Online Lending Company To Settle FTC Charges

Apr 16, 2019 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive

Avant, LLC to Settle FTC Charges It Engaged in Deceptive and Unfair Loan Servicing Practices – Will Pay $3.85M For Harming Thousands of Consumers

On April 15, 2019, the FTC announced that Avant, LLC (“Avant”), an online lending company, has agreed to settle the Federal Trade Commission’s charges that it engaged in deceptive and unfair loan servicing practices, such as imposing unauthorized charges on consumers’ accounts and unlawfully requiring consumers to consent to automatic payments from their bank accounts.

According to the FTC’s complaint, Avant offers unsecured installment loans for consumers through its website. The FTC charged that in many cases, Avant falsely advertised that it would accept payments by credit or debit cards, when in fact it rejected these forms of payments. The FTC also alleged that Avant withdrew money from consumers’ accounts or charged their credit cards without authorization. In some instances, Avant charged consumers duplicate payments without authorization, improperly taking consumers’ monthly payments twice or more in one month. For example, one consumer’s monthly payment, according to the FTC, was debited from his account 11 times in a single day.

Allegedly, in many cases when consumers complained about the unauthorized charges, Avant insisted that the consumers authorized the charges and refused to provide a refund. Despite hundreds of consumer complaints about unauthorized charges and internal documents repeatedly acknowledging this problem, the company, according to the FTC, continued to charge consumers without authorization.

The FTC also charged the online lending company with the following law violations:

• Failing to properly and timely credit payments made by check;
• Providing inaccurate payoff quotes to consumers;
• Collecting additional amounts even after consumers paid the quoted payoff amount; and
• Violating the Telemarketing Sales Rule and the Electronic Fund Transfer Act by requiring borrowers to agree to recurring automatic debits of their bank account as a condition of obtaining a loan.

The stipulated final order imposes a judgment of $3.85 million, which will be returned to consumers who were harmed by Avant’s unlawful practices.  Further, under the settlement order, Avant will be prohibited from taking unauthorized payments and from collecting payment by means of remotely created check. Avant also is prohibited from misrepresenting: the methods of payment accepted for monthly payments, partial payments, payoffs, or any other purpose; the amount of payment that will be sufficient to pay off in its entirety the balance of an account; when payments will be applied or credited; or any material fact regarding payments, fees, or charges.

Source: FTC.gov

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Coldwell Banker Real Estate and NRT LLC – Unsolicited Calls Alleged

Apr 4, 2019 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making consumers aware that on April 3, 2019, a class action lawsuit was filed in United States District Court for the Northern District of California against Coldwell Banker Real Estate, LLC (“Coldwell Banker”) and NRT LLC (“NRT”) to stop Coldwell Banker and NRT “. . . from directing realtors to violate the Telephone Consumer Protection Act [‘TCPA’] by making unsolicited autodialed calls to consumers without their consent, including calls to consumers registered on the national Do Not Call registry (“DNC”), and to otherwise obtain injunctive and monetary relief for all persons injured by the conduct of Defendants. . . .” [Emphasis in original]

According to the class action complaint,

. . . Coldwell Banker and NRT direct realtors to cold call consumers to sell them Coldwell Banker’s realty services. This includes specific instructions to call consumers who have previously listed their properties for sale with other realtors, but whose listings with those other realtors expired without a sale of the property.

In addition to directly instructing realtors to make unsolicited cold calls to obtain listings, Coldwell Banker and NRT provide realtors with telephone numbers and other analytics for identifying leads to cold call, scripts for the cold calls, and preferred pricing from Coldwell Banker’s partner vendors for other cold calling related training and products, including autodialers.

Ultimately, Coldwell Banker’s and NRT’s marketing plan for NRT realtors involves cold calling consumers, with a focus on calling consumers who have recently expired property listings. This is troubling since cold calling consumers without consent violates the TCPA. [Emphasis added]

Allegedly, the “marketing plan” of Coldwell Banker “. . . resulted in [the Plaintiff] receiving unsolicited, autodialed calls from [three] different Coldwell Banker and NRT realtors to his cellular phone number registered on the DNC. This all occurred after the multiple listing service listing for Plaintiff’s property, which was maintained by Plaintiff’s former realtor and which did not include any of Plaintiff’s telephone numbers, was removed from the multiple listing service without Plaintiff having sold his home.”

