Wichita Falls Man
HOME - SUPPORT THIS JOURNAL - MENU
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION SNIPS
12-15-2025 - FTC and States File Amended Complaint Against Uber for Deceptive Billing and Cancellation Practices -The Federal Trade Commission—joined by 21 states and the District of Columbia—today filed an amended complaint alleging that Uber charged consumers for its subscription without their consent, failed to deliver promised savings including $0 delivery fees, and made it difficult for users to cancel the subscription. The FTC sued Uber in April over allegations it engaged in deceptive billing and cancellation practices related to its Uber One subscription. The states and the District of Columbia joined the FTC in filing the amended complaint, which includes a request for civil penalties for alleged violations of the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act and state laws. In addition to the District of Columbia, the states joining the FTC lawsuit include: Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.
Uber markets a monthly or annual subscription, Uber One, that it claims will qualify consumers for certain discounts or promotions, such as $0 in delivery fees and $25 in monthly savings. Some consumers say they did not receive the promised monthly savings or had to pay fees on deliveries despite the $0 delivery fee promise, according to the complaint. Many consumers also say that Uber enrolled them in its Uber One subscription without their knowledge or consent and makes it exceedingly difficult to cancel, despite claims that consumers can “cancel anytime.” For example, many consumers who signed up for a free trial offer were automatically enrolled and charged for the subscription before the trial ended. Others report being charged for Uber One despite never knowingly signing up for the subscription at all. Users who try to cancel can be forced to navigate as many as 23 screens and take as many as 32 actions to cancel, according to the complaint. The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the amended complaint was 2-0. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
12-11-2025 - The Federal Trade Commission today released the National Do Not Call Registry Data Book for Fiscal Year 2025, which shows that, while overall complaints rose in FY 2025, unwanted calls remain about 48% lower than in FY 2021, when the FTC received approximately five million reports about unwanted calls. The FTC’s annual data book provides detailed information on robocall and live-caller complaints, the topics consumers report most often, and a state-by-state breakdown of registrations and complaints per 100,000 people. As in prior years, calls about reducing debt, imposters, and medical and prescription issues remained among the topics consumers most frequently reported in FY 2025. The National Do Not Call (DNC) Registry lets consumers add their phone numbers and opt out of most legal telemarketing calls. In FY 2025, more than 4.7 million additional phone numbers were added to the Registry, bringing the total to about 258.5 million active registrations as of September 30, 2025—an increase of roughly 1.9% over FY 2024 and nearly 6% higher than FY 2021.
12-11-2025 - The Federal Trade Commission is sending checks totaling more than $9.6 million to eligible consumers impacted by CarShield’s misleading claims about its vehicle service contracts. In July 2024, CarShield, a seller of vehicle service contracts, and American Auto Shield, LLC (AAS), the administrator of such contracts, agreed to pay nearly $10 million to settle an FTC complaint. The complaint alleged CarShield’s advertisements and telemarketing for vehicle service contracts were deceptive and misleading, and that purchasers found many repairs were not “covered,” despite making payments of up to $120 per month. The FTC alleged CarShield’s ads deceptively represented that all repairs to consumers’ vehicles, or to “covered” systems within their vehicles, would be paid for under the plans; consumers would receive a rental car at no cost if their car broke down; and consumers could use the repair facility of their choice for repairs. Under the order settling the FTC’s allegations, CarShield and AAS are prohibited from making deceptive and misleading statements in the future when advertising their vehicle service contracts and they are required to ensure their endorsers’ testimonials are truthful, accurate, and not deceptive.
12-09-2025 - 7-Eleven, Inc. and its parent company, Seven & i Holdings Co., Ltd., (collectively 7-Eleven) will pay $4.5 million to settle a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit alleging that the convenience store chain violated a 2018 FTC consent order by acquiring a fuel outlet in St. Petersburg, Fla. without providing the Commission prior notice. The $4.5 million penalty marks the largest civil penalty ever collected in an FTC case involving a prior-notice violation. It is also the largest negotiated settlement of any order violation in the FTC Bureau of Competition’s history.
12-09-2025 - The Federal Trade Commission is sending payments totaling more than $27.6 million to consumers who were enrolled, without their knowledge, in plans where they were shipped and charged repeatedly for products marketed to promote weight loss, clear skin, and other healthcare benefits. According to the FTC’s July 2024 complaint, defendants Legion Media, LLC, KP Commerce, LLC, Pinnacle Payments, LLC, Sloan Health Products, LLC, and their principals, operated two types of unauthorized billing scams. In the first, the FTC alleged that the defendants defrauded consumers who bought CBD and Keto-related products by charging them more than the advertised price and enrolling them in continuity plans without their consent in which they are charged for products they never intended or agreed to buy. Several defendants participated in a second scheme where consumers paid a small shipping fee for a supposedly free “gift.” However, after consumers used their credit and debit cards to pay the fee, they incurred recurring unauthorized charges on their cards.