Business Blog
$3.3 million FTC settlement with Passport drives home importance of fair lending
By
Lesley Fair
October 18, 2022
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
When it comes to the car buying process, there a world of difference between going for a test drive and getting taken for a ride. An FTC complaint against DC-based Passport Automotive Group alleges that the company deceived customers by packing junk fees onto the cost of its vehicles. According to the complaint, Passport also discriminated against Black and Latino consumers by charging them higher financing costs and fees, in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the FTC Act. To settle the case, the defendants will pay $3.3 million and will change their business practices in ways that should cause others in the industry to take notice.
Passport operates nine dealerships in the Washington area. (And yes, if the name sounds familiar, Passport was the subject of an FTC action in 2018, charging the company with sending phony “urgent recall” notices that were really just sales promotions.) In the just-announced case, Passport ads conveyed to consumers that they could buy certain inspected, reconditioned, or certified vehicles at specific prices. However, the complaint alleges that in many instances, when a consumer tried to buy a car for the advertised amount, Passport’s double-talk – and double pricing – kicked in. Despite the claim that the advertised price included the cost of certification, inspection, etc., the FTC says Passport packed on hefty additional (and redundant) fees for those same services.
The complaint cites examples of just how Passport’s tactics walloped consumers in the wallet. For example, one Passport dealership advertised a certified pre-owned Nissan Rogue for $24,050. However, Passport later charged the buyer an additional $2,390 in fees, purportedly required for reconditioning and certification. The upshot: the consumer had to pay $26,440 due to the double charges. But the deception didn’t end there. In numerous instances, Passport falsely told prospective buyers that those extra reconditioning, inspection, preparation, and certification fees were mandatory, despite what Passport said in its ads – and despite the fact that many manufacturers’ policies prohibit dealers from separately charging for the cost of certification.
The FTC also alleges Passport violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the FTC Act by imposing higher borrowing costs on Black and Latino consumers when compared to non-Latino White consumers. To put the discrimination allegations in context, here’s some background on the vehicle financing process. Dealerships like Passport often arrange financing for customers by reviewing their credit applications and credit reports, and then submitting the applications to one or more finance companies. Those companies get back to Passport with a specific “buy rate” – the risk-based interest rate the company will offer for that transaction.
In some instances, the finance company allows Passport to add another charge – called a markup. But unlike the buy rate, the markup isn’t based on the individual’s credit record. The complaint alleges that Passport’s policy was to charge a standard markup of 2%, but gave employees discretion to reduce or eliminate the markup for certain reasons. Passport supposedly required approvals and audits, but the FTC says Passport didn’t actually follow its policy.
According to the FTC, Passport’s discretionary use of markup rates – charging some consumers the markup, but not others – resulted in charging many Black and Latino consumers more than non-Latino White consumers. For example, among thousands of consumers who received financing through Passport between August 2017 and August 2020, when compared to non-Latino White consumers, Passport charged Black consumers, on average, about $291 more in interest, and Latino consumers, on average, about $235 more. In addition, Black consumers were charged the maximum markup approximately 47% more often and Latino consumers approximately 38% more often than non-Latino White consumers.
The complaint also alleges that Passport charged Black and Latino consumers even more in those tacked-on junk fees. The FTC say that when compared to non-Latino White consumers, Black consumers paid, on average, approximately $82 more and Latino consumers approximately $81.
In addition to the $3.3 million financial remedy, the proposed stipulated order will make sweeping changes in how Passport does business, including a broad prohibition on misrepresenting the costs or terms to buy, lease, or finance a car and a requirement that the defendants get consumers’ express, informed consent before charging them any fees. The proposed order explains the changes in detail, but one provision related to the Equal Credit Opportunity Act deserves particular attention. In addition to implementing a Fair Lending Program, the defendants have agreed that each Passport dealership will either charge no financing markup or will charge the same markup rate to all consumers. In other words, the defendants are prohibited from charging different groups different markups. That provision addresses the FTC concern that Passport was using the discretionary markup rate to discriminate against consumers on the basis of race and ethnicity.
There’s a lot for other companies to glean from the FTC action against Passport.
Conduct an ECOA compliance check. This is the latest in a series of recent FTC actions to enforce the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. ECOA has been the law of the land for almost 50 years and businesses have no excuse for continuing pernicious practices that violate the statute.
