FederalTradeCommission posts

Refunds will be issued by Ticketmaster to consumers who purchased tickets to 14 Bruce Springsteen concerts last year and were either overcharged or didn't receive any tickets at all, the Federal Trade Commission said Thursday.

Ticketmaster drove prospective purchasers from its main ticket-selling site to its reseller TicketsNow.com, charging a premium for its own tickets. And not every ticket sold even existed, FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz said in a conference call with reporters. A settlement of the complaint lodged by the FTC was filed in U.S. District Court in Chicago.

The FTC said that from October 2008 to February 2009 Ticketmaster showed consumers a message -- for Springsteen concerts as well as other events -- that no tickets were available and then direct them to TicketsNow, where prices could be four times the face value.

Kevin Trudeau, the star of late night long-form TV ads promoting his own books filled with questionable claims, will be the first one to tell you of his contempt for the government and courts that have tried to rein him in.

The normally cocky and unapologetic pitchman with a large and loyal following left U.S. District Court in Chicago with his tail between his legs after being held in criminal contempt of court. Trudeau tapped into the raw energy of those who cling to his words like the gospel and asked them to email notes of support for him to Judge Robert Gettleman. The judge got the message as hundreds upon hundreds of emails filled his inbox -- still pouring in even as Trudeau stepped into the courtroom.

More than 356,000 victims of a massive nationwide telemarketing scam will be sent checks totaling more than $14 million, the Federal Trade Commission said.

The telemarketing operation was run by Suntasia Marketing of Largo, Fla., which allegedly deceived nearly a million people into joining buyers' and travel clubs between 1999 and 2007, the FTC said in a news release. A permanent injunction shutting down the operation, which took in more than $170 million, was filed in federal court a year ago. The company's principals also agreed to sell their homes, boats and vehicles to add to the compensation fund.

Even if you don't know Kevin Trudeau by name, you'll likely recognize his face. You've probably seen him while channel surfing during a bout of insomnia; he's the perfectly coiffed guy who confidently explains to one or more women on his talk show style-infomercials about having the answers for all that worries you -- from illness to money.

Trudeau is a legendary figure in the world of infomercials, with a charismatic approach that has won him a legion of followers. Over the years, he's offered us advice on how to beat cancer, improve our memory, read faster, lose weight and straighten out our finances. Now he's onto the next life-altering topic. Trudeau is currently saturating the infomercial airwaves with 30-minute segments about his latest book: "Free Money 'They' Don't Want You to Know About."

Trudeau has sold millions of books that dole out his expansive range of advice. Yet, one thing his adoring fans might not realize is that the charming pitchman on the television is also a convicted felon who has been slammed with an extraordinary series of sanctions by the FTC for allegedly misleading consumers. Currently, there is a $40 million-plus fine looming over Trudeau's head in an ongoing court battle with the Federal Trade Commission. A judge even gave him the distinction of being the only pitchman banned from doing infomercials.

"Hi. This is Rachel from Cardholder Services." It's safe to say that millions of Americans have received a call from Rachel or one of her robo-calling cohorts at some point. In fact, there have been so many complaints about calls from robo-dialers with pre-recorded announcements that the government has almost entirely banned them.

As of September 1, the Federal Trade Commission barred all prerecorded telemarketing calls unless a consumer gives their written permission to receive them furst. Robo-soliciting over cell phones was already prohibited by the Federal Communications Commission several years ago.

Just don't tell that to Rachel. She doesn't appear to be slowing down -- and, at least for the time being, no one can stop her because it's not clear where she comes from.

BlueHippo.com, which markets itself as a way for the credit-challenged to buy a new computer and other electronics, has been ripping off its customers and should be ordered to stop, the Federal Trade Commission told a federal judge today.

"BlueHippo is a company with a business model based on deceit," FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz said in a statement. The company is also allegedly operating in violation of a 2008 agreement to settle a previous case brought by the FTC.

