NJ Consumer Affairs Files Action against "As Seen On TV" Telebrands for Consumer Fraud Act Violations
NJ Consumer Affairs Files Action against "As Seen On TV" Telebrands for Consumer Fraud Act Violations
Newark - The Office of the Attorney General and the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs have filed a complaint against Telebrands Corp., the Fairfield-based company known for its "As Seen on TV" products. The state alleges that Telebrands violated the Consumer Fraud Act through its practice of aggressively upselling products through its automated phone system and websites, failing to provide means for consumers to opt out of the ordering process, shipping and billing for products not ordered by consumers, and using misleading advertisements, among other violations.
Complaint was filed on 7th August 2014
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY CHANCERY DIVISION, ESSEX COUNTY
DOCKET NO. ESX-C-
Civil Action –
Plaintiffs, - JOHN J. HOFFMAN, Acting Attorney General of the
State of New Jersey, and STEVE C. LEE, Acting Director
of the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs,
TELEBRANDS CORP.; JANE AND JOHN DOES 1-10,
individually and as owners, officers, directors, shareholders, founders, managers, agents, servants, employees, representatives and/or independent contractors of TELEBRANDS CORP.; and XYZ CORPORATIONS 1-10,
The state's five-count complaint, filed in Essex County Superior Court by the Division of Law, also alleges that Telebrands violated the terms of a 2001 Final Consent Judgment and Order that resolved prior litigation with the state and, among other things, required the company to comply with the Consumer Fraud Act. From 2012 through July 2014, the Division has received, either directly or indirectly, 340 consumer complaints regarding Telebrands' business practices.
"As demonstrated by its alleged actions, Telebrands cannot be trusted to do right by its customers or to even honor its own 2001 pledge to follow our consumer protection laws," Acting Attorney General John J. Hoffman said. "We are bringing this action to end the abusive business practices that Telebrands allegedly is inflicting upon consumers."
The state's complaint alleges that Telebrands violated the Consumer Fraud Act by engaging in unconscionable commercial practices; making false promises and/or misrepresentations; and knowingly omitting material facts, in violation of the Consumer Fraud Act; and violated the Advertising Regulations by obscuring material facts (i.e., processing fees) and using misleading terms (i.e., "SPECIAL OFFER") in its product infomercials and other advertisements. The alleged violations are based upon consumer complaints as well as an undercover investigation conducted by the Division of Consumer Affairs.
Over several months, Division of Consumer Affairs investigators made undercover purchases of products advertised and offered for sale by Telebrands, including "Instabulbs," the "Olde Brooklyn Lantern" and the "Pocket Hose." The purchases were made through various Telebrands websites and as well as the toll-free numbers featured in the company's television commercials and infomercials.
The state's complaint alleges that consumers calling the company's toll-free numbers were generally connected to the Telebrands Interactive Voice Response (IVR) System, an automated phone ordering system, rather than a live customer service representative. The state's complaint further alleges that through its Telebrands IVR System, the company subjected consumers to a lengthy ordering process, sometimes lasting over half an hour; offered additional products, yet failed to provide a mechanism to decline the offer; aggressively solicited orders for additional products (e.g., during undercover Instabulb purchase, soliciting for at least seven additional products); failed to provide consumers with an opportunity to confirm the merchandise order prior to authorizing charges; charged and shipped additional merchandise that the consumers declined to purchase while placing an order. In addition, the complaint alleges the company failed to inform consumers of Telebrands' complete purchase, cancellation and return policies; failed to provide consumers with the total cost of their orders; and failed to provide consumers with an opportunity to speak with a live customer service representative.
The state's complaint also alleges that through its product-specific and other websites, Telebrands failed to provide consumers with the opportunity to edit their virtual "shopping cart," thus resulting in consumers' ordering products they neither intended nor wanted to order; failed to inform consumers when they are completing their merchandise order and authorizing charges; made it difficult for consumers to decline solicitations by obscuring the "No Thanks" link through the use of small text and a light color; and charged consumers more than the total reflected in the summary of charges.
In addition, the state's complaint alleges that upon receipt of Telebrands' products, consumers received non-conforming merchandise; received merchandise that they did not order; were not provided with instructions as to the return of merchandise; were required to return to Telebrands the non-conforming merchandise or merchandise not ordered at the consumers' expense; and had difficulty in contacting and communicating with customer service representatives (e.g. placed on hold for lengthy periods of time and/or disconnected).
"This action against Telebrands alleges that consumers were repeatedly pressured through gimmickry, misrepresentations, and high-pressure sales tactics to buy products they didn't want," Acting Consumer Affairs Director Steve Lee said. "What's just as unconscionable is that when consumers attempted to return unwanted products and obtain refunds, they allegedly couldn't reach actual customer service representatives and were subjected to return policies that differed from what was represented in ads and on the company's web site."
For example, a Division of Consumer Affairs investigator who attempted to return an Olde Brooklyn Lantern and obtain a refund was required to make four telephone calls to the Telebrands "800" number identified in the delivery invoice, after being disconnected twice and placed on hold once. After finally reaching a Telebrands representative, the Division investigator was instructed to call another toll-free number, which connected him to the Telebrands IVR System. After being placed on hold, the Division Investigator spoke with a Telebrands customer service representative, who stated that the return could not be processed without a credit card number. The Division investigator then asked to speak with a supervisor and was then placed on hold for three minutes. The supervisor also stated that a credit card number was needed to process the refund even though the refund policy as posted on the company's web site stated that a credit card was not needed.
