InPhonic, Inc.; Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to Aid Public Comment, 24584-24586 [E7-8403]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
24584
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 85 / Thursday, May 3, 2007 / Notices
Agreement, the Settling Party will pay
the entire proceeds of an insurance
claim in the amount of $672,397 to EPA
and NJDEP and transfer title to the
Property to EPA. The Settling Party will
remit 85% of the insurance proceeds to
EPA and 15% of the proceeds to NJDEP.
In exchange, EPA will grant a covenant
not to sue or take administrative action
against the Settling Party for
reimbursement of past or future
response costs pursuant to Section
107(a) of CERCLA.
EPA will consider any comments
received during the comment period
and may withdraw or withhold consent
to the proposed settlement if comments
disclose facts or considerations that
indicate the proposed settlement is
inappropriate, improper, or inadequate.
EPA’s response to any comments
received will be available for public
inspection at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Regional
Counsel, 290 Broadway—17th Floor,
New York, NY 10007–1866. Telephone:
(212) 637–3111.
DATES: Comments must be provided
within June 4, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Regional Counsel, 290
Broadway—17th Floor, New York, NY
10007–1866 and should refer to: Dover
Municipal Well ι4 Superfund Site, U.S.
EPA Docket No. CERCLA–02–2006–
2002.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Regional Counsel, 290
Broadway—17th Floor, New York, NY
10007–1866. Telephone: (212) 637–
3111.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A copy of
the proposed administrative settlement
may be obtained in person or by mail
from Diego Garcia, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 290 Broadway—19th
Floor, New York, NY 10007–1866.
Telephone: (212) 637–4947.
George Pavlou,
Director, Emergency and Remedial Response
Division, Region 2.
[FR Doc. E7–8441 Filed 5–2–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Change in Bank Control Notices;
Acquisition of Shares of Bank or Bank
Holding Companies
The notificants listed below have
applied under the Change in Bank
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and §
225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12
CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank
VerDate Mar 15 2010
05:02 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
holding company. The factors that are
considered in acting on the notices are
set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12
U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
The notices are available for
immediate inspection at the Federal
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices
also will be available for inspection at
the office of the Board of Governors.
Interested persons may express their
views in writing to the Reserve Bank
indicated for that notice or to the offices
of the Board of Governors. Comments
must be received not later than May 18,
2007.
A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(Glenda Wilson, Community Affairs
Officer) 411 Locust Street, St. Louis,
Missouri 63166-2034:
1. Wilson–Gardner Family Control
Group, Jackson, Mississippi, which
consists of Alice King Harrison, Forrest
City, Arkansas; Fred Gillaspy Wilson,
Jackson, Mississippi; John Frederick
Wilson, Jackson, Mississippi; Margaret
Gardner Wilson, Ridgeland, Mississippi;
Margaret Wilson Ethridge, Madison,
Mississippi; Ermis King Wilson,
Sterlington, Louisiana; Edna Earl
Douglas, Memphis, Tennessee; Alison
Wilson Page, Sterlington, Louisiana; and
Ermis M. Wilson, Sterlington,
Louisiana; to retain control of
Commerce Bancorp, Inc., and thereby
indirectly retain voting shares of Bank
of Commerce, both of Greenwood,
Mississippi.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, April 30, 2007.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E7–8481 Filed 5–2–07; 8:45 am]
otherwise noted, these activities will be
conducted throughout the United States.
Each notice is available for inspection
at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated.
The notice also will be available for
inspection at the offices of the Board of
Governors. Interested persons may
express their views in writing on the
question whether the proposal complies
with the standards of section 4 of the
BHC Act. Additional information on all
bank holding companies may be
obtained from the National Information
Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
Unless otherwise noted, comments
regarding the applications must be
received at the Reserve Bank indicated
or the offices of the Board of Governors
not later than May 18, 2007.
A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
(W. Arthur Tribble, Vice President) 2200
North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 752012272:
1. Professional Capital, Inc., Dallas,
Texas; to engage de novo in
management consulting activities,
pursuant to section 225.28(b)(9)(i)(A) of
Regulation Y.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, April 30, 2007.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E7–8482 Filed 5–2–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210–01–S
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
[File No. 062 3066]
InPhonic, Inc.; Analysis of Proposed
Consent Order to Aid Public Comment
ACTION:
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Notice of Proposals to Engage in
Permissible Nonbanking Activities or
to Acquire Companies that are
Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking
Activities
The companies listed in this notice
have given notice under section 4 of the
Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C.