Among its complaints, the FTC says BlueHippo took in $15 million under the guise of financing computer purchases for their customers, but it neither provided the financing nor the computers. Fewer than 1 percent of customers received what they signed up for, the FTC said.

A call to BlueHippo's designated phone number for the media rolls into a voice mail that doesn't accept messages. And a call to their spokesman at the Washington, D.C. offices of an international public relations firm was not returned.

MoneyGram International, Inc., has agreed to pay $18 million to settle federal charges that the money transfer service allowed itself to be a conduit for con artists who allegedly bilked people out of tens of millions of dollars.

The money will be used to help consumers recoup some of their losses, the Federal Trade Commission said. MoneyGram is also being required to install an anti-fraud program and monitor its agents, the FTC said.

According to the FTC, between 2004 and 2008, MoneyGram agents helped criminals make away with $84 million wired to Canada and around the U.S.

Having money sent by a wire transfer service is a common method used in a variety of scams, mainly those requiring an upfront payment to participate. Consumers likely lost considerably more, the FTC said.

They call them "rebate" cards. But they're hardly a rebate. Instead, they are a mechanism to take millions of dollars due to consumers and give them back to the companies.

"Rebate cards are a colossal ripoff because sellers who long ago figured out how to make rebates difficult to obtain have now found a clever way to make them difficult to spend too," said consumer advocate Edgar Dworsky, who runs the web site ConsumerWorld.org. "These are just inherently deceptive the way they are advertised."

They are considered so deceptive that Canada recently issued guidelines to stop companies from using the word rebate when issuing consumers a card instead of a check.

Use of rebate cards is growing rapidly. In 2008, more than $4 billion worth were issued -- up more than 50 percent over 2007, according to CreditCards.com.

Not only are these cards not actual rebates -- although a handful of companies allow consumers to draw cash from them at ATMs -- they come with hurdles that will keep all but the most industrious users from spending the full amount.

"The consumer has to go to the web site of the issuer and put in the password and find out how much money is left. If you go to the retailer without knowing the exact amount on the card they can't take the card," said Barbara Anthony, undersecretary of the Massachusetts Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation.. "We are leaving money on the table that belongs to us because some retailers make it very difficult to find out what's left on the cards. Millions of people across the country have these cards."

Little government action has been taken so far about the cards in the U.S. partly because of how silently the money is drained away from the consumer and back to the company.

Consumers were outraged when a settlement first reported on WalletPop in June was reached between Sears Holdings over an accusation by the Federal Trade Commission that the owner of Sears and Kmart was spying on the web use and online shopping habits of its customers. They won't be a lot happier with the ending.

The feds just officially resolved the case after commissioners accepted the proposed settlement and the penalty for Sears' alleged overzealous, privacy invading behavior wasn't even a slap on the wrist. It was a gentle touch. The harshest part of whole situation was the FTC actually letting people know the situation even happened.

Being in debt is challenging enough before you add the pressure of the debt collector.

The nature of business doesn't lend itself to friendliness -- although they could give it a try once in a while. With so many people unemployed and the economy still gasping, more and more people are having to deal with this unpleasant situation.

If you are, you need to know the rules. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act spells out consumers' rights in the debt collection process and puts restrictions on just how far a collector can go.

CVS agreed to pay $2.8 million in consumer refunds and stop claiming that its knock-off "AirShield" supplement can fight germs, help battle colds or boost the immune system, the Federal Trade Commission said.

The settlement of charges lodged by the FTC is the third similar case, following settlements by Rite Aid and the company that makes "Airborne." Rite Aid's marketing of its version of the supplement, "Germ Defense," cost that company $500,000 -- a drop in the bucket compared to the $23.5 million paid by Airborne Health Inc.

