February 23, 2012

Mortgage Relief Scammers Banned From Doing Business Permanently

CES 2012 – Consumer Electronics Show
consumer

Image by David Berkowitz
Consumer Electronics Show 2012 – Las Vegas, Nevada
(cc) David Berkowitz – www.marketersstudio.com / www.twitter.com/dberkowitz

 

Defendant Ordered to Surrender Yacht, Cadillac, and Rolex

courthouseAt the request of the Federal Trade Commission, a U.S. district court put the mortgage relief business permanently off limits to marketers who allegedly charged thousands of consumers up to ,600 each, based on bogus promises to provide loan modifications that would make mortgages much more affordable.

The case against U.S. Mortgage Funding, Inc. is part of the FTC’s continuing crackdown on scams that target homeowners who are behind in their mortgage payments or facing foreclosure.  According to the agency, the scheme caused consumer losses of nearly million.  All but two of the defendants settled with the agency, while the two remaining corporate defendants received default judgments.

The FTC alleged that the defendants used direct mail, the Internet, and telemarketing to target homeowners – even those whose lenders had denied them modifications or who had been sent foreclosure notices.  The defendants typically asked for half of the fee up-front, falsely claiming a success rate of up to 100 percent, according to the complaint.

The defendants deceptively claimed they could prevent foreclosure, that they were affiliated with or approved by consumers’ lenders, and that they would refund consumers’ money if they failed to deliver promised services, according to the FTC.  They told consumers not to contact their lenders and to stop making mortgage payments, claiming that falling behind on payments would demonstrate the consumers’ hardship to lenders, the FTC alleged.

The FTC complaint charged U.S. Mortgage Funding, Inc., Debt Remedy Partners Inc., Lower My Debts.com LLC, David Mahler, Jamen Lachs, and John Incandela, Jr., also known as Jonathan Incandela, Jr., with violating the FTC Act and the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule.  An amended complaint added Louis Gendason as a defendant.

The court orders ban all the defendants from providing mortgage relief services, and   Mahler and Debt Remedy Partners, who also provided debt relief services, are banned from continuing to do so.

The court orders for U.S. Mortgage Funding, Inc. and Lower My Debts.Com LLC ban them from engaging in any telemarketing.  The remaining defendants are prohibited from violating the Telemarketing Sales Rule, and from misrepresenting any facts relevant to marketing or selling any product or service.  Also under the settlements:

  • A judgment for more than million against Mahler and Debt Remedy Partners Inc.is suspended due to their inability to pay, except for 8,212.  Mahler also is required to turn over a 1971 Hatteras yacht, a 2007 Cadillac DTC, and a Rolex watch to the court-appointed receiver for liquidation.
  • A judgment for .5 million against Lachs is suspended due to his inability to pay, except for 9,766.
  • Judgments for more than million against Incandela and Gendason and more than million against U.S. Mortgage Funding, Inc. and Lower My Debts.Com LLC are not suspended, but the two have pled guilty to unrelated criminal charges, and both face prison terms.

The FTC’s Mortgage Assistance Relief Services Rule, known as the MARS Rule, bans providers of mortgage foreclosure rescue and loan modification services from collecting fees until homeowners have a written offer from their lender or servicer that they decide is acceptable.  Because the defendants’ mortgage relief ads predated the MARS Rule, the FTC did not allege any violations of that rule in this case.

The Commission has advice for consumers about mortgage and foreclosure rescue scams, and debt settlement scams.  For more information see:  Your Home, and Settling Your Credit Card Debts.

The Commission votes to file the proposed consent agreements with Lachs, Incandela, and Gendason were 4-0.  The Commission vote to file the proposed consent agreement with Mahler and his company, Debt Remedy Partners Inc., was 3-1, with Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch voting no.  The FTC filed the four proposed settlement orders in the in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.  The settlement orders were entered by the court on February 3, 2012.  The court entered default judgments against U.S. Mortgage Funding, Inc. and Lower My Debts.Com LLC on September 20, 2011.

