FTC cracks down on get rick quick schemes from MSN
- Thread starter AdExhibitJason
- Start date
FTC Cracks Down on Scammers Trying to Take Advantage of the Economic Downturn
google biz ops specifically mentioned by the FTC
google biz ops specifically mentioned by the FTC
Google Money Tree, its principals, and related entities allegedly misrepresented that they were affiliated with Google and lured consumers into divulging their financial account information by advertising a low-cost kit that they said would enable consumers to earn $100,000 in six months. They then failed to adequately disclose that the fee for the kit would trigger monthly charges of $72.21, the complaint states. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada.
Grants For You Now and its affiliates and principals operated Web sites such as
grantsforyounow.com, grantoneday.org, and easygrantaccess.com that deceived consumers by promising them free government grant money to use for personal expenses or to pay off debt. According to the FTC complaint, after obtaining consumers’ credit or debit account information to process a $1.99 fee for grant information, the defendants failed to adequately disclose that consumers would be enrolled in a membership program that cost as much as $94.89 a month. Some consumers also were charged a one-time fee of $19.12 for a third-party “Google Profit” program. All the defendants’ Web sites falsely offered a “100% No Hassle Money Back Guarantee.” This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
Grants For You Now and its affiliates and principals operated Web sites such as
grantsforyounow.com, grantoneday.org, and easygrantaccess.com that deceived consumers by promising them free government grant money to use for personal expenses or to pay off debt. According to the FTC complaint, after obtaining consumers’ credit or debit account information to process a $1.99 fee for grant information, the defendants failed to adequately disclose that consumers would be enrolled in a membership program that cost as much as $94.89 a month. Some consumers also were charged a one-time fee of $19.12 for a third-party “Google Profit” program. All the defendants’ Web sites falsely offered a “100% No Hassle Money Back Guarantee.” This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
Here's the moral of this for advertisers:
1. Disclose any rebill fees perperly.
2. Honor refund policies.
The FTC isn't coming down on biz opps necessarily, just biz opps that flagrantly flaunt the law with their billing policies. Sure, it's not as profitable, but it's probably better for longevity than getting shut down by the FTC.
1. Disclose any rebill fees perperly.
2. Honor refund policies.
The FTC isn't coming down on biz opps necessarily, just biz opps that flagrantly flaunt the law with their billing policies. Sure, it's not as profitable, but it's probably better for longevity than getting shut down by the FTC.
yeah but it appears they might be coming after the entire thing. that John beck free and clear thing was a legit rebill with a product (can find it on demonoid even, it's got some good info), just people think they're being dicked by rebills
i don't think it's the rebill, i think it's the product behind the rebill, and the ease of cancellation. you can have high pressure people trying to stop you from canceling, but at least it's still a person to talk to and cancel through, not a busy signal in india
“In the down economy,” said Cooper, “the scam artists crawl out from under rocks.” His number-one rule: never pay money up-front.
“If they want money up-front, then they’re up to no good,” said Cooper.
^^^ LMFAO. I'm LOL'ing so hard right you have no idea!
“If they want money up-front, then they’re up to no good,” said Cooper.
^^^ LMFAO. I'm LOL'ing so hard right you have no idea!
I dont think theres any need to panic here... the FTC is doing this to force the Advertisers to properly disclose rebill info, which they should be doing anyway. From what I've read a lot of these guys were being incredibly shady, not sending anything after somebody paid cash, not offering refunds, etc. If you're going to pull that crap you deserve it IMO.
Nobody can ever take away an Advertiser's right to promote "get rich quick" concepts as long as theyre being truthful. Which is the real problem.
Nobody can ever take away an Advertiser's right to promote "get rich quick" concepts as long as theyre being truthful. Which is the real problem.
as long as they don't come down the chain to the affiliates, because we have no idea how their cancellation practices are. for all intents and purposes, they're duping us as well
I don't see it going that far. It's kind of like a drug bust.. they sometimes pinch the guy on the street selling, but they mostly want the supplier. It's the Advertiser who really needs to stay in check here.
We're pulling offers from a major network. We have no idea what's authentic or not, that is the Network's job (and their attorneys) and their own due diligence. If a network and their lawyers approve an offer, and it becomes PUBLIC DOMAIN for the using, we can't be held responsible.
Not that an aggressive AG may TRY and pin it on a more prominent affiliate, like most idiots do just to test the courts, but it would/should ultimately lose.
We're pulling offers from a major network. We have no idea what's authentic or not, that is the Network's job (and their attorneys) and their own due diligence. If a network and their lawyers approve an offer, and it becomes PUBLIC DOMAIN for the using, we can't be held responsible.
Not that an aggressive AG may TRY and pin it on a more prominent affiliate, like most idiots do just to test the courts, but it would/should ultimately lose.