This March, bring NCPW to your neighborhood
By
Ari Lazarus
Consumer Education Specialist, FTC
January 20, 2023
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
Image
March is right around the corner, and you know what that means…it’s almost time for National Consumer Protection Week! This year, NCPW is March 5-11, so now’s the time to jump into planning — and we want to help.
During NCPW, government agencies, consumer protection groups, and people like you work together to share information about consumer rights and help people learn to spot, report, and avoid scams.
At the FTC, we’re focused on helping you bring NCPW 2023 to your neighborhood. How can you get your community involved?
- Reach out to your local library, university, house of worship, or community center. Do they already have something planned for NCPW? If not, ask if they’d consider handing out materials or planning an event to help people in your community. We have free resources to get them started!
- Attend one of our free webinars on How to Bring NCPW To Your Neighborhood.
- Order free materials to share in English or Spanish. Order by February 3rd to ensure delivery in time for NCPW.
Have a cool event planned? Let us know about it in the comments below.
And stay tuned — we’ll be back next month to tell you more about the virtual events we have planned for NCPW. See you then.
_________________________________________________________________
Consumer Alert
Seeing isn’t always believing when it comes to ad prices for LASIK eye surgery
By
Colleen Tressler
FTC, Division of Consumer and Business Education
January 19, 2023
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
Image
LASIK is corrective surgery to a very delicate part of the eye. Millions of people have had LASIK surgery to correct their vision, many with great success.
Advertising is one way LASIK providers attract customers. But like any other purchase, it’s important to do some research. Prices vary, and what may seem like a deal may only be available to select “qualified” patients.
Take the FTC’s case against LASIKPlus, a nationwide LASIK surgery chain. The FTC says that, in its ads, LASIKPlus promoted LASIK as available for “as low as” or “starting at” $250. The $250 price was per eye, although that was not always clearly disclosed. In truth, very few people qualified for the $250 price. Anyone with vision worse than 20/40 — already good enough to drive without glasses — was ineligible, but only told that after undergoing a 90-minute to 2-hour full-dilation eye exam and sales pitch. At that point, customers were told the true regular LASIKPlus price of $1800-$2295 per eye. The FTC complaint says that the company’s ads often did not reveal the prescriptions people needed to qualify, that few people were eligible, and the price most people would actually pay. Bottom line: The $250 price was, says the FTC, misleading and used to lure people in the door and then sell them LASIK at the much higher price.
If you’re thinking about LASIK, here’s some advice to help you save time and money:
- Get a recommendation. Ask your eye doctor for a recommendation.
- Ask questions about promotions and eligibility before you visit a LASIK center. Is the advertised offer limited to certain customers? Are there certain requirements? Are there other fees or payments? If so, what are they? If they won’t tell you before your visit, be wary.
- See what others are saying. Search online for the LASIK provider’s name plus words like “complaint” or “review.”
- Compare online reviews from a wide variety of sources. You can get a good idea about a company, product, or service from reading user reviews on various comparison sites. But also think about the source of the review. Where is this review coming from? Is it from an expert organization or individual customers?
If you think a company has used misleading practices to sell you a service or product, report it to the FTC at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.
Want to learn more about LASIK, read The Basics of LASIK Eye Surgery.
Topics
_______________________________________________________________
For Release
Wireless Customers Who Were Subject to Data Throttling by AT&T Can Apply for a Payment from the FTC
Those who had unlimited data plans with AT&T between 2011-2015 may be eligible
January 19, 2023
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
Tags:
- Consumer Protection
- Bureau of Consumer Protection
- Western Region San Francisco
- deceptive/misleading conduct
- consumer refunds
- Technology
- Telecommunications
- Advertising and Marketing
The Federal Trade Commission opened a claims process for former AT&T customers who have yet to claim a refund stemming from the FTC’s lawsuit against the company for misleading consumers about its unlimited data plans.
Former AT&T customers may be eligible to claim a refund from the $7 million remaining in a fund created to settle allegations that the wireless provider charged for “unlimited” data plans while reducing their data speeds, a practice known as throttling.