Source: FTC

Federal Trade Commission, Plaintiff v. U.S. Mortgage Funding, Inc., Debt Remedy Partners, Inc., Lower my Debts.com, LLC, David Mahler, individually and as an officer of Debt Remedy Partners, Inc. and a former officer of U.S. Mortgage Funding, Inc., and John Incandela, Jr., aka Jonathan Incandela, Jr., individually and as a former officer of U.S. Mortgage Funding, Inc. and a manager of Lower My Debts.com, LLC, and Jamen Lachs, individually and as an officer of U.S. Mortgage Funding, Inc., Defendants.

(United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida)
Case No. 11-Civ-80155  – FTC File No. 102 3146

FMD Consumer News

Protecting Data – Does Your Business Know What to Do?

CES 2012 – Consumer Electronics Show
consumer

Image by David Berkowitz
Consumer Electronics Show 2012 – Las Vegas, Nevada
(cc) David Berkowitz – www.marketersstudio.com / www.twitter.com/dberkowitz

Posted on 2/3/2012 by

In times of escalating privacy and data breaches, customers expect every business — large or small — that collects their sensitive personal information will protect it. Better Business Bureau advises business owners to proactively address customer anxiety and takes steps to both prevent and prepare for a security breach. BBB has endorsed the Online Trust Alliance’s Data Protection and Breach Readiness Guide, recently updated for 2012

Last year, more than 125 million people were affected by data loss incidents.  Increased awareness of these high visibility incidents, as well as aggressive data collection and sharing practices, have eroded consumers’ trust and online confidence, according to OTA.

“The Internet has become the land of opportunity for scams and, unfortunately, we see thousands of them every year,” notes Genie Barton, Vice President of the Council of Better Business Bureaus and director of its Online Behavioral Advertising Program.  “Consumers need assurances that they can trust the companies they do business with to secure their data, and the OTA Data Protection and Breach Readiness Guide is a great tool to help businesses protect themselves and their customers.”

In the wake of a security breach, it’s important to take action quickly. Small and large businesses alike need to be able to readily determine the nature and scope of the data incident, and take all appropriate steps to contain and stop the attack.

BBB recommends the 2012 guide and encourages all businesses to use its suggestions to help build a safer Internet for all.

The 2012 Data Protection and Breach Readiness Guide reflects input from a wide range of stakeholders, including interviews with companies that have experienced breach and data loss incidents, and industry and breach analysis experts.
 
For more data security advice you can trust, visit www.bbb.org/data-security, and for a complete OTA guide, visit https://otalliance.org/breach.html.

BBB Blog RSS Feed

New US Rule Could Help Consumers Who Send Money Abroad – Fox Business

CES 2012 – Consumer Electronics Show
consumers

Image by David Berkowitz
Consumer Electronics Show 2012 – Las Vegas, Nevada
(cc) David Berkowitz – www.marketersstudio.com / www.twitter.com/dberkowitz


Kansas City Star
New US Rule Could Help Consumers Who Send Money Abroad
Fox Business
WASHINGTON – The US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Friday adopted a rule that will require protections for consumers that transfer money internationally, its first substantive rule since starting up as a new financial markets watchdog in July.
Disclosure Increased on Overseas Wire TransfersWall Street Journal
Clarity sought on foreign money transfer feesReuters
New rules set for international money transfersThe Associated Press

all 586 news articles »

consumers – Google News

BBB Business Advice for Tackling Holiday Gift Returns

Posted on 12/1/2011 by

While most retailers love the holidays and the increased sales of the last quarter of each year, no one looks forward to the dreaded post-holiday gift returns. BBB is advising businesses to make sure that their return policies are simple and solid before tackling customer gift returns this holiday season.

Most consumers are happy with return policies. According to the National Retail Federation’s, 2010 Holiday Returns Survey, nearly nine out of 10 Americans (88.4 percent) say they find stores’ return policies to be fair.

It’s important for retailers to keep their customers in mind when it comes to their return policy.  “While it’s important that your return policy doesn’t hurt your business, it’s critical that it doesn’t completely discourage and penalize the customer,” said Katherine Hutt, BBB spokesperson.”

