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.
In May 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Constellation Energy Power Choice for allegedly using a bait-and-switch marketing scheme to make consumers believe they will save money if they switch their electricity supplier. According to the plaintiffs, the company deceptively offers a low initial rate for a specific number of months without informing consumers that the company switches them to a variable rate after the initial rate expires, and the variable rate is “substantially higher than the initial teaser rate” and does not reflect changes in the market rates for electricity. (Coda et al v. Constellation Energy Power Choice, LLC, Case No. 17-cv-3437, D. NJ.)
For more information about other class-action lawsuits filed against energy suppliers and TINA.org’s coverage of the topic, click here.
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.