During the undercover purchase for the Pocket Hose, the Telebrands IVR System requested that the Division of Consumer Affairs investigator provide an email address. Two days later, the Division investigator received an email under the heading of "Welcome to Everyday Family Savings" which stated that he would be enrolled in the "Everyday Family Savings" program at a cost of $19.95, which would automatically renew each month unless he called that day to cancel. During the order of the Pocket Hose, Telebrands did not disclose to the Division investigator that he was being enrolled in the "Everyday Family Savings" program.
Many of Telebrands' products are labeled with the logo "As Seen on TV"
Among other things, Telebrands' advertisements for certain products state in
Bolded, large text: (a) "BUY ONE GET ONE;" (b) "2 for 1 pick it up Special;" (c) "Double
Offer!" and (d) "Special Offer." However, at the bottom of each of these Telebrands
Advertisements, there is a disclosure in smaller font and/or a light color that a separate fee
A Telebrands' television advertisement for Fresh Sticks, a home air freshener,
Which aired on December 24, 2013 ("Fresh Sticks Advertisement"), included the following:
The Fresh Sticks Advertisement states in large font, "Double Offer! $10." The
Term "Plus S&H" appears adjacent to that text in smaller font. Two lines below such text, in even
Smaller font, appears the statement, "Just pay sep. processing fee for Bonus Fresh Sticks."
The Trusty Cane Advertisement states in bolded, large font next to an image of
Two (2) Trusty Canes: "SPECIAL OFFER. Buy 1 Trusty Cane, Get A Second!" However, only
In the bottom right-hand corner is there a disclosure in small font and a light color stating, "Just
Pay Separate Fee."
The Pocket Hose Advertisement states "Special Offer! Get a Second 25' Pocket
Hose Ultra." Only near the bottom right-hand corner of the Pocket Hose Advertisement is there
Disclosure in a much smaller font stating, "Just Pay Separate Fee."
The Ankle Genie Advertisement states in large, capitalized and/or outlined font,
"BUY ONE GET ONE" and "BUY ANKLE GENIE FOR ONLY $12.99, PLUS S&H, AND
GET A 2ND ANKLE GENIE." Only near the bottom right-hand corner of the Ankle Genie
Advertisement is there a disclosure in much smaller font and a light color stating, "Just Pay
Telebrands' Interactive Phone Ordering System:
33. At all relevant times, Telebrands has made available to consumers toll-free "800"
Telephone numbers for the purposes of ordering its products over the phone.
34. Upon information and belief, Telebrands has assigned a separate toll-free "800"
Phone number to each product offered for sale.
35. At varying times, consumers who have placed their merchandise orders over the
Phone are either connected with a live representative from Telebrands or connected with
Telebrands' Interactive Voice Response System ("Telebrands IVR System"), an automated
36. Upon information and belief, the Telebrands IVR System does not provide
Consumers with the option to speak with a live representative from Telebrands.
37. Upon information and belief, the Telebrands IVR System allows the consumer to
Purchase merchandise over the phone by either using voice commands or inputting a number.
38. upon information and belief, one of the first actions taken by the Telebrands IVR
System is to obtain the consumer's billing address and payment information (i.e., method of
39. at all relevant times, Telebrands has used the Telebrands IVR System to
Aggressively solicit orders from consumers for additional products.
40. When Telebrands aggressively solicits orders for additional products through the
Telebrands IVR System, consumers are not always provided with an option to decline the
41. For example, the Telebrands IVR system may offer an additional set of Fresh
Sticks to consumers and prompt consumers to say "yes" or press one (1) on their phone to add
The offer, but does not provide consumers with a method to decline the offer.
42. Consumers who were frustrated by Telebrands' aggressive solicitation through
The Telebrands IVR System reported that they terminated the phone call prior to confirming the
Transaction only to find that they were still charged for certain products.
43. Upon information and belief, the Telebrands IVR System fails to provide
Consumers with an opportunity to confirm their merchandise order prior to authorizing the
44. As a result, consumers have reported that Telebrands charged them for
Merchandise they did not intend to order or no longer wanted to order.
45. As a result, consumers have reported that Telebrands charged prices for
Merchandise that were higher than the prices consumers expected to pay based on Telebrands'
COUNT I -
VIOLATION OF THE CFA BY THE DEFENDANT UNCONSCIONABLE COMMERCIAL PRACTICES
VIOLATION OF THE CFA BY THE DEFENDANT FALSE PROMISES AND/OR MISREPRESENTATIONS
VIOLATION OF THE CFA BY THE DEFENDANT (KNOWING OMISSIONS OF MATERIAL FACT)
VIOLATION OF THE ADVERTISING REGULATIONS BY DEFENDANT
VIOLATION OF THE FEBRUARY 16, 2001 FINAL CONSENT JUDGMENT
AND ORDER BY DEFENDANT
Through this action, the state is seeking restitution for the affected consumers, plus civil penalties and reimbursement of its investigative costs and attorneys' fees. The Consumer Fraud Act provides for a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per violation. Based upon Telebrands' violation of the 2001 consent judgment, the state is seeking enhanced civil penalties, in an amount of up to $20,000 for each violation.
Investigator Elizabeth Perry in the Division of Consumer Affairs Office of Consumer Protection conducted the investigation, assisted by Investigator Michael Myola.
Deputy Attorney General Natalie A. Serock in the Consumer Fraud Prosecution Section of the Division of Law is representing the state in this action.
Consumers who believe they have been cheated or scammed by a business, or suspect any other form of consumer abuse, can file a complaint online with the State Division of Consumer Affairs or by calling 1-800-242-5846 (toll free within New Jersey) or 973-504-6200.
Reality views by sm –
Sunday, August 17, 2014
Tags – Telebrands Scam NJ US Civil Case