The FTC is not anti-direct selling. It’s pro-truth in advertising.
The DSA misses the mark.
Chambers et al. v. Carol Cole Co., Inc. d/b/a NuFACE
24-cv-1938, S.D. Cal.
(Oct. 2024)
Trinity+ and Trinity Classic Facial Toning Devices and Wrinkle Reducer Attachments
Falsely representing that the products’ red-light therapy provides several benefits – including increasing collagen production, correcting discoloration, and reducing inflammation, fine lines and wrinkles – when they are not capable of providing such benefits
Falsely representing that the products’ microcurrent technology is “clinically proven” to enhance collagen and elastin production, improve circulation, and tighten and tone skin when the devices are not capable of providing such benefits
Pending
The DSA misses the mark.
TINA.org reader takes issue with this product’s deceptive packaging.
Don’t let this company blindside you with its deceptive pricing.
Lawsuit pokes holes in company’s Swiss branding.
Why are these airport vendors slyly charging consumers for “employee benefits”?