Corporate officers: The buck stops with you. In addition to naming corporate entities, the complaint names in their individual capacities Passport’s owner Everett A. Hellmuth, III, and Jay Klein, Vice President of seven of the Passport-related companies. The complaint explains in detail their involvement in the conduct challenged as illegal and alleges that Passport didn’t take appropriate corrective measures even when possible law violations were called to their attention. For example, according to the FTC, “Despite these multiple emails and text messages informing them of Passport’s practice of charging consumers bogus fees, Hellmuth and Klein have allowed the practice to continue.” Furthermore, Passport had received letters from finance companies raising “statistically significant differences in the markup rates charged to Black borrowers at two separate Passport dealerships,” but the FTC says Passport “took no steps to modify its discretionary markup policy or practice.”
When implementing corporate policies, practices – not paper – are what matters. According to Passport’s written policy, any deviations from the standard markup had to be recorded on a certification form, signed by the sales person, and reviewed by another employee. The written policy also required random monitoring of credit offers and periodic audits of credit sales. Sounds good on paper, but the FTC says Passport didn’t walk the walk. A document that looks nice in a file folder won’t paper over illegal practices on the sales floor.
Discriminatory conduct can be “unfair.” In addition to alleging that Passport’s discriminatory finance practices violate ECOA, the FTC alleges the practices were unfair under the FTC Act. That makes sense. Passport’s discriminatory conduct injured Black and Latino consumers’ wallets: They paid more than White consumers to finance their car. They couldn’t reasonably avoid being charged more by Passport. The FTC says Passport didn’t disclose the markups and didn’t tell the truth about the fees. And the practice of charging those consumers more doesn’t yield countervailing benefits.
Tags:
- Consumer Protection
- Bureau of Consumer Protection
- Automobiles
- Finance
- Advertising and Marketing
- Advertising and Marketing Basics
- Credit and Finance
- Credit and Loans
_________________________________________________________________
Consumer Alert
Prepare for winter weather emergencies while avoiding scams
By
Terri Miller
Consumer Education Specialist, FTC
October 20, 2022
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
Image
Scammers don’t hibernate in the winter. Just like you, they’re watching the weather reports and preparing for storms — and they’re counting on catching you unawares.
As you get ready for winter, unlicensed contractors and scammers may call, email, or knock on your door promising to inspect your furnace, repair your leaky roof, or clean your heating ducts. Once winter arrives, they’ll add snow and ice removal to their list. But sometimes they don’t deliver — and they might just take your money and run without doing some or all the work.
To stay ahead of winter weather-related scammers, and certainly before you hire a contractor who found you:
- Get recommendations from people you know and trust.
- Ask contractors for IDs, licenses, proof of insurance, and references before paying for services.
- Search online for the company’s name with words like “scam” or “complaint.”
- Pay by credit card or check, which offers you protections — never with cash, gift cards, or through wire transfer companies like Western Union or MoneyGram. And only pay in full after the work is done and you’re satisfied with it.
- Get a contract — never rely on handshake deals. Make sure all promises are in writing and that you understand what you’re signing.
To learn more about ways to prepare for, deal with, and recover from a weather emergency, visit ftc.gov/WeatherEmergencies.
If you suspect a scam, report it to the FTC at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.
_________________________________________________________________
Consumer Alert
Discriminatory financing and bogus fees at the car dealer? No thank you
By
Rosario Mendez
Division of Consumer and Business Education, FTC
October 18, 2022
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
Image
When car shopping, you shouldn’t be charged more than the advertised price, or more than other people because of the way you look or where you’re from. That’s wrong, dishonest, and illegal. Today the FTC announced a lawsuit and settlement with a dealership and its owners for allegedly doing just that. Now they have to pay $3.3 million to refund people harmed by their actions and change their allegedly deceptive and unfair practices.
The FTC says that Passport Auto lied to customers about car prices: for example, it regularly advertised a car for one price, but charged more when customers went to buy it. According to the FTC, the dealer illegally added additional fees for things that were already included in the advertised price, like certification, reconditioning, and inspection. But the law says they can’t do that.
If you’re in the market for a car, your options may be limited by things like supply or your budget. So that dealerships don’t take advantage:
- Bring the ad to the dealer. Be sure the dealer honors the advertised price.
- Shop around for financing. Dealership financing often comes with marked-up interest rates. It’s not your only option. Start with banks, credit unions, and other financing companies.
