SEPTEMBER 2018

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has dismissed a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) fax case where the plaintiff alleged the fax opt-out notice was deficient.  The court noted the fax opt-out notice was there, and regardless of technical errors in the language, the recipient had no standing to sue because he never attempted to opt-out of receiving faxes.  St. Louis Heart Center, Inc. v. Nomax, Inc

Read More

AUGUST 2018

Federal Trade Commission

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has obtained an injunction from a federal court stopping a telemarketing company which allegedly charged up front fees from consumers to secure them government grants of up to $10,000.  FTC v. Hite Media Group, LLC, et al.  The defendants were based in Phoenix, Arizona.

Comment: Usually, the FTC only seeks a temporary restraining order against a defendant accused of violating the Telemarketing Sales Rule (“TSR”) if allegations of financial fraud are involved.

Read More

JUNE 2018

Federal Trade Commission

A company purportedly offering student loan debt relief has settled charges brought by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) alleging fraud and violation of the national “do-not-call” registry.  FTC v. Student Debt Relief Group.  The company was forced to turn over more than $2.3 million in assets to the FTC.

Read More

MAY 2018

Federal Trade Commission

A Florida-based company will surrender more than $3 million of assets to the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) to settle claims of illegal telemarketing of timeshare resale services.  The callers charged property owners $2,500 in advance claiming to be able to broker a sale of their timeshare and the FTC alleged these claims were false.  FTC v. J. William Enterprises, LLC, et al.

Read More

MARCH 2018

Federal Communications Commission

Numerous comments have been filed in support of Outcome Health’s request for a safe harbor with regard to Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) restrictions on calls and texts to cell phones.  One counter-argument came from plaintiff’s attorney Jeremy Glapion, who argued callers should not be protected in the event of “technical errors”. 

Comment: Glapion happens to represent Christie Griffith, who alleged she received faxes, a class action should be certified, and outcome should not be protected by “good faith” defense.

Read More

JANUARY 2018

Federal Trade Commission

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has settled charges against a Utah woman, Jamie L. White, who allegedly violated the Telemarketing Sales Rule (“TSR”).  Under the terms of the settlement she is banned from telemarketing.  Charges were first brought December 6, 2017 and alleged she provided payment processing services to fraudulent telemarketing operations.

The FTC brought these charges under its standards for “accomplice liability” despite the fact that White made no calls herself, nor did any company she owned make calls.  A business or individual can be liable under the standard if it knows, has reason to know, or consciously avoids knowing of wrongdoing by its business partners.  For example, if a contractor requires compliance with the TSR and other law but a business has knowledge that its partner is ignoring that provision and continues the business relationship, it can be held liable even if it did not violate the TSR directly.  The FTC can use this standard to pursue domestic companies working with international companies, companies with assets versus companies without assets, etc.

Read More