BBB recommends that businesses consider the following when creating, solidifying or simplifying their return policy:

Make sure the customer is aware of your policy. Display you policies at the checkout counter and on your website. 

Provide gift receipts. Six out of ten shoppers say they include a gift receipt when giving a gift, so be sure to offer one at the time of purchase.

Encourage customers to return the merchandise unused, unworn or unwrapped. Everyone likes getting merchandise in its original package and by encouraging customers to return goods this way, you better your chances that the product can be resold.

Make online returns easy. Lay out the return rules clearly. Explain who pays for the return shipping, where the customer sends the return, and any forms or mailing labels you want them to use.

Stay calm and helpful. The holidays can be a stressful time for everyone and making returns is usually not high on the customer’s list of fun things to do. When working with a customer, always go into a return with a smile. If their experience is good, you may win over a new customer.

For more helpful tips, visit www.bbb.org.

BBB Blog RSS Feed

Georgia Debt Collector Nelson, Hirsch & Associates Out of Business Permanently

Yahoo – CES 2011 – Consumer Electronics Show – Las Vegas, NV
consumer

Image by David Berkowitz
Consumer Electronics Show (CES) 2011 – Las Vegas, NV
(cc) David Berkowitz www.marketersstudio.com

Court-BuildingIt’s about time the State of Georgia did something about bad debt collectors, too bad they won’t go after Frederick T. Hanna and Associates, Portfolio Recovery, Hollander Law, West Asset Management, Northland Lending Group, Leading Edge Recovery, Nationwide Credit of Kennesaw Georgia> They also abuse, harass and use illegal tactics to collect debts as well. I know and have evidence to prove such.

 

 

Now for the story….

Nelson, Hirsch & Associates, Inc., a Georgia debt collections company, and its owner, Tanya Santiago, have entered into an Assurance of Voluntary Compliance with the Governor’s Office of Consumer Protection (OCP), resolving charges that the company committed multiple violations of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Georgia Fair Business Practices Act. OCP’s investigation stemmed from a series of reports from consumers that Nelson, Hirsch & Associates harassed and deceived them by:

  • Failing to disclose that it was a debt collector attempting to collect a debt;
  • Threatening consumers with arrest, imprisonment or charges of fraud if they did not pay the debt;
  • Refusing to send consumers written proof of the debt owed;
  • Collecting more than the amount owed or authorized;
  • Threatening to call the consumer’s employer and have the consumer’s wages garnished;
  • Falsely representing to consumers that it was affiliated with a law firm and/or that the caller was a fraud investigator;
  • Continuing to contact consumers even after they told the company to stop calling them;
  • Calling consumers at unusual hours (e.g. before 8:00am or after 9:00pm);
  • Calling consumers at work when they knew their employers prohibited such contact;
  • Speaking to consumers in a harassing and abusive manner;
  • Threatening consumers’ family members;
  • Calling repeatedly (sometimes as much as 50 times a day)

Under the Assurance, Nelson, Hirsch & Associates and Ms. Santiago are required to cease business operations. Further, Ms. Santiago must refrain from engaging in any aspect of debt collection activities in Georgia or in connection with Georgia consumers for a period of at least five years. In addition, the company and Ms. Santiago will forego collection of 5,809 consumer accounts that they had purchased from creditors who had previously written off the debts. These accounts total ,307,658. The company must also pay a ,000 civil penalty and reimburse OCP for investigative and legal expenses in the amount of ,000.

“We are sending a strong and clear message that this kind of abuse and harassment of consumers, and the egregious disregard for the law that these practices typify will not be tolerated,” says John Sours, Administrator of the Governor’s Office of Consumer Protection.

Source: Georgia Governor’s Office of Consumer Affairs

FMD Consumer News

Georgia Debt Collector Nelson, Hirsch & Associates Out of Business Permanently

Yahoo – CES 2011 – Consumer Electronics Show – Las Vegas, NV
consumer

Image by David Berkowitz
Consumer Electronics Show (CES) 2011 – Las Vegas, NV
(cc) David Berkowitz www.marketersstudio.com

Court-BuildingIt’s about time the State of Georgia did something about bad debt collectors, too bad they won’t go after Frederick T. Hanna and Associates, Portfolio Recovery, Hollander Law, West Asset Management, Northland Lending Group, Leading Edge Recovery, Nationwide Credit of Kennesaw Georgia> They also abuse, harass and use illegal tactics to collect debts as well. I know and have evidence to prove such.