Do You Believe You Are a Victim of Illegal Robocalls, Text Messages, “Junk” Faxes or Telemarketing Sales Calls?

If you have received illegal robocalls, text messages, “junk” faxes or telemarketing sales calls, you may be able to recover at least $500 for each illegal call, text or fax you received and, possibly, as much as $1,500 for each illegal call, text message or facsimile that was made either willfully or knowingly in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

To help evaluate your potential legal claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, please complete KLF’s confidential Robocall Questionnaire or, if you prefer to speak with an attorney, please complete the form above on the right, e-mail [email protected] or contact Michael Yarnoff, Esq., [email protected], (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, for a free, no-obligation evaluation of your potential legal rights.

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.

Office Depot, Tech Support Firm To Pay $35 Million to Settle FTC Allegations

Apr 4, 2019 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive

On March 27, 2019, the FTC announced that Office Depot, Inc. and a California-based tech support software provider agreed to pay a total of $35 million to settle Federal Trade Commission allegations that the companies tricked customers into buying millions of dollars’ worth of computer repair and technical services by deceptively claiming their software had found malware symptoms on the customers’ computers.

Office Depot has agreed to pay $25 million while its software supplier, Support.com, Inc., has agreed to pay $10 million as part of their settlements with the FTC. The FTC intends to use these funds to provide refunds to consumers.

In its complaint, the FTC alleges that Support.com worked with Office Depot for nearly a decade to sell technical support services at its stores. Office Depot and Support.com used PC Health Check, a software program, as a sales tool to convince consumers to purchase tech repair services from Office Depot and OfficeMax, Inc., which merged in 2013.

According to the FTC, the Office Depot companies marketed the program as a free “PC check-up” or tune-up service to help improve a computer’s performance and scan for viruses and other security threats. Support.com, which received tens of millions of dollars in revenue from Office Depot, remotely performed the tech repair services once consumers made the purchase.

The FTC alleged that while Office Depot claimed the program detected malware symptoms on consumers’ computers, the actual results presented to consumers were based entirely on whether consumers answered “yes” to four questions they were asked at the beginning of the PC Health Check program. These included questions about whether the computer ran slow, received virus warnings, crashed often, or displayed pop-up ads or other problems that prevented the user from browsing the Internet.

The complaint alleged that Office Depot and Support.com configured the PC Health Check Program to report that the scan found malware symptoms or infections whenever consumers answered “yes” to at least one of these four questions, despite the fact that the scan had no connection to the “malware symptoms” results. After displaying the results of the scan, the program also displayed a “view recommendation” button with a detailed description of the tech services consumers were encouraged to purchase—services that could cost hundreds of dollars—to fix the problems.

The FTC alleged that both Office Depot and Support.com have been aware of concerns and complaints about the PC Health Check program since at least 2012. For example, one OfficeMax employee complained to corporate management in 2012, saying “I cannot justify lying to a customer or being TRICKED into lying to them for our store to make a few extra dollars.” Despite this and other internal warnings, Office Depot, according to the FTC, continued until late 2016 to advertise and use the PC Health Check program and pushed its store managers and employees to generate sales from the program, according to the complaint.

The FTC alleged that both companies violated the FTC Act’s prohibition against deceptive practices.

In addition to the monetary payment, the proposed settlement prohibits Office Depot from making misrepresentations about the security or performance of a consumer’s electronic device and requires the company to ensure its existing and future software providers do not engage in such conduct. As part of its proposed settlement, Support.com cannot make, or provide others with the means to make, misrepresentations about the performance or detection of security issues on consumer electronic devices.

Source: FTC.gov

Kehoe Law Firm, P.C.