CFPB, Federal Agencies, State Agencies, and Attorneys General
The FTC has announced that under a proposed order filed in Nevada federal court, Dennise Merdjanian, the operator of a student loan debt forgiveness service, would be permanently barred from the debt relief and telemarketing industries
The proposed order would resolve charges that she and other operators took more than $45.9 million from consumers as part of an allegedly illegal student loan debt relief operation.… Continue Reading
The FTC recently announced the settlement (subject to court approval) of an action premised in part on its Unfair and Deceptive Fees Rule (the so-called “Junk Fee Rule”
The FTC and the companies that operate the Hopper travel apps reached an agreement that would require the companies to pay $35 million.… Continue Reading
The Federal Trade Commission recently issued a proposed policy statement that could reshape how financial services firms use AI-powered tools. The proposed statement, titled “Proposed Policy Statement Concerning the Suppression of Accuracy in Artificial Intelligence Systems,” puts AI developers on notice that altering AI outputs away from accuracy, even if done to comply with a state law, may constitute consumer deception under Section 5 of the FTC Act.… Continue Reading
We have, of course, already blogged about the Supreme Court’s holding in Trump v. Slaughter, 25-332 (2026). One aspect of the decision, however, deserves separate attention because it may foreshadow future challenges to one of the FTC’s, and perhaps the CFPB’s, most significant sources of regulatory authority.
Although not necessary to the Court’s holding, Chief Justice Roberts and, even more pointedly, Justice Gorsuch questioned the extraordinary breadth of the Federal Trade Commission’s authority to define by regulation what constitutes an “unfair or deceptive act or practice” under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act.… Continue Reading
A federal judge, at the request of the FTC, recently ordered Cliq Inc., a payment processing company, and its operators to pay $6.5 million for violating a 2015 federal court order intended to prevent the company from assisting in consumer fraud.
U.S. District Court in Nevada entered the order finding Cliq Inc, formerly known as Cardflex Inc.,… Continue Reading
The FTC has continued to crackdown on subscription billing and cancellation practices it considers unlawful.
Recently, at the urging of the FTC, a federal court agreed to temporarily stop a large business enterprise allegedly built on deceptive subscription schemes from continuing to deceive consumers with hidden costs and recurring charges, while failing to provide simple means to cancel their subscriptions.… Continue Reading
In a pair of very important decisions issued today, the U.S. Supreme Court reshaped the constitutional landscape governing independent federal agencies. In Trump v. Slaughter, Court overruled the 91-year-old precedent of Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, 295 U.S. 602( 1935), and held that members of the Federal Trade Commission may be removed by the President at will, notwithstanding statutory “for cause” removal protections.… Continue Reading
A U.S. District Court Judge has temporarily halted an allegedly deceptive mortgage assistance relief operation lured homeowners with promises that it could provide mortgage relief assistance under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act.
The order, entered in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, was issued at the request of the FTC.… Continue Reading
The nation’s largest ticket exchange and resale service, StubHub Holdings, Inc., will pay $10 million to settle Federal Trade Commission allegations that the company violated the FTC Act and the agency’s trade regulation rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees.
The FTC said the service advertised ticket prices on its website without “clearly and conspicuously disclosing up-front how much consumers actually would pay, including all mandatory fees” from May 12 through May 14, 2025.… Continue Reading
The FTC and the Maryland Attorney General’s Office announced that Lindsay Automotive Group (“Lindsay”) must pay refunds to consumers the government officials said were misled by Lindsay, under a settlement reached with the dealerships and other defendants.
The settlement resolves allegations that Lindsay and its executives deceived consumers for years with falsely low prices and unwanted add-ons that resulted in buyers paying thousands of dollars more for their vehicles.… Continue Reading