1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y (12
CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to
acquire or control voting securities or
assets of a company, including the
companies listed below, that engages
either directly or through a subsidiary or
other company, in a nonbanking activity
that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation
Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has
determined by Order to be closely
related to banking and permissible for
bank holding companies. Unless
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Federal Trade Commission.
Proposed consent agreement.
AGENCY:
BILLING CODE 6210–01–S
Sfmt 4703
SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this
matter settles alleged violations of
federal law prohibiting unfair or
deceptive acts or practices or unfair
methods of competition. The attached
Analysis to Aid Public Comment
describes both the allegations in the
draft complaint and the terms of the
consent order—embodied in the consent
agreement—that would settle these
allegations.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 29, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
invited to submit written comments.
Comments should refer to ‘‘InPhonic,
Inc., File No. 062 3066,’’ to facilitate the
organization of comments. A comment
filed in paper form should include this
reference both in the text and on the
envelope, and should be mailed or
delivered to the following address:
E:\FEDREG\03MYN1.LOC
03MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 85 / Thursday, May 3, 2007 / Notices
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
Federal Trade Commission/Office of the
Secretary, Room 159–H, 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20580. Comments
containing confidential material must be
filed in paper form, must be clearly
labeled ‘‘Confidential,’’ and must
comply with Commission Rule 4.9(c).
16 CFR 4.9(c) (2005).1 The FTC is
requesting that any comment filed in
paper form be sent by courier or
overnight service, if possible, because
U.S. postal mail in the Washington area
and at the Commission is subject to
delay due to heightened security
precautions. Comments that do not
contain any nonpublic information may
instead be filed in electronic form as
part of or as an attachment to e-mail
messages directed to the following email box: consentagreement@ftc.gov.
The FTC Act and other laws the
Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to
consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. All timely and responsive
public comments, whether filed in
paper or electronic form, will be
considered by the Commission, and will
be available to the public on the FTC
Web site, to the extent practicable, at
https://www.ftc.gov. As a matter of
discretion, the FTC makes every effort to
remove home contact information for
individuals from the public comments it
receives before placing those comments
on the FTC Web site. More information,
including routine uses permitted by the
Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC’s
privacy policy, at https://www.ftc.gov/
ftc/privacy.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Matthew D. Gold, FTC Western Regional
Office, 901 Market Street, Suite 570, San
Francisco, CA 94103, (415) 848–5100.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade
Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.
46(f), and § 2.34 of the Commission
Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is
hereby given that the above-captioned
consent agreement containing a consent
order to cease and desist, having been
filed with and accepted, subject to final
approval, by the Commission, has been
placed on the public record for a period
of thirty (30) days. The following
Analysis to Aid Public Comment
describes the terms of the consent
agreement, and the allegations in the
1 The comment must be accompanied by an
explicit request for confidential treatment,
including the factual and legal basis for the request,
and must identify the specific portions of the
comment to be withheld from the public record.
The request will be granted or denied by the
Commission’s General Counsel, consistent with
applicable law and the public interest. See
Commission Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c).
VerDate Mar 15 2010
05:02 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
complaint. An electronic copy of the
full text of the consent agreement
package can be obtained from the FTC
Home Page (for April 27, 2007), on the
World Wide Web, at https://www.ftc.gov/
os/2007/04/index.htm. A paper copy
can be obtained from the FTC Public
Reference Room, Room 130–H, 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20580, either in person
or by calling (202) 326–2222.
Public comments are invited, and may
be filed with the Commission in either
paper or electronic form. All comments
should be filed as prescribed in the
ADDRESSES section above, and must be
received on or before the date specified
in the DATES section.
Analysis of Agreement Containing
Consent Order to Aid Public Comment
The Federal Trade Commission has
accepted, subject to final approval, an
agreement containing a consent order
from InPhonic, Inc. (‘‘InPhonic’’).
The proposed consent order has been
placed on the public record for thirty
(30) days for reception of comments by
interested persons. Comments received
during this period will become part of
the public record. After thirty (30) days,
the Commission will again review the
agreement and the comments received
and will decide whether it should
withdraw from the agreement or make
final the agreement’s proposed order.
InPhonic, located in Washington, DC,
is an online marketer of wireless
telephone packages. Each wireless
telephone package includes a namebrand wireless device and a wireless
service contract with a national or
regional wireless carrier. This matter
concerns allegedly deceptive and unfair
practices regarding InPhonic’s
advertised mail-in rebates.
