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 December 2015, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Household Finance Corporation International alleging, among other things, that the company deceptively marketed two of its trial period loan modification plans. According to the complaint, the company promised to provide permanent loan modifications to customers who met certain requirements when, in reality, the company did not permanently modify the loans and, instead, directed customers to apply for a program that temporarily modified loans. (McLean et al v. Household Finance Corporation International, Household Finance Corporation II, and Household Finance Corporation III, Case No. 15-cv-8974, D. NJ.)
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.