- Read the sales quote and financing agreement carefully. Do the terms you agreed on match the ones in the contract? Get answers about any extra fees you don’t recognize.
- Walk away if you’re not getting what you were promised. You don’t have to take the deal if you’re not satisfied.
Also, says the FTC, the dealer illegally charged Black and Latino consumers more in junk fees and financing markups than White consumers. Markups are charges dealers add on top of the interest rate when they arrange financing. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act makes it illegal to discriminate based on things like race, natural origin, and age, among others.
For more advice on car buying and financing see ftc.gov/cars. Report bad business practices when you see them at ReportFraud.ftc.gov or in Spanish at ReporteFraude.ftc.gov.
Search Terms
Topics
__________________________________________________________
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission <eeoc@updates.eeoc.gov>
To:warrior_75210@yahoo.com
Thu, Oct 20 at 6:39 AM
Funeral Home and Crematory Owner Sexually Harassed Four Female Employees and Punished Them for Reporting, Federal Agency Charged |
Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page. EEOC Dallas District Office 207 S. Houston St Dallas, Texas 75202 CONTACT: ROBERT A. CANINO Regional Attorney (Dallas) (972) 918-3619 SUZANNE ANDERSON Assistant Regional Attorney (972) 918-3626 ALEXA LANG Trial Attorney (972) 918-3648 TTY: 800-669-6820 newsroom@eeoc.gov FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATE 10/20/2022 CHARLES W. SMITH & SONS FUNERAL HOME AND METRO MORTUARY AND CREMATORY SETTLE EEOC SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND RETALIATION SUIT Funeral Home and Crematory Owner Sexually Harassed Four Female Employees and Punished Them for Reporting, Federal Agency Charged DALLAS – Sachse, Texas-based Charles W. Smith & Sons Funeral Home and Metro Mortuary and Crematory will pay $135,000 and furnish other relief to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency announced today. According to the EEOC’s suit, the defendants’ owner and funeral director subjected four female employees to a hostile work environment at both the company’s Sachse mortuary and the McKinney funeral home. He made numerous crude sexual comments and sexual propositions to the women and subjected them to unwelcome physical touching. He also offered money for sexual acts, the EEOC said. Even after the sexual harassment was reported to other supervisors and managers, no responsive or remedial actions were taken. Instead, one of the female employees was removed from the work schedule following her report of sex harassment and the other three were forced to resign, the agency charged. Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on sex, including sexual harassment, and retaliation for complaining about it. The EEOC filed suit, Civil Action No. 4:21-cv-00731, in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division, after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process. The three-year consent decree settling the suit was entered by U.S. District Judge Amos Mazzant on October 19, 2022 and prohibits future discrimination and retaliation. In addition to the payment of damages to the female employees, the decree requires the mortuary and funeral home to provide annual training to all employees, including specified training for the owner on eliminating discrimination in the workplace and the rights and responsibilities of employees. The training will also discuss the appropriate steps to be taken in response to complaints about sexual harassment. The defendants will also have to hire a professional human resources monitor to whom employees can report sexual harassment and who will ensure compliance with the decree. “Supervisors at both the funeral homes and the mortuary repeatedly said there was nothing they could do to respond to the demands for sexual favors and unwanted advances these women faced because they came from the owner,” said Alexa Lang, trial attorney in the EEOC’s Dallas District Office. “Employers have a legal responsibility to ensure a safe workplace and not punish women who come forward to report abuse.” EEOC Supervisory Trial Attorney Suzanne Anderson added, “A funeral home’s business is founded upon trust. This owner violated the trust of his employees by creating a hostile work environment. The EEOC stands ready to come to the defense of sexual harassment victims.” For more information on sexual harassment, please visit https://www.eeoc.gov/sexual-harassment. For more information on retaliation, please visit https://www.eeoc.gov/retaliation. The EEOC advances opportunity in the workplace by enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. More information is available at www.eeoc.gov. Stay connected with the latest EEOC news by subscribing to our email updates. |
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 131 M St. NE, Washington, D.C. 0507 www.eeoc.gov | info@eeoc.gov 800-669-4000 | 844-234-5122 (ASL Videophone) |
__________________________________________________________
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission <eeoc@updates.eeoc.gov>
To:warrior_75210@yahoo.com
Wed, Oct 19 at 7:13 AM
Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page. Washington, D.C. Headquarters FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Oct. 19, 2022 Contact: newsroom@eeoc.gov or 202-921-3192 EEOC RELEASES UPDATED ‘KNOW YOUR RIGHTS’ POSTER Covered Employers Required by Law to Display Poster at Work Site WASHINGTON – Today, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released the ‘Know Your Rights’ poster, which updates and replaces the previous “EEO is the Law” poster. Covered employers are required by federal law to prominently display the poster at their work sites. The EEOC’s web page for the poster provides information about where to post it. The poster also includes a QR code for applicants or employees to link directly to instructions for how to file a charge of workplace discrimination with the EEOC. A number of the laws that the EEOC enforces require covered employers to post a notice describing the Federal laws prohibiting job discrimination. The poster summarizes these laws and explains that employees or applicants can file a charge if they believe that they have experienced discrimination. The poster shares information about discrimination based on: Race, color, sex (including pregnancy and related conditions, sexual orientation, or gender identity), national origin, religion, Age (40 and older), Equal pay, Disability, Genetic information (including family medical history or genetic tests or services), and includes Retaliation for filing a charge, reasonably opposing discrimination, or participating in a discrimination lawsuit, investigation, or proceeding. “The new ‘Know Your Rights’ poster is a win-win for employers and workers alike,” said Chair Charlotte A. Burrows. “By using plain language and bullet points, the new poster makes it easier for employers to understand their legal responsibilities and for workers to understand their legal rights and how to contact EEOC for assistance. The poster advances the EEOC’s mission both to prevent unlawful employment discrimination and remedy discrimination when it occurs.” The new “Know Your Rights” poster includes these changes: Uses straightforward language and formatting; Notes that harassment is a prohibited form of discrimination; Clarifies that sex discrimination includes discrimination based on pregnancy and related conditions, sexual orientation, or gender identity; Adds a QR code for fast digital access to the how to file a charge webpage; Provides information about equal pay discrimination for federal contractors. The poster is available in English and Spanish and will be available in additional languages at a later date. The posters should be placed in a conspicuous location in the workplace where notices to applicants and employees are customarily posted. In addition to physically posting, covered employers are encouraged to post a notice digitally on their websites in a conspicuous location. In most cases, electronic posting supplements the physical posting requirement. In some situations (for example, for employers without a physical location or for employees who telework or work remotely and do not visit the employer’s workplace on a regular basis), it may be the only posting. Covered employers are subject to fines for noncompliance. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that notices of Federal laws prohibiting job discrimination be made available in a location that is accessible to applicants and employees with disabilities that limit mobility. The EEOC advances opportunity in the workplace by enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. More information is available at www.eeoc.gov. Stay connected with the latest EEOC news by subscribing to our email updates. ### |
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 131 M St. NE, Washington, D.C. 0507 www.eeoc.gov | info@eeoc.gov 800-669-4000 | 844-234-5122 (ASL Videophone) |
_________________________________________________________________
Consumer Alert
Now that the student loan debt relief application is open, spot the scams
By
K. Michelle Grajales
Attorney, Division of Financial Practices
October 18, 2022
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
Image
The Department of Education (ED)’s application for federal student loan debt relief is now open and, of course, scammers are on the move — trying to get your money and personal information. Luckily, there are ways to stop them, so keep reading to find out how to protect yourself as you apply for relief.
As people file their applications, ED will review them on a rolling basis. Pack some patience and follow the process…not those who say they can put you in front of the line. Because those are scammers. Here’s what to know right now to steer clear of scammers:
- Apply at StudentAid.gov/DebtRelief.Nowhere else.Right now, application is online only and in English and Spanish.A paper application will be available later.
- Don’t pay to apply. It’s FREE. Anyone who says you need to pay is a scammer. And anyone who guarantees approval or quicker forgiveness: scam, scam, scam.
- Know what to share, where, and when. The real application will ask for your name, birth date, Social Security number, phone number, and address. But, when you apply online, you don’t have to upload or attach any documents.
- Know what not to share. When you apply, nobody legit will ask for your FSA ID, bank account, or credit card information. Anyone who does: scammer. (Stay tuned for more info when ED starts processing applications. Some applicants will have to verify their income, but not yet.)
- Expect email updates from ED. After you apply, you may hear from ED — to upload tax documents verifying your income — or to give updates on your application. Those emails will only come from noreply@studentaid.gov
, noreply@debtrelief.studentaid.gov, or ed.gov@public.govdelivery.com
- . Pay close attention the sender address for emails about loan forgiveness — looking for slight typos — to avoid a scammer’s fake emails.
