actions or warnings involving fraud committed against consumers in financial trouble.
The complaint also alleges that the defendants did not take reasonable steps to identify the ultimate purchasers of the credit reports. In some cases, according to the complaint, the defendants sold lists to brokers who then re-sold them to unidentified entities.
"The sensitive financial information in credit reports must be protected from those who would use it to target vulnerable consumers for sham offers," said Stuart Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division. "We will work with the Federal Trade Commission to aggressively enforce the laws that safeguard these reports."
Along with the $1.2 million civil penalty, the defendants agreed to injunctions against future FCRA and FTC violations in a proposed consent decree that must be approved by the court. The proposed order would prohibit the defendants from using, obtaining or reselling consumer reports for unauthorized purposes. The proposed order also would prohibit the defendants from selling consumer reports in connection with solicitations for debt relief and mortgage relief services that charge advance fees.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which oversees the FCRA, referred the case to the Department. The lawsuit, United States v. Direct Lending Source et al., was filed in the Southern District of California.
Acting Assistant Attorney General Delery thanked the FTC for referring this matter to the Department. The Consumer Protection Branch of the Justice Department’s Civil Division brought the case on behalf of the United States.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Justice Department Files Lawsuit Against Three Related Companies for Violating Fair Credit Reporting Act
The United States has filed a complaint against three related companies that bought and sold consumer credit reports, the Justice Department announced today. The government’s complaint charges these companies with violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The companies have agreed to pay a $1.2 million civil penalty to resolve these charges.
In a complaint filed Oct. 9, 2012, the United States alleged that Direct Lending Source Inc., and Bailey & Associates Advertising Inc., both Florida corporations, Virtual Lending Source LLC, based in San Diego, Calif., and the principals of all of these entities, Robert M. Bailey, Jr. and Linda Giordiano , violated the FCRA by failing to comply with provisions forbidding the sale of credit reports without a "permissible purpose." The complaint alleges that the defendants purchased thousands of "pre-screened" consumer lists, or collections of credit report data. The only permissible purpose under the Act for using such prescreened lists is to make "firm offers of credit or insurance" to consumers. However, the complaint alleges that the defendants re-sold the lists to dealers who marketed loan modification, debt relief and credit repair services rather than making firm offers of credit. According to the complaint, some of the dealers who purchased the defendants’ credit report data have become the subject of law enforcement actions or warnings involving fraud committed against consumers in financial trouble.
The complaint also alleges that the defendants did not take reasonable steps to identify the ultimate purchasers of the credit reports. In some cases, according to the complaint, the defendants sold lists to brokers who then re-sold them to unidentified entities.
"The sensitive financial information in credit reports must be protected from those who would use it to target vulnerable consumers for sham offers," said Stuart Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division. "We will work with the Federal Trade Commission to aggressively enforce the laws that safeguard these reports."
Along with the $1.2 million civil penalty, the defendants agreed to injunctions against future FCRA and FTC violations in a proposed consent decree that must be approved by the court. The proposed order would prohibit the defendants from using, obtaining or reselling consumer reports for unauthorized purposes. The proposed order also would prohibit the defendants from selling consumer reports in connection with solicitations for debt relief and mortgage relief services that charge advance fees.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which oversees the FCRA, referred the case to the Department. The lawsuit, United States v. Direct Lending Source et al., was filed in the Southern District of California.
Acting Assistant Attorney General Delery thanked the FTC for referring this matter to the Department. The Consumer Protection Branch of the Justice Department’s Civil Division brought the case on behalf of the United States.
Friday, October 12, 2012
BP PRODUCTS NORTH AMERICA SPILL RESPONSE WILL IMPROVE
FROM: U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL
BP Products North America to Improve Spill Response Preparedness at Oil Terminals Nationwide
Company also agrees to pay $210,000 penalty for oil spill response violations at Maryland facility
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Justice announced that BP Products North America, Inc. will pay a $210,000 penalty and implement an enhanced oil spill response program at its oil terminals nationwide, as well as a comprehensive compliance audit to resolve alleged violations of oil spill response regulations at its Curtis Bay Terminal in Md. The enhanced oil spill response program will help ensure that BP’s oil terminals are better prepared to respond to oil spills that could affect people's health and the environment.