The FTC complaint alleges that in
representing that substantial mail-in
rebates were available to purchasers of
its wireless telephone packages,
InPhonic failed to disclose, or failed to
adequately disclose that: (1) Consumers
would not be able to submit a rebate
request until at least three or six months
after purchase; (2) consumers would be
required to submit wireless bills
establishing three or six months of
continuous wireless service in good
standing; (3) consumers would not
receive their rebate check until
approximately six or nine months after
purchase; (4) an e-mail address would
be required to be eligible for the rebate;
(5) consumers who changed their
wireless phone numbers after purchase
would be disqualified from receiving a
rebate; and (6) any rebate submission
that did not strictly comply with all
rebate terms and conditions or that was
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24585
deemed in any way illegible could be
rejected with little or no opportunity to
resubmit. The complaint alleges that the
failure to disclose or adequately disclose
these material facts is a deceptive
practice.
The complaint also alleges that
InPhonic misrepresented that
consumers seeking to redeem its
‘‘customer appreciation rebate’’ needed
to establish that their first three months
of wireless service had been paid in full.
According to the complaint, numerous
consumers who waited to submit their
fourth wireless bill in order to establish
that their first three months of wireless
service had been paid in full were
unable to submit the rebate request
within the 120-day time period
specified in the offer, and InPhonic
rejected such rebate requests as
untimely. The complaint further alleges
that Inphonic misrepresented that
consumers whose rebate requests
contained missing, incorrect, or illegible
information would be given a
reasonable opportunity to resubmit their
request.
According to the FTC complaint, in
numerous cases, InPhonic rejected
rebate requests, or consumers were
prevented from submitting valid
requests, because InPhonic failed to
supply to consumers with one or more
pieces of required documentation and
consumers, despite their best efforts,
were unable to obtain such
documentation from InPhonic.
According to the complaint, many
consumers did not receive the required
rebate redemption form, a box
containing a required UPC code, and/or
a required ‘‘Guide to Wireless Service’’
and, despite repeated attempts to
contact respondent, were unable to
obtain the documentation. The
complaint alleges that this constitutes
an unfair practice.
Finally, according to the complaint,
InPhonic promised to provide
consumers with rebate checks within 12
weeks of rebate submission, if they
purchased a wireless phone and service
plan, and submitted a valid rebate
request with supporting documentation.
The complaint alleges that after
receiving rebate requests in
conformance with these terms, InPhonic
extended the time period in which it
would deliver the rebates without
consumers agreeing to this extension of
time and failed to deliver the rebates to
consumers within the promised time
period. According to the complaint, this
constitutes an unfair business practice.
The proposed consent order contains
provisions designed to prevent InPhonic
from engaging in similar acts and
practices in the future and to redress
E:\FEDREG\03MYN1.LOC
03MYN1
mmaher on DSK3CLS3C1PROD with $$_JOB
24586
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 85 / Thursday, May 3, 2007 / Notices
consumers. Part I.A. of the proposed
order prohibits InPhonic from making a
claim about the amount of any rebate,
unless it discloses, clearly and
conspicuously, unavoidably, and prior
to consumers incurring any financial
obligation: any time period that
consumers must wait before submitting
a rebate request; that consumers who
change their wireless phone numbers
after purchase are disqualified from
receiving a rebate, if that is the case; that
any rebate submission that does not
strictly comply with all rebate terms and
conditions, or that is deemed in any
way illegible, may be rejected with little
or no opportunity to resubmit, if that is
the case; any requirement for submitting
bills, records, or any other
documentation, with a rebate request;
when consumers can expect to receive
their rebates; and that an e-mail address
is required to be eligible for the rebate,
if that is the case. Part I.B. of the
proposed order prohibits InPhonic from
making a claim about the amount of any
rebate unless it also discloses, clearly
and prominently, on any rebate coupon
or form, all terms, conditions, or other
limitations of the rebate offer.
Part II of the proposed order prevents
InPhonic from misrepresenting what
documentation consumers must submit
with any rebate request and from
misrepresenting any material terms of
any rebate program.
Part III of the proposed order
prohibits InPhonic from representing
that consumers will have the
opportunity to resubmit deficient rebate
requests, unless it gives consumers a
reasonable period of time in which to
resubmit such requests and notifies
them precisely how to correct any
deficiencies.