- Follow ED’s process if your application is denied. Anyone who says they can get you approved (for a fee) is a scammer. Your email notice will have instructions. Follow those, and if you have questions, call FSA’s dedicated phone line at 1-833-932-3439. Expect long wait times.
Have you spotted one of these scams? Tell us about it at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.
Search Terms
Topics
Scams
Student Loan and Education Scams
Related Items
How Student Loans Work and How To Avoid Scams
_________________________________________________________________
Consumer Alert
Data security applies to charitable organizations, too
By
Rosario Méndez
Division of Consumer and Business education
October 17, 2022
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
This week is Charity Fraud Awareness Week, an effort run by charity regulators, law enforcers, and other non-profit stakeholders from across the world. It’s an opportunity to remind charities and other non-profit organizations of how important it is to secure their networks and protect any consumer data they collect from donors, employees, and others. This will help protect the organization from scammers, hackers, and identity thieves.
If you work at a charity or other non-profit organization, you’ll want to see what’s at ftc.gov/cybersecurity, an FTC website with free practical resources to help any organization implement data security strategies. This week, join others in raising awareness about the importance of maintaining an organizational culture that encourages protecting personal information by sharing the information at ftc.gov/cybersecurity with the rest of your organization’s staff. Having an informed workforce is key when it comes to protecting data. So, for example, implement measures to protect files and devices, such as:
- Keep software up to date and back up your files. Set software to update automatically and create offline backups of important files. That way, you have access to them even if your network is compromised.
- Require multi-factor authentication for employees to access areas of your network with sensitive information. This requires additional steps beyond logging in with a username and password — like a temporary code on a smartphone or a key that’s inserted into a computer.
- Require passwords for all laptops, tablets, and smartphones. Don’t leave these devices unattended in public, even locked in a car. They may have sensitive information that, if they’re stolen, could fall into the hands of an identity thief.
It’s also important to know what to do if something goes wrong. What steps would you take to minimize the damage if you discover that your business email has been hacked? Or if someone took over your system and demanded a ransom? Read more at ftc.gov/cybersecurity, and then share within your organization.
Topics
_________________________________________________________
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission <eeoc@updates.eeoc.gov>
To:warrior_75210@yahoo.com
Mon, Oct 17 at 9:30 AM
Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE OCTOBER 17, 2022 ELWOOD STAFFING TO PAY $77,500 TO SETTLE EEOC DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT Staffing Company Rescinded Job Offer For Applicant With One Hand, Federal Agency Charges OREM, Utah – An Orem, Utah branch of Elwood Staffing Services, a nationwide staffing company, will pay $77,500 and furnish other relief to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today. The EEOC alleged in its suit that Elwood Staffing rescinded a conditional job offer because the applicant does not have a left hand. Elwood Staffing did not provide any reasonable accommodations to the applicant, the EEOC alleged, and then chose not to hire her because of her disability and/or her need for an accommodation. This alleged conduct violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division (EEOC v. Elwood Staffing Services, Inc., Case No. 2:21-cv-00498-JCB) after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its conciliation process. In addition to $77,500 in damages, the two-year consent decree settling the suit requires Elwood Staffing’s Utah locations to revise their anti-discrimination policies, promptly and thoroughly investigate complaints of disability discrimination, train all employees including temporary associates on antidiscrimination, and provide reports on training, complaints of discrimination, and any revisions to policies and procedures to the EEOC. “The EEOC is committed to eliminating barriers in recruiting and hiring,” said EEOC Phoenix District Office Regional Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill. “Employers, including staffing agencies, must engage in the interactive process with prospective employees instead of making assumptions about an applicant’s abilities.” The acting district director of the EEOC’s Phoenix District Office, Melinda Caraballo, said, “Disability antidiscrimination training for temporary associates, like the training required by this consent decree, is critical in helping new employees understand their federal rights. I am pleased we were able to reach a resolution in this matter.” The EEOC’s Phoenix District Office has jurisdiction for Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, and part of New Mexico. The EEOC advances opportunity in the workplace by enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. More information is available at www.eeoc.gov. Stay connected with the latest EEOC news by subscribing to our email updates. ### U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 131 M St. NE, Washington, D.C. 0507 www.eeoc.gov | info@eeoc.gov 800-669-4000 | 844-234-5122 (ASL Videophone) |
____________________________________________________________