EPA alleged that BP Products violated federal regulations requiring oil storage facilities to conduct drills and exercises to respond to oil spills at its Curtis Bay Terminal. The civil penalty is EPA’s highest to date for violations of oil drills and exercises requirements where there was no discharge of oil.
"Being prepared to respond to an oil spill can be the difference between dealing with a small, contained event or a full-blown environmental disaster," said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. "After twice failing to pass oil spill response exercises at its Curtis Bay facility, under the settlement, BP is required to put preventative measures into place at all of its terminals nationwide that will reduce the threat of oil spills and protect our nation’s valuable waterways. These measures also raise the bar for forward-looking companies seeking to ensure that their facilities are ready to respond quickly in the event of a spill."
"This agreement will help BP Products strengthen its spill response capabilities across the nation at 33 onshore oil terminals, implementing enhanced oil spill response measures, and requiring an independent auditor to evaluate a dozen high-risk onshore facilities for their readiness to respond to oil spills," said Ignacia S. Moreno, assistant attorney general for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice. "Taking these steps will help instill a culture of readiness and preparedness that will help protect many communities, and the natural resources upon which they rely, from future harm."
Under the settlement filed today in federal court by the U.S. Department of Justice, BP Products will implement a first-of-its-kind program of spill prevention measures at its 33 non-refinery petroleum products terminals across the country.
As part of this program, the company will review and revise response plans for these facilities to ensure safeguards are tailored to the conditions at each facility. BP Products will also perform enhanced training, drills and exercises, exceeding regulatory requirements, and will repeat any failed drills and exercises within 90 days.
In addition, BP Products has agreed to an independent compliance audit of 12 of its marine and high-risk petroleum product terminal facilities. The audits will ensure that each audited facility is in compliance with spill response requirements, and to evaluate whether the facilities have resources to respond to major spills. The results of the compliance audits will also be incorporated into the enhanced spill prevention and response program being implemented at all of BP’s petroleum terminals.
EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard twice conducted unannounced government-initiated oil spill response exercises at the Curtis Bay Terminal. During these exercises, BP Products was required to demonstrate its response to a small scale discharge of fuel oil from the facility into Curtis Creek by being prepared to deploy 1,000 feet of oil containment boom within one hour and subsequently deploying the boom. On both occasions, the company did not complete the exercise in the allotted time and failed to adequately deploy the containment boom.
The Curtis Bay Terminal, which can store about 22 million gallons of oil, is located less than a quarter mile from Curtis Creek, a tributary of Curtis Bay, the Patapsco River, and the Chesapeake Bay.
High-risk onshore facilities that store oil, such as the Curtis Bay Terminal, must have a plan for responding to oil spills that includes employee training, spill response equipment, and a "worst case" contingency plan for containing and cleaning up spills.
Based on the failed drills, EPA cited the company for failing to adequately implement a response plan, failing to identify sufficient spill response resources at the facility, and deficiencies in the facility’s training, drills and exercises program.
The proposed consent decree is subject to a 30 day public comment period and final court approval.
BP Products North America to Improve Spill Response Preparedness at Oil Terminals Nationwide
Company also agrees to pay $210,000 penalty for oil spill response violations at Maryland facility
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Justice announced that BP Products North America, Inc. will pay a $210,000 penalty and implement an enhanced oil spill response program at its oil terminals nationwide, as well as a comprehensive compliance audit to resolve alleged violations of oil spill response regulations at its Curtis Bay Terminal in Md. The enhanced oil spill response program will help ensure that BP’s oil terminals are better prepared to respond to oil spills that could affect people's health and the environment.
EPA alleged that BP Products violated federal regulations requiring oil storage facilities to conduct drills and exercises to respond to oil spills at its Curtis Bay Terminal. The civil penalty is EPA’s highest to date for violations of oil drills and exercises requirements where there was no discharge of oil.