"Consumers should not be misled by false claims about the germ-fighting properties of dietary supplements," FTC Consumer Protection director David Vladeck said in a written statement. "With orders against Airborne, Rite Aid, and the one proposed against CVS, manufacturers and retailers are on notice that they have to tell the truth about what dietary supplements can and cannot do."

All three companies were charged with making false and deceptive advertising claims in the marketing of the popular supplements. All have changed their packaging.

"Airborne" now markets its product using the toned-down "Helps support your immune system," without making any health claims.

Rite Aid agreed to pay $500,000 after being accused of deceiving consumers into buying its "Germ Defense" tablets and lozenges by claiming they could prevent colds or reduce their severity, the Federal Trade Commission announced.

The settlement comes nearly a year after the FTC reached a $23.5 million settlement over claims made in the marketing of the "Airborne" products, which regulators said could not be substantiated. Germ Defense is Rite Aid's take on the Airborne line.

Rite Aid's supplier, Improvita Health Products, Inc., also faces charges.

The settlement forbids Rite Aid from claiming the pills and lozenges can prevent colds, protect from colds in crowded places, reduce the severity of colds or lessen their duration.

A Rite Aid spokeswoman said the product line is no longer carried in the stores.

"Since we were notified of the investigation in March 2007, we have cooperated fully with the FTC," spokeswoman Ashley Flower told WalletPop.com

In agreeing to the settlement, Rite Aid admitted no wrongdoing.

Under the terms of the agreement, Rite Aid must offer refunds to consumers who purchased the product. The national pharmacy chain is required to post refund notices and offer prepaid postage for consumers to send back up to six packages of Germ Defense. The notices are required to go up in the cold medicine aisle at every Rite Aid store starting Oct. 1. Refund requests will be accepted until Dec. 31.

Targeting scams that prey on people vulnerable because of the down economy, federal and state officials announced today a laundry list of legal actions including a lawsuit against a collection of get rich quick schemes that lured "hundreds of thousands" of victims who paid out about $300 million.

The companies allegedly jointly operating the schemes, including John Beck's Amazing Profits and Mentoring of America, marketed them heavily through television infomercials. They sold guides to their supposed systems of quick paths to wealth for $39.95 and charged an additional $39.95 a month after that.

A group of Florida men who made false promises that they could fix consumers' credit agreed to a $21 million settlement with the Federal Trade Commission that was reduced to $5,000 apiece because they said they couldn't afford the larger sum, the FTC announced.

The FTC said it would reimpose the higher number, which spokesman said accounts for the gross revenue of the business, if the three defendants fail to pay the $5,000 or they lied about their financial conditions.

Ace Group, Inc., also known as American Credit Experts, Inc., The Ace Group, Inc., The Ace Group, and ACE; and Legal Credit Repair Center, Inc. were the subject of a federal lawsuit filed late last year by the FTC. Also cited were principals Michael Singer, Gerald Roth and Melvin Kessler.

The FTC said they told consumers they could get negative entries on their credit reports removed and charged $60 upfront and then another $60 a month thereafter. Dispute letters sent by the company didn't achieve the promised result, the FTC said.

The men agreed to stop collecting money from people who had signed up for their services and to protect their customers' identities as they dispose of the personal and financial information that had been collected. Two separate judgments were filed in the case: One that covered Singer and Roth and the other on Kessler, who filed for protection under federal bankruptcy laws.

The FTC warns consumers that using such services isn't the solution to credit problems. The commission offers advice on its web site on what consumers with credit problems can do to help their situations. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has some additional information on avoid debt elimination scams.

The nation's advertising police busted Kmart and two other companies for trying to capitalize on consumers' interest in going green by marketing products that allegedly weren't as environmentally friendly as they claimed.

The Federal Trade Commission's announcement coincided with testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives about enforcing laws against false claims of products being green.

"For the marketplace to thrive...companies must compete on the basis of legitimate advertising claims and consumers must be able to rely on those claims," James A. Kohm, associate director of enforcement for the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection told a congressional subcommittee.