The FTC in 2019 required AT&T to provide $60 million for refunds for failing to disclose to millions of smartphone customers with unlimited data plans that once they reached a certain amount of data use in a given billing cycle, AT&T would reduce or throttle their data speeds. Some customers experienced data speeds so slow that many common phone applications, such as web browsing and video streaming, became difficult or nearly impossible to use.
The money paid by AT&T was deposited into a fund that the company used to provide partial refunds to current and former customers who had unlimited plans that were throttled by AT&T. The company gave a bill credit to current AT&T customers and sent refund checks to former customers.
AT&T has not been able to reach everyone who was eligible for a refund. The FTC is using the remaining $7 million from the fund to provide partial refunds to consumers who meet all these requirements:
- they are a former AT&T customer;
- they had an unlimited data plan at some point between October 1, 2011 and June 30, 2015;
- they experienced data throttling; and
- they have not received a bill credit or payment from AT&T related to this matter.
Consumers who meet these requirements can submit a claim online at www.ftc.gov/ATT. Consumers can contact the claims administrator by calling 1-877-654-1982 or emailing info@ATTDataThrottling.com
if they have questions or if they would like to request a claim form. Consumers have until May 18, 2023, to submit a claim.
The Federal Trade Commission works to promote competition and protect and educate consumers. Learn more about consumer topics at consumer.ftc.gov, or report fraud, scams, and bad business practices at ReportFraud.ftc.gov. Follow the FTC on social media, read consumer alerts and the business blog, and sign up to get the latest FTC news and alerts.
Press Release Reference
FTC Says AT&T Has Misled Millions of Consumers with ‘Unlimited’ Data Promises
Contact Information
Contact for Consumers
JND Legal Administration
Media Contact
Office of Public Affairs
____________________________________________________________
Consumer Alert
Are you a former AT&T unlimited data plan customer? Read on
By
Andrew Rayo
Consumer Education Specialist
January 19, 2023
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
Image
Today, the FTC announced a new claims process to return money to thousands of former AT&T customers as a result of a $60 million settlement with AT&T. To date, $52 million has already been refunded.
Are you a former AT&T customer who had an unlimited data plan between October 2011 and June 2015 and you haven’t already cashed a check from AT&T? You might be eligible to get a payment. Are you a current AT&T customer who had an unlimited data plan during this time? No need to file a claim — you should have gotten a bill credit from AT&T in early 2020.
Why are some customers who had unlimited plans getting money back? The FTC says that AT&T throttled their data, slowing down their internet speed after they used a certain amount of data in a billing cycle. The limits on this “unlimited” plan made it hard — and, in some cases, impossible — to browse the internet or stream videos. And, before people signed a long-term contract, AT&T didn’t adequately disclose to customers that it would slow down their internet.
Here’s what to know:
- Find out if you’re eligible and file your claim today at ftc.gov/ATT.
- You have until May 18, 2023, to file a claim.
- Questions about filing a claim? Call the refund administrator at 1-877-654-1982 or email info@ATTDataThrottling.com
- .
And remember, if you think a company is slowing down your data or internet service without telling you, report it at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.
___________________________________________________________
Business Blog
FTC charges LasikPlus with dilate-and-switch pricing
By
Lesley Fair
January 19, 2023
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
“If you’re nearsighted, farsighted, or have an astigmatism, LasikPlus can help fix your vision for only $250.” That’s just one example of how LCA-Vision – consumers may know the company as LasikPlus or Joffe MediCenter – promoted its services to prospective customers. But according to a $1.25 million proposed settlement with the FTC, the company was eying its pricing through rose-colored glasses, given that only 6.5% of consumers who receive a consultation could qualify for the surgery at the promotional price, and only 1.3% ended up getting it for that price, with most others paying between $1,800 and $2,295 per eye.