"Being prepared to respond to an oil spill can be the difference between dealing with a small, contained event or a full-blown environmental disaster," said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. "After twice failing to pass oil spill response exercises at its Curtis Bay facility, under the settlement, BP is required to put preventative measures into place at all of its terminals nationwide that will reduce the threat of oil spills and protect our nation’s valuable waterways. These measures also raise the bar for forward-looking companies seeking to ensure that their facilities are ready to respond quickly in the event of a spill."
"This agreement will help BP Products strengthen its spill response capabilities across the nation at 33 onshore oil terminals, implementing enhanced oil spill response measures, and requiring an independent auditor to evaluate a dozen high-risk onshore facilities for their readiness to respond to oil spills," said Ignacia S. Moreno, assistant attorney general for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice. "Taking these steps will help instill a culture of readiness and preparedness that will help protect many communities, and the natural resources upon which they rely, from future harm."
Under the settlement filed today in federal court by the U.S. Department of Justice, BP Products will implement a first-of-its-kind program of spill prevention measures at its 33 non-refinery petroleum products terminals across the country.
As part of this program, the company will review and revise response plans for these facilities to ensure safeguards are tailored to the conditions at each facility. BP Products will also perform enhanced training, drills and exercises, exceeding regulatory requirements, and will repeat any failed drills and exercises within 90 days.
In addition, BP Products has agreed to an independent compliance audit of 12 of its marine and high-risk petroleum product terminal facilities. The audits will ensure that each audited facility is in compliance with spill response requirements, and to evaluate whether the facilities have resources to respond to major spills. The results of the compliance audits will also be incorporated into the enhanced spill prevention and response program being implemented at all of BP’s petroleum terminals.
EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard twice conducted unannounced government-initiated oil spill response exercises at the Curtis Bay Terminal. During these exercises, BP Products was required to demonstrate its response to a small scale discharge of fuel oil from the facility into Curtis Creek by being prepared to deploy 1,000 feet of oil containment boom within one hour and subsequently deploying the boom. On both occasions, the company did not complete the exercise in the allotted time and failed to adequately deploy the containment boom.
The Curtis Bay Terminal, which can store about 22 million gallons of oil, is located less than a quarter mile from Curtis Creek, a tributary of Curtis Bay, the Patapsco River, and the Chesapeake Bay.
High-risk onshore facilities that store oil, such as the Curtis Bay Terminal, must have a plan for responding to oil spills that includes employee training, spill response equipment, and a "worst case" contingency plan for containing and cleaning up spills.
Based on the failed drills, EPA cited the company for failing to adequately implement a response plan, failing to identify sufficient spill response resources at the facility, and deficiencies in the facility’s training, drills and exercises program.
The proposed consent decree is subject to a 30 day public comment period and final court approval.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
$366 MILLION SETTLEMENT IN NEW BEDFORD HARBOR CONTAMINATION CASE
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
AVX Corp. to Pay $366 Million in Settlement, Accelerating Cleanup of New Bedford Harbor Contamination in Massachusetts
The Department of Justice, on behalf of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), along with the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office, on behalf of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, have reached a settlement with AVX Corp. for $366.25 million plus interest regarding the New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site, in New Bedford, Mass.
The settlement paves the way for expedited implementation of the cleanup of the New Bedford Harbor Site at full capacity, providing more rapid protection of public health and the environment in addressing polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) contaminated sediment in the harbor. PCBs are mixtures of up to 209 individual synthetic chlorinated compounds that are chemically stable, attach onto sediment particles readily and are resistant to biodegradation. PCBs are characterized as a probable carcinogen in humans.
The settlement follows an April 18, 2012, enforcement order issued by EPA to AVX to implement the ongoing cleanup work at the Harbor Site.
The "cash-out" settlement will be paid to the United States and the commonwealth jointly, and retained by EPA for use at the Harbor Site. The settlement provides the United States and the commonwealth with funding from AVX Corp. to continue to take action to remediate contamination. This includes dredging PCB-contaminated sediment and disposing the dredged sediment at an appropriately licensed off-site facility, in a confined aquatic disposal cell in the Lower Harbor, and in confined disposal facilities to be built along the shoreline. AVX’s payment resolves its remaining liabilities to pay for the costs of cleanup at the site. If approved by the court, this will be the largest single-site cash settlement in the history of the Superfund program.
