There Should Be a Price to Pay for Knowingly Lying to Consumers
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
February 2015: This action was voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled. because the parties reached a settlement agreement. The terms of the settlement have not been disclosed.
September 2013: A class-action lawsuit against Advance America was filed for allegedly deceptively advertising its payday loans. Among other things, the complaint alleges that the company deceives consumers in promotional materials by representing that the 350% APR “doesn’t matter” and it is not the appropriate measure of how much customers will pay. (Zieger et al. v. Advance America, Cash Advance Centers, Inc. d/b/a Advance America, NCAS of Delaware, LLC d/b/a Advance America, Case No. 13-cv-01614, D. DE.).
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
Letters alert agencies and organizations to company’s improper marketing.
TINA.org discovers some roadblocks to unlocking this purportedly free offer.
New research points to “no.”
Why disclosures are key to protecting informed consumer choice and competition.