The complaint alleges that the $250 price – or $295, in the case of promotions for Joffe MediCenter – was a centerpiece of the company’s advertising via TV, radio, direct mail, and the internet. For example, according to LasikPlus ads:
- “What if we told you there’s a quick, easy way to get rid of the daily hassles of contacts and glasses? And even better…what if it could cost as low as Two Hundred and Fifty Dollars? Well, it’s all true…all thanks to LasikPlus. Now…LasikPlus can help fix your vision for only Two Hundred and Fifty Dollars…our lowest price ever!”
- “Frustrated with glasses or contact lenses? Now you can improve your vision to 20/20 with LASIK at LasikPlus, America’s most highly recommended LASIK provider. Now, for a limited time, get LASIK at LasikPlus for as low as $250. Call now or go online to schedule your no obligation LASIK exam absolutely free.”
Image
Ads further focused on the $250 price by directing prospective customers to the URL, 250lasik.com.
Ads for Joffe MediCenter made similar pricing claims:
- “Make this year the year you finally get that LASIK procedure you’ve been thinking about. Joffe MediCenter is the Twin Cities’ home for custom LASIK. With top laser technology, experienced doctors, and the most affordable pricing for all-laser LASIK. Joffe MediCenter is now offering custom LASIK starting at just $295 per eye.”
- “$295 LASIK. Call Joffe for your free Lasik eye exam and to See How Your Qualify for $295 LASIK.”
According to the FTC, many of the ads touting $250 or $295 LASIK included no qualifying information at all. Others used generic language like “restrictions apply” or “see website for details,” often conveyed in print substantially smaller than the $250 or $295 headline. You’ll want to read the complaint for more about the allegations, but the FTC says that if consumers went to the LasikPlus website and if they spotted a tiny heart-shaped icon next to the $250 price and if they scrolled down through a dense block of fine print, here is what it said in grey print on a black background:
♥ $250 per eye price applies to patients with qualifying insurance coverage receiving treatment for up to -1.00 diopter with up to -1.00 diopter of astigmatism, performed with the traditional excimer laser (Advantage Plan not available). Prices range between $247 and $2,299 per eye based on prescription, laser, Advantage Plan selected as well as patient’s insurance coverage. Previous Laser Vision Correction of any kind are ineligible for the $250 price offer. Not valid at LasikPlus locations in Ft. Lauderdale, FL, Oklahoma City, OK. Best price when compared with other national LASIK provider pricing advertised online as of 10/31/2014.
The FTC further alleges that patients who clicked directly on links to BOOK FREE CONSULTATION NOW or who contacted the company’s call center were often immediately scheduled for appointments, bypassing even that hard-to-find online information. The complaint also includes examples of how prospective customers who asked direct pricing questions were rebuffed.
Once prospective customers arrived for a consultation, what they experienced could best be described as dilate-and-switch. According to the complaint, it was only after a substantial expenditure of time – including a lengthy eye exam that typically lasted between 90 minutes and two hours – that most people learned they weren’t eligible for the $250 or $295 advertised rate. For example, any prospective customers who were farsighted or had a prescription greater than -1.00 diopter – vision roughly equivalent to 20/30 or 20/40 on the eye chart and good enough to drive without glasses – were told they were ineligible for the advertised price.
The FTC says that the company trained its staff on tactics to persuade people who didn’t qualify to switch to the much more expensive regular-priced LASIK, including teaching how to “overcome” patients’ objections about price and “transition” them to the full-priced procedure. One example alleged in the complaint: “[P]ersonnel were directed to wait until after the patient eye examinations were complete, and the staff had an opportunity to discuss the benefits of LASIK surgery and ‘make the patient really want it,’ before revealing that the patient did not qualify for the promotional pricing.”
As for the lucky few who did qualify for the $250 price, most also ended up switching to the higher-priced LASIK after learning that the $250 surgery was only available using a much older and less precise laser. Consequently, the lawsuit alleges that only 1.3% of all consumers who received a consultation at Respondent’s centers underwent LASIK surgery for the promotional price.
According to the FTC, hundreds of consumers complained that the ads were misleading. But some of the most notable concerns were voiced by LasikPlus’ own personnel. As one staff member said, “I agree that the $250 promotion is deceptive and not consistent with what we are or what we want to be.”