"This agreement is the product of our commitment to pursue the government’s legal rights to defray costs borne by the Superfund and U.S. taxpayers in the cleanup of the New Bedford Harbor and to hold polluters ultimately accountable," said Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice. "The recovery of these settlement funds will result in a more rapid reduction of human health and environmental risks and faster restoration of the harbor for the use and benefit of the public."
"With this settlement, we are making good on our pledge to the citizens of New Bedford to help clean their harbor. Cleanup work will proceed much faster with dedicated funding, and we will more rapidly be able to ensure that both human health and ecological health are being protected from exposure to PCBs in New Bedford Harbor," said Curt Spalding, the Regional Administrator of EPA’s New England Office. "Further, the settlement is consistent with EPA’s longstanding ‘polluter pays’ principle."
"This settlement is a victory for the people of the Commonwealth," said Governor Deval Patrick. "These funds will allow us to expedite the ongoing cleanup efforts at the Harbor Site in order to protect the environment and the public health of our residents."
"This settlement brings hundreds of millions of dollars to the City of New Bedford to clean up contamination that subjected people to unacceptable health risks and limited economic development," said Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley. "The AVX Corporation is responsible for the contamination and will pay for the cleanup, not Massachusetts taxpayers. The settlement also significantly accelerates the schedule so the region can feel the economic benefits sooner rather than later."
"Thanks to this record settlement, those who live and work along the harbor will see a significant reduction in risk to humans and the environment, and people will not have to wait decades to begin to enjoy the harbor’s natural resources," said Commissioner Kenneth Kimmell of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. "As the natural resources return to vitality, so will tourism, recreation and redevelopment for harbor-side communities."
The settlement with AVX will provide the bulk of the estimated funding needed to allow EPA to complete the cleanup remedy for the New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site in approximately five to seven years, in contrast to the estimated 40 or more years it would take to complete the remedy under current funding of $15 million per year from the Superfund and payment of $1.5 million per year by the commonwealth.
From the 1940s to the 1970s, AVX’s corporate predecessor, Aerovox Corp., owned and operated what was known as the Aerovox facility, an electrical capacitor manufacturing facility located on the western shore of New Bedford Harbor. The United States and the commonwealth have determined that Aerovox discharged hazardous substances, including PCBs, into the harbor, and that Aerovox’s facility was the primary source of PCBs released into the harbor.
In 1983, the New Bedford Site was listed on the EPA’s Superfund National Priorities list, and the United States and the commonwealth of Massachusetts filed suit against AVX and other companies for injury to natural resources at the site from releases of PCBs. In 1984, the civil action was amended to include claims on behalf of EPA for recovery of response costs. AVX previously paid $66 million, plus interest, for past and future response costs and natural resource damages at the Harbor Site as a result of a 1992 settlement with the U.S. and the commonwealth. The governments reserved certain rights in that settlement through reopener provisions, which were exercised to bring about this current settlement. In addition, in 2010 AVX entered into a settlement with the U.S. to demolish the Aerovox facility, which was accomplished in 2011, and AVX entered into a separate settlement with the commonwealth to address the remaining contamination at the Aerovox facility.
Under the supplemental consent decree lodged today in federal district court in Boston supplementing and modifying the 1992 consent decree, AVX agrees to pay $366.25 million plus interest to settle its remaining liabilities for cleanup at the harbor site.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
AVX Corp. to Pay $366 Million in Settlement, Accelerating Cleanup of New Bedford Harbor Contamination in Massachusetts
The Department of Justice, on behalf of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), along with the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office, on behalf of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, have reached a settlement with AVX Corp. for $366.25 million plus interest regarding the New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site, in New Bedford, Mass.
The settlement paves the way for expedited implementation of the cleanup of the New Bedford Harbor Site at full capacity, providing more rapid protection of public health and the environment in addressing polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) contaminated sediment in the harbor. PCBs are mixtures of up to 209 individual synthetic chlorinated compounds that are chemically stable, attach onto sediment particles readily and are resistant to biodegradation. PCBs are characterized as a probable carcinogen in humans.