 

 

Now for the story….

Nelson, Hirsch & Associates, Inc., a Georgia debt collections company, and its owner, Tanya Santiago, have entered into an Assurance of Voluntary Compliance with the Governor’s Office of Consumer Protection (OCP), resolving charges that the company committed multiple violations of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Georgia Fair Business Practices Act. OCP’s investigation stemmed from a series of reports from consumers that Nelson, Hirsch & Associates harassed and deceived them by:

  • Failing to disclose that it was a debt collector attempting to collect a debt;
  • Threatening consumers with arrest, imprisonment or charges of fraud if they did not pay the debt;
  • Refusing to send consumers written proof of the debt owed;
  • Collecting more than the amount owed or authorized;
  • Threatening to call the consumer’s employer and have the consumer’s wages garnished;
  • Falsely representing to consumers that it was affiliated with a law firm and/or that the caller was a fraud investigator;
  • Continuing to contact consumers even after they told the company to stop calling them;
  • Calling consumers at unusual hours (e.g. before 8:00am or after 9:00pm);
  • Calling consumers at work when they knew their employers prohibited such contact;
  • Speaking to consumers in a harassing and abusive manner;
  • Threatening consumers’ family members;
  • Calling repeatedly (sometimes as much as 50 times a day)

Under the Assurance, Nelson, Hirsch & Associates and Ms. Santiago are required to cease business operations. Further, Ms. Santiago must refrain from engaging in any aspect of debt collection activities in Georgia or in connection with Georgia consumers for a period of at least five years. In addition, the company and Ms. Santiago will forego collection of 5,809 consumer accounts that they had purchased from creditors who had previously written off the debts. These accounts total ,307,658. The company must also pay a ,000 civil penalty and reimburse OCP for investigative and legal expenses in the amount of ,000.

“We are sending a strong and clear message that this kind of abuse and harassment of consumers, and the egregious disregard for the law that these practices typify will not be tolerated,” says John Sours, Administrator of the Governor’s Office of Consumer Protection.

Source: Georgia Governor’s Office of Consumer Affairs

FMD Consumer News

USDA: ‘Locally grown’ food a $4.8 billion business – Boston.com


msnbc.com
USDA: 'Locally grown' food a .8 billion business
Boston.com
A new US Department of Agriculture report says sales of “local foods,” whether sold direct to consumers at farmers markets or through intermediaries such as grocers or restaurants, amounted to .8 billion in 2008. That's a number several times greater
Farmers markets double, local food sales to hit billion, USDA saysLos Angeles Times

all 254 news articles »

consumers – Google News

Proponent Of Costing Banks More Money By Mailing Back Weighted Business Reply Envelopes Defends His Cause

Earlier this week I wrote about a viral video that promised you could “Keep Wall Street Occupied” by sending back credit card business reply envelopes stuffed with anti-corporate messages and wooden shims. The video said this would increase mailing costs for the banks and force them to engage in a dialogue with their customers. Responding to my review where I called this idea “terrible,” the video’s maker sent me a note defending his campaign.

Artie writes:

Thank you for blogging about my videos for “Keep Wall Street Occupied.”

Subsequent posters on your blog covered most of the points I’d have raised in response to your article. Mediaite.com fact-checked my video with a US Postal Service spokesperson, who confirmed my two main technical assertions: mailing the envelope back costs the banks money, and heavier envelopes cost the banks more money. Tossing unwanted credit card offers in the bin costs banks nothing, and removing oneself from bank mailing lists actually saves banks money by refocusing their scattershot marketing efforts.

I read up on USPS BRE specifications before I produced the videos. No one sticking to “Phase 1″ or “Phase 2″ as explained in my first video is wasting her time. She may or may not be wasting the bank’s time. She is wasting the bank’s money. Even tiny protests are important, because they swell the ranks of those who see themselves as protesters.

