Displaying 1 - 20 of 9872
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.
Mercury Marketing LLC, FTC v.
The FTC filed a complaint alleging that Mercury Marketing, LLC, and other defendants impersonated substance use disorder treatment clinics in Google search ads to deceptively route consumers trying to call those clinics to defendant clinics.
Walmart Inc., FTC et al. v. (Walmart Spark Driver)
Walmart, Inc. has agreed to a $100 million judgment to settle FTC allegations that the company caused delivery drivers to lose tens of millions of dollars’ worth of earnings, by deceiving them about the base pay, incentive pay and tips they could earn.