Part IV.A. of the proposed order
prohibits InPhonic from failing to
provide, or to make reasonably available
to consumers, all required rebate
documentation. Part IV.B. prohibits
InPhonic from making any
representation about the time in which
any rebate will be mailed, or otherwise
provided to purchasers, unless it has a
reasonable basis for the representation
at the time it is made. Part IV.C.
prohibits InPhonic from failing to
provide any rebate within the time
specified or, if no time is specified,
within thirty days.
Part V of the proposed order requires
InPhonic to send rebates to eligible
purchasers. Eligible purchasers include
consumers whose rebate requests were
previously denied solely on the basis of
one or more of the following reasons: (1)
The consumer changed his/her wireless
phone number; (2) the signature on the
rebate form was illegible; (3) InPhonic
VerDate Mar 15 2010
05:02 Aug 19, 2011
Jkt 223001
failed to provide the consumer with
required information or documents; (4)
the e-mail address was missing from the
rebate form; or (5) the request was late
due to the consumer’s submission of a
fourth wireless bill. In addition, eligible
purchasers include consumers whose
requests were denied due to a curable
deficiency, but where the consumer was
not given at least thirty days to resubmit
the request.
Parts VI through IX of the proposed
order are reporting and compliance
provisions. Part X of the proposed order
is a ‘‘sunset’’ provision, dictating that
the order will terminate twenty years
from the date it is issued or twenty years
after a complaint is filed in Federal
court, by either the United States or the
FTC, alleging any violation of the order.
The purpose of this analysis is to
facilitate public comment on the
proposed order. It is not intended to
constitute an official interpretation of
the agreement and proposed order or to
modify in any way their terms.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7–8403 Filed 5–2–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–P
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
[File No. 062 3094]
Soyo, Inc.; Analysis of Proposed
Consent Order To Aid Public Comment
Federal Trade Commission.
Proposed consent agreement.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this
matter settles alleged violations of
federal law prohibiting unfair or
deceptive acts or practices or unfair
methods of competition. The attached
Analysis to Aid Public Comment
describes both the allegations in the
draft complaint and the terms of the
consent order—embodied in the consent
agreement—that would settle these
allegations.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 29, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
invited to submit written comments.
Comments should refer to ‘‘Soyo, Inc.,
File No. 062 3094,’’ to facilitate the
organization of comments. A comment
filed in paper form should include this
reference both in the text and on the
envelope, and should be mailed or
delivered to the following address:
Federal Trade Commission/Office of the
Secretary, Room 159–H, 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20580. Comments
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
containing confidential material must be
filed in paper form, must be clearly
labeled ‘‘Confidential,’’ and must
comply with Commission Rule 4.9(c).
16 CFR 4.9(c) (2005).1 The FTC is
requesting that any comment filed in
paper form be sent by courier or
overnight service, if possible, because
U.S. postal mail in the Washington area
and at the Commission is subject to
delay due to heightened security
precautions. Comments that do not
contain any nonpublic information may
instead be filed in electronic form as
part of or as an attachment to e-mail
messages directed to the following email box: consentagreement@ftc.gov.
The FTC Act and other laws the
Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to
consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. All timely and responsive
public comments, whether filed in
paper or electronic form, will be
considered by the Commission, and will
be available to the public on the FTC
Web site, to the extent practicable, at
https://www.ftc.gov. As a matter of
discretion, the FTC makes every effort to
remove home contact information for
individuals from the public comments it
receives before placing those comments
on the FTC Web site. More information,
including routine uses permitted by the
Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC’s
privacy policy, at https://www.ftc.gov/
ftc/privacy.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Linda K. Badger, FTC Western Regional
Office, 901 Market Street, Suite 570, San
Francisco, CA 94103, (415) 848–5100.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade
Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.
46(f), and § 2.34 of the Commission
Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is
hereby given that the above-captioned
consent agreement containing a consent
order to cease and desist, having been
filed with and accepted, subject to final
approval, by the Commission, has been
placed on the public record for a period
of thirty (30) days. The following
Analysis to Aid Public Comment
describes the terms of the consent
agreement, and the allegations in the
complaint. An electronic copy of the
full text of the consent agreement
package can be obtained from the FTC
Home Page (for April 27, 2007), on the
1 The comment must be accompanied by an
explicit request for confidential treatment,
including the factual and legal basis for the request,
and must identify the specific portions of the
comment to be withheld from the public record.
The request will be granted or denied by the
Commission’s General Counsel, consistent with
applicable law and the public interest. See
Commission Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c).