The settlement follows an April 18, 2012, enforcement order issued by EPA to AVX to implement the ongoing cleanup work at the Harbor Site.
The "cash-out" settlement will be paid to the United States and the commonwealth jointly, and retained by EPA for use at the Harbor Site. The settlement provides the United States and the commonwealth with funding from AVX Corp. to continue to take action to remediate contamination. This includes dredging PCB-contaminated sediment and disposing the dredged sediment at an appropriately licensed off-site facility, in a confined aquatic disposal cell in the Lower Harbor, and in confined disposal facilities to be built along the shoreline. AVX’s payment resolves its remaining liabilities to pay for the costs of cleanup at the site. If approved by the court, this will be the largest single-site cash settlement in the history of the Superfund program.
"This agreement is the product of our commitment to pursue the government’s legal rights to defray costs borne by the Superfund and U.S. taxpayers in the cleanup of the New Bedford Harbor and to hold polluters ultimately accountable," said Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice. "The recovery of these settlement funds will result in a more rapid reduction of human health and environmental risks and faster restoration of the harbor for the use and benefit of the public."
"With this settlement, we are making good on our pledge to the citizens of New Bedford to help clean their harbor. Cleanup work will proceed much faster with dedicated funding, and we will more rapidly be able to ensure that both human health and ecological health are being protected from exposure to PCBs in New Bedford Harbor," said Curt Spalding, the Regional Administrator of EPA’s New England Office. "Further, the settlement is consistent with EPA’s longstanding ‘polluter pays’ principle."
"This settlement is a victory for the people of the Commonwealth," said Governor Deval Patrick. "These funds will allow us to expedite the ongoing cleanup efforts at the Harbor Site in order to protect the environment and the public health of our residents."
"This settlement brings hundreds of millions of dollars to the City of New Bedford to clean up contamination that subjected people to unacceptable health risks and limited economic development," said Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley. "The AVX Corporation is responsible for the contamination and will pay for the cleanup, not Massachusetts taxpayers. The settlement also significantly accelerates the schedule so the region can feel the economic benefits sooner rather than later."
"Thanks to this record settlement, those who live and work along the harbor will see a significant reduction in risk to humans and the environment, and people will not have to wait decades to begin to enjoy the harbor’s natural resources," said Commissioner Kenneth Kimmell of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. "As the natural resources return to vitality, so will tourism, recreation and redevelopment for harbor-side communities."
The settlement with AVX will provide the bulk of the estimated funding needed to allow EPA to complete the cleanup remedy for the New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site in approximately five to seven years, in contrast to the estimated 40 or more years it would take to complete the remedy under current funding of $15 million per year from the Superfund and payment of $1.5 million per year by the commonwealth.
From the 1940s to the 1970s, AVX’s corporate predecessor, Aerovox Corp., owned and operated what was known as the Aerovox facility, an electrical capacitor manufacturing facility located on the western shore of New Bedford Harbor. The United States and the commonwealth have determined that Aerovox discharged hazardous substances, including PCBs, into the harbor, and that Aerovox’s facility was the primary source of PCBs released into the harbor.
In 1983, the New Bedford Site was listed on the EPA’s Superfund National Priorities list, and the United States and the commonwealth of Massachusetts filed suit against AVX and other companies for injury to natural resources at the site from releases of PCBs. In 1984, the civil action was amended to include claims on behalf of EPA for recovery of response costs. AVX previously paid $66 million, plus interest, for past and future response costs and natural resource damages at the Harbor Site as a result of a 1992 settlement with the U.S. and the commonwealth. The governments reserved certain rights in that settlement through reopener provisions, which were exercised to bring about this current settlement. In addition, in 2010 AVX entered into a settlement with the U.S. to demolish the Aerovox facility, which was accomplished in 2011, and AVX entered into a separate settlement with the commonwealth to address the remaining contamination at the Aerovox facility.
Under the supplemental consent decree lodged today in federal district court in Boston supplementing and modifying the 1992 consent decree, AVX agrees to pay $366.25 million plus interest to settle its remaining liabilities for cleanup at the harbor site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)