A LasikPlus surgeon added, “It doesn’t help that we come out as liars with ‘come get your lasik for $250.’ It angers a lot of patients when they find out our price.” One LasikPlus center director took particular issue with how the company buried key information on its website: “I know that we do have a disclaimer in the very small print on the bottom about qualifying Rx’s, but it is hard to tell/find. A heart next to something is not usually an indication of a bullet in the small print.” But as another member of the LCA team observed, “It’s simple bait and switch and it works. Let’s not start acting like we’re doing it for the sa[k]e of the world.”
In addition to a $1.25 million financial judgment based on consumers’ wasted time during consultations, the proposed settlement prohibits misrepresentations about the price or total cost of a LASIK procedure, or about any material limitations or restrictions that aren’t based on the clinical judgments of the company’s affiliated independent medical professionals.
The lessons of the case extend far beyond LASIK. What can other companies that make pricing claims about medical procedures glean from the proposed settlement?
Ditch the bait-and-switch pitch. Do we really need to remind companies that bait-and-switch sales tactics are illegal? Don’t lure consumers in with deceptively low prices and then pull the old switcheroo. In addition, take care to clearly disclose material information – including limitations on eligibility – related to promotional prices. The fact that somebody somewhere might qualify for the rock-bottom promotion is insufficient to substantiate the much broader pricing claim.
Don’t waste consumers’ time. According to the complaint, people often went through a lengthy appointment before they were told they would have to pay much more than the advertised price. Time is money, so creating a sales strategy purpose-built to waste the time of a substantial number of prospective customers is a form of consumer injury.
Tags:
- Consumer Protection
- Bureau of Consumer Protection
- Advertising and Marketing
- Health Claims
- Online Advertising and Marketing
- Advertising and Marketing Basics
- Credit and Finance
- Payments and Billing
_____________________________________________________________
Business Blog
FTC reminds company that makes Pyrex glassware to be transparent about Made in USA claims
By
Lesley Fair
January 18, 2023
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
When home cooks bake an apple pie, many of them use Pyrex glass measuring cups – products promoted as, well, “American as apple pie.” But despite prominent claims that certain of their measuring cups were “proudly made in the USA,” the FTC says that between May 2021 and March 2022, some consumers shopping on Amazon actually received products made in China.
Illinois-based Instant Brands manufactures and sells housewares under the Pyrex brand name, including glass measuring cups and other glass cooking and baking accessories. Touting Pyrex’s “made in the USA heritage,” Instant Brands advertised Pyrex products as “Made in USA,” “Proudly Made in USA” and “1 of 10 products surprisingly still made in America.”
Image
One consequence of the COVID pandemic was a resurgence in home baking and an accompanying increase in demand for Pyrex measuring cups. On Amazon, Instant Brands marketed two SKUs of its glass cups – a three-piece set and a four-piece set – with the prominent representation that they were “Made in USA.” However, between May 2021 and March 2022, Instant Brands shifted production of certain measuring cups advertised as U.S.-made from the United States to China. Those Chinese-origin measuring cups were marked and packaged with the statement “Made in China.”
All told, Instant Brands fulfilled more than 110,000 Amazon orders for Made in USA measuring cups with Chinese-origin products. The company did that despite receiving numerous complaints from consumers who had ordered American-made measuring cups and were unhappy about receiving Chinese-made merchandise instead. What’s more, alleges the FTC, “[T]hroughout this time, despite importing and selling measuring cups from China, Instant Brands continued to publish and disseminate general advertising materials stating or implying that all Pyrex products were of U.S. origin.”