Despite what some have insinuated, nowhere did I advocate mailing bricks. Or straw men.

My second video, more clarification than sequel, went up shortly before you posted your story. My third and fourth videos will go up later this week.

Thank you again for your article.

Yours,

Artie Moffa

While mailing back envelopes may marginally increase the mailing costs for the banks, I don’t think it will be enough to make a difference or provoke any soul-searching meetings. Instead, I’d rather see people who want to change how this country works spend their time getting candidates sympathetic to their interests elected. After all, it’s what the banks did.

Here’s Artie’s second video:

RELATED
Viral Video Fact-Check: Will Mailing Wood To Credit Card Solicitors Cost Banks More Money? [Mediaite]

PREVIOUSLY
Sending Back Protest Messages In Pre-Paid Credit Card Envelopes Isn’t Going To Occupy Wall Street One Bit

The Consumerist

Study Finds that Pharmaceutical Industry Continued to Make Business Deals that Delayed Consumers Access to Lower-Cost Generic Drugs

The Consumers
consumer

Image by ghwpix
The Consumers
» Their MySpace page
» Their official website

Spartanburg, SC
Spring Fling 2009
Saturday, May 2

According to an overview of industry data released by the staff of the Federal Trade Commission, in Fiscal Year 2011, pharmaceutical companies continued a recent anticompetitive trend of paying potential generic rivals to delay the introduction of lower-cost prescription drug alternatives for American consumers.

The FTC staff report found that drug companies entered into 28 potential pay-for-delay deals in FY 2011 (October 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011). The figure nearly matches last year’s record of 31 deals and is higher than any other previous year since the FTC began collecting data in 2003. Overall, the agreements reached in the latest fiscal year involved 25 different brand-name pharmaceutical products with combined annual U.S. sales of more than billion.

“While a lot of companies don’t engage in pay-for-delay settlements, the ones that do increase prescription drug costs for consumers and the government each year,” said FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz. “Fortunately, Congress has the opportunity to fix this problem through the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction — and save the government and American taxpayers billions of dollars.”

Generic drugs are the key to making medicines affordable for millions of American consumers, and they also help hold down costs for taxpayer-funded health programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. Generic drug prices are typically at least 20 to 30 percent less than the name-brand drugs, and in some cases are up to 90 percent cheaper.

In recent years, certain brand-name companies have paid or otherwise compensated generic firms to settle their patent challenges and, in turn, delay the introduction of lower-cost medicines. An FTC staff study has found that patent settlements that include a payment or other compensation delay generic entry on average by 17 months longer than those that do not include a payment. According to the Congressional Budget Office, proposed legislation would reduce the federal deficit by .67 billion over 10 years.

The FTC has challenged a number of these patent settlement agreements in court, contending that they are anticompetitive and violate U.S. antitrust laws. The agency also has supported legislation in Congress that would prohibit pay-for-delay settlements that increase the cost of prescription drugs.

According to the new staff report, companies reached a total of 156 final patent settlements in FY 2011. Twenty-eight settlements contained a payment to a generic manufacturer and also restricted the generic’s ability to market its product. Of those 28 settlements, 18 involved generics that were so-called “first filers,” meaning that they were the first to seek FDA approval to market a generic version of the branded drug, and, at the time of the settlement, were eligible to exclusively market the generic product for period of time. Because of the regulatory framework, when first filers delay entering the market, other generic manufacturers can also be blocked from entering the market, which makes such patent settlement deals particularly harmful to consumers.

Source: FTC

FMD Consumer News

Six Surprises Hidden in the Credit CARD Act – Fox Business


WRAL.com
Six Surprises Hidden in the Credit CARD Act
Fox Business
When the Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act was ushered into law, it was heralded as a way to protect consumers from unfair and deceptive practices by credit card issuers.
Consumers Can't Get Enough of American ExpressMyBankTracker.com
Credit cards: How high does your card rank?FOX19
Debt Consolidation Using A Balance Transfer Costs For Consumers–Cardholders Red, White, and Blue Press
Credit.com News (blog)
all 51 news articles »

consumers – Google News

Powered by Yahoo! Answers