E:\FEDREG\03MYN1.LOC
03MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 85 (Thursday, May 3, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24584-24586]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8403]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
[File No. 062 3066]
InPhonic, Inc.; Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to Aid Public
Comment
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
ACTION: Proposed consent agreement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this matter settles alleged
violations of federal law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or
practices or unfair methods of competition. The attached Analysis to
Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the draft
complaint and the terms of the consent order--embodied in the consent
agreement--that would settle these allegations.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 29, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments.
Comments should refer to ``InPhonic, Inc., File No. 062 3066,'' to
facilitate the organization of comments. A comment filed in paper form
should include this reference both in the text and on the envelope, and
should be mailed or delivered to the following address:
[[Page 24585]]
Federal Trade Commission/Office of the Secretary, Room 159-H, 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580. Comments containing
confidential material must be filed in paper form, must be clearly
labeled ``Confidential,'' and must comply with Commission Rule 4.9(c).
16 CFR 4.9(c) (2005).\1\ The FTC is requesting that any comment filed
in paper form be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible,
because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission
is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions. Comments
that do not contain any nonpublic information may instead be filed in
electronic form as part of or as an attachment to e-mail messages
directed to the following e-mail box: consentagreement@ftc.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The comment must be accompanied by an explicit request for
confidential treatment, including the factual and legal basis for
the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment
to be withheld from the public record. The request will be granted
or denied by the Commission's General Counsel, consistent with
applicable law and the public interest. See Commission Rule 4.9(c),
16 CFR 4.9(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FTC Act and other laws the Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. All timely and responsive public comments, whether filed
in paper or electronic form, will be considered by the Commission, and
will be available to the public on the FTC Web site, to the extent
practicable, at https://www.ftc.gov. As a matter of discretion, the FTC
makes every effort to remove home contact information for individuals
from the public comments it receives before placing those comments on
the FTC Web site. More information, including routine uses permitted by
the Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC's privacy policy, at https://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew D. Gold, FTC Western Regional
Office, 901 Market Street, Suite 570, San Francisco, CA 94103, (415)
848-5100.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 6(f) of the Federal
Trade Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and Sec. 2.34 of
the Commission Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is hereby given
that the above-captioned consent agreement containing a consent order
to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to
final approval, by the Commission, has been placed on the public record
for a period of thirty (30) days. The following Analysis to Aid Public
Comment describes the terms of the consent agreement, and the
allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of
the consent agreement package can be obtained from the FTC Home Page
(for April 27, 2007), on the World Wide Web, at https://www.ftc.gov/os/2007/04/index.htm. A paper copy can be obtained from the FTC Public
Reference Room, Room 130-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20580, either in person or by calling (202) 326-2222.
Public comments are invited, and may be filed with the Commission
in either paper or electronic form. All comments should be filed as
prescribed in the ADDRESSES section above, and must be received on or
before the date specified in the DATES section.
Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order to Aid Public Comment
The Federal Trade Commission has accepted, subject to final
approval, an agreement containing a consent order from InPhonic, Inc.
(``InPhonic'').
The proposed consent order has been placed on the public record for
thirty (30) days for reception of comments by interested persons.
Comments received during this period will become part of the public
record. After thirty (30) days, the Commission will again review the
agreement and the comments received and will decide whether it should
withdraw from the agreement or make final the agreement's proposed
order.
InPhonic, located in Washington, DC, is an online marketer of
wireless telephone packages. Each wireless telephone package includes a
name-brand wireless device and a wireless service contract with a
national or regional wireless carrier. This matter concerns allegedly
deceptive and unfair practices regarding InPhonic's advertised mail-in
rebates.
The FTC complaint alleges that in representing that substantial
mail-in rebates were available to purchasers of its wireless telephone
packages, InPhonic failed to disclose, or failed to adequately disclose
that: (1) Consumers would not be able to submit a rebate request until
at least three or six months after purchase; (2) consumers would be
required to submit wireless bills establishing three or six months of
continuous wireless service in good standing; (3) consumers would not
receive their rebate check until approximately six or nine months after
purchase; (4) an e-mail address would be required to be eligible for
the rebate; (5) consumers who changed their wireless phone numbers
after purchase would be disqualified from receiving a rebate; and (6)
any rebate submission that did not strictly comply with all rebate
terms and conditions or that was deemed in any way illegible could be
rejected with little or no opportunity to resubmit. The complaint
alleges that the failure to disclose or adequately disclose these
material facts is a deceptive practice.