The complaint alleges that in advertising Pyrex three- and four-piece measuring cup sets, Instant Brand falsely represented they were all or virtually all made in the United States. To settle the case, the company will pay a $129,416 monetary judgment and will be bound by injunctive provisions prohibiting it from making Made in USA claims unless the final assembly or processing of the product occurs in the United States, all significant processing occurs here, and all or virtually all ingredients or components are made and sourced here. If Instant Brands wants to make a qualified claim, the proposed order requires a clear and conspicuous qualification immediately adjacent to the representation that must accurately convey the extent to which the product contains foreign parts, ingredients, or processing. What if the company wants to say a product is assembled in the U.S.? Then the product must be last substantially transformed in the United States, the principal assembly must take place in the U.S., and the U.S. assembly operations must be substantial.
Once the proposed settlement appears in the Federal Register, the FTC will receive public comments for 30 days.
The lesson of the Pyrex case is to make sure your manufacturing processes measure up to your Made in USA promises. If there are changes to your supply chain – even temporary ones – update your ads to avoid deception. It’s a recipe for consumer dissatisfaction and possible law enforcement to disseminate half-baked Made in USA claims.
Tags:
________________________________________________________________
Consumer Alert
Pyrex “Made in the USA” claims didn’t measure up
By
Gema de las Heras
Consumer Education Specialist, FTC
January 18, 2023
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
Image
If you took up baking during the pandemic, you may have ordered Pyrex bakeware promoted as “American as apple pie.” It turns out, says the FTC, some Pyrex glassware advertised as “proudly made in the USA” was actually made elsewhere. Read on to find out why that’s a problem.
According to the FTC’s complaint, Instant Brands, which owns Pyrex, has claimed that all Pyrex glass products are American-made. But during the pandemic, the company sold Pyrex measuring cups on Amazon that were made in China without clarifying that production had shifted there. While there’s no problem with selling foreign-made products that are clearly marked as such — advertising something as “Made in the USA” when it isn’t is false, misleading, and a clear violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
The agency’s proposed settlement order will stop Instant Brands from making further deceptive Made in USA claims and impose a monetary judgment for its past deceptive claims.
It can be hard to tell whether a company is telling the truth about the origin of its products, but keep in mind that in most cases companies can’t label or advertise their products as “Made in the USA” unless they can show that all (or almost all) parts, processing, and labor are of U.S. origin.
Think a company is breaking the rules by making phony “Made in the USA” claims? Tell us about it at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.
______________________________________________________________
Consumer Alert
How to spot, avoid, and report weather-related scams
By
Colleen Tressler
FTC, Division of Consumer and Business Education
January 18, 2023
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to LinkedIn
Image
From the relentless series of powerful storms that have battered California to the dozens of tornadoes that swept across six states, including Alabama, Georgia, and Kentucky, 2023 is off to a devastating start.
Whether you’re getting back on your feet or looking for ways to help people in hard-hit areas, learn how scammers operate — and how to avoid them.
Here are a few ways to spot the scammers who might try to take your money or personal information after a weather emergency:
- Spot imposter scams. Scammers might pretend to be safety inspectors, government officials trying to help you, or utility workers who say immediate work is required. Don’t give them money, and ask for identification to verify who you are dealing with — before sharing personal information like your Social Security or account numbers.
- Spot FEMA impersonators charging application fees. If someone wants money to help you qualify for FEMA funds, it’s a scam. Download the FEMA Mobile App to get alerts and information. Visit FEMA.gov for more information.
- Spot home improvement and debris removal scams. Unlicensed contractors and scammers may appear in recovery zones with promises of quick repairs or clean-up services. Walk away if they demand cash payments up front, or refuse to give you copies of their license, insurance, and a contract in writing.
- Spot rental listing scams. Scammers know people need a place to live while they rebuild. They’ll advertise rentals that don’t exist to get your money and run. The scammers are the ones who tell you to wire money, or who ask for security deposits or rent before you’ve met or signed a lease.
- Spot charity scams. Scammers will often try to profit from the misfortune of others, sometimes using familiar-sounding names or logos. Check Donating Wisely and Avoiding Charity Scams before opening up your wallet.
Learn more at ftc.gov/WeatherEmergencies and report weather-related scams to the FTC at ReportFraud.ftc.gov.
Topics
Scams
________________________________________________________________