The complaint also alleges that InPhonic misrepresented that
consumers seeking to redeem its ``customer appreciation rebate'' needed
to establish that their first three months of wireless service had been
paid in full. According to the complaint, numerous consumers who waited
to submit their fourth wireless bill in order to establish that their
first three months of wireless service had been paid in full were
unable to submit the rebate request within the 120-day time period
specified in the offer, and InPhonic rejected such rebate requests as
untimely. The complaint further alleges that Inphonic misrepresented
that consumers whose rebate requests contained missing, incorrect, or
illegible information would be given a reasonable opportunity to
resubmit their request.
According to the FTC complaint, in numerous cases, InPhonic
rejected rebate requests, or consumers were prevented from submitting
valid requests, because InPhonic failed to supply to consumers with one
or more pieces of required documentation and consumers, despite their
best efforts, were unable to obtain such documentation from InPhonic.
According to the complaint, many consumers did not receive the required
rebate redemption form, a box containing a required UPC code, and/or a
required ``Guide to Wireless Service'' and, despite repeated attempts
to contact respondent, were unable to obtain the documentation. The
complaint alleges that this constitutes an unfair practice.
Finally, according to the complaint, InPhonic promised to provide
consumers with rebate checks within 12 weeks of rebate submission, if
they purchased a wireless phone and service plan, and submitted a valid
rebate request with supporting documentation. The complaint alleges
that after receiving rebate requests in conformance with these terms,
InPhonic extended the time period in which it would deliver the rebates
without consumers agreeing to this extension of time and failed to
deliver the rebates to consumers within the promised time period.
According to the complaint, this constitutes an unfair business
practice.
The proposed consent order contains provisions designed to prevent
InPhonic from engaging in similar acts and practices in the future and
to redress
[[Page 24586]]
consumers. Part I.A. of the proposed order prohibits InPhonic from
making a claim about the amount of any rebate, unless it discloses,
clearly and conspicuously, unavoidably, and prior to consumers
incurring any financial obligation: any time period that consumers must
wait before submitting a rebate request; that consumers who change
their wireless phone numbers after purchase are disqualified from
receiving a rebate, if that is the case; that any rebate submission
that does not strictly comply with all rebate terms and conditions, or
that is deemed in any way illegible, may be rejected with little or no
opportunity to resubmit, if that is the case; any requirement for
submitting bills, records, or any other documentation, with a rebate
request; when consumers can expect to receive their rebates; and that
an e-mail address is required to be eligible for the rebate, if that is
the case. Part I.B. of the proposed order prohibits InPhonic from
making a claim about the amount of any rebate unless it also discloses,
clearly and prominently, on any rebate coupon or form, all terms,
conditions, or other limitations of the rebate offer.
Part II of the proposed order prevents InPhonic from
misrepresenting what documentation consumers must submit with any
rebate request and from misrepresenting any material terms of any
rebate program.
Part III of the proposed order prohibits InPhonic from representing
that consumers will have the opportunity to resubmit deficient rebate
requests, unless it gives consumers a reasonable period of time in
which to resubmit such requests and notifies them precisely how to
correct any deficiencies.
Part IV.A. of the proposed order prohibits InPhonic from failing to
provide, or to make reasonably available to consumers, all required
rebate documentation. Part IV.B. prohibits InPhonic from making any
representation about the time in which any rebate will be mailed, or
otherwise provided to purchasers, unless it has a reasonable basis for
the representation at the time it is made. Part IV.C. prohibits
InPhonic from failing to provide any rebate within the time specified
or, if no time is specified, within thirty days.
Part V of the proposed order requires InPhonic to send rebates to
eligible purchasers. Eligible purchasers include consumers whose rebate
requests were previously denied solely on the basis of one or more of
the following reasons: (1) The consumer changed his/her wireless phone
number; (2) the signature on the rebate form was illegible; (3)
InPhonic failed to provide the consumer with required information or
documents; (4) the e-mail address was missing from the rebate form; or
(5) the request was late due to the consumer's submission of a fourth
wireless bill. In addition, eligible purchasers include consumers whose
requests were denied due to a curable deficiency, but where the
consumer was not given at least thirty days to resubmit the request.
Parts VI through IX of the proposed order are reporting and
compliance provisions. Part X of the proposed order is a ``sunset''
provision, dictating that the order will terminate twenty years from
the date it is issued or twenty years after a complaint is filed in
Federal court, by either the United States or the FTC, alleging any
violation of the order.
The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the
proposed order. It is not intended to constitute an official
interpretation of the agreement and proposed order or to modify in any
way their terms.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-8403 Filed 5-2-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
