#Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act

[justinssportscorner]

John Russell at LGBTQ Nation:

Anti-LGBTQ+ Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) is suing the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) over its policies allowing transgender women to compete in women’s sports. Paxton’s lawsuit, filed on Sunday, December 22, takes the novel approach of accusing the NCAA of “engaging in false, deceptive, and misleading practices by marketing sporting events as ‘women’s’ competitions only to then provide consumers with mixed sex competitions where biological males compete against biological females.” In a press release, Paxton alleged that the organization violated the Texas Trade Practices Act “which exists to protect consumers from businesses attempting to mislead or trick them into purchasing goods or services that are not as advertised,” Fox News reported.

“When people watch a women’s volleyball game,” the Texas AG said in as statement, “they expect to see women playing against other women — not biological males pretending to be something they are not. Radical ‘gender theory’ has no place in college sports.” Paxton also claimed that the NCAA was “intentionally and knowingly jeopardizing the safety and wellbeing of women by deceptively changing women’s competitions into co-ed competitions.” The idea that transgender people are deceiving others about their genders is a transphobic stereotype used to justify anti-transgender discrimination. Transgender people generally describe coming out as an act of honesty after having pretended to be something they’re not, often for years. As Chron notes, Paxton’s suit seeks to have the NCAA either limit the participation of trans athletes in competitions taking place in Texas or involving Texas teams, or to have the NCAA stop categorizing events as “women’s sports” when a transgender athlete is involved.

Anti-LGBTQ+ extremist culture warrior Texas AG Ken Paxton (R) files frivolous lawsuit against the NCAA for insinuating that the organization promotes “false, deceptive, and misleading practices” for allowing trans women to play in women’s sports. This is not the first lawsuit against the NCAA regarding trans women in women’s sports.

See Also:

Texas Tribune: Ken Paxton sues NCAA over transgender athletes’ participation in women’s college sports

Texas AG Paxton: Texas v. NCAA filing.

[darkmaga-returns]

In a groundbreaking lawsuit, the State of Texas has filed suit against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) for deceptive practices in women's sports. The lawsuit, filed in Lubbock County, Texas, calls out the NCAA for misleading consumers by allowing biological males to compete in women's sporting events, violating the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA).

According to the lawsuit, the NCAA has been advertising and selling goods and services associated with women's sporting events, which are, in fact, mixed-sex competitions where males can compete against females. The lawsuit contends that this practice is false, misleading, and deceptive, leading to significant unfairness and safety concerns for female athletes.

Historical context and policy changes

The NCAA was established in 1906 with the primary objective of regulating college sports. Throughout its history, women's sports were strictly limited to biological females. However, recent changes in policies have allowed biological males to compete in women's sports, provided they have testosterone levels below 10 nanomoles per liter (nmol/L) for a short period before the event.

The lawsuit outlines the NCAA's violations of the DTPA, which prohibits false, misleading, or deceptive acts and practices. Texas claims that the NCAA is causing confusion and misunderstanding among consumers, who reasonably believe that the goods and services they purchase are associated with events exclusively for biological females.

[pscottm]

Texas sues NCAA over transgender athletes in women's sports

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5053923-texas-attorney-general-sues-ncaa/

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) sued the NCAA on Sunday, accusing the organization of engaging in “false, deceptive, and misleading practices” by allowing transgender women to participate in athletic events it markets as women’s competitions.

Paxton said the NCAA, which oversees college sports at more than 1,000 colleges and universities nationwide, is duping women’s sports fans in violation of Texas’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act, a state law that shields consumers against businesses that falsely advertise their products.

“Consumers purchase goods and services associated with women’s college sports because they enjoy watching women compete against women—not men competing against women,” Paxton wrote in the lawsuit, filed Sunday in a Texas district court. The lawsuit does not mention transgender men who compete in men’s sports.

[electlaca]

1. Contract Law & Promissory Estoppel

Promissory Estoppel: This legal principle could be relevant if Zelinda made a promise to you (e.g., helping you move out of Arizona or assisting with your financial situation) and you relied on that promise to your detriment. Under promissory estoppel, a promise may be enforceable even if no formal contract was created, if you relied on the promise to your disadvantage.

Relevant Articles:

Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) § 44-1522 (General provisions on enforceability of promises in contract law)

Texas Business and Commerce Code (if it relates to Texas law and any agreements made in Austin)

Contract Breach: If there was any written or verbal contract where Zelinda agreed to help, and she failed to follow through, you might look into contract law for breach of an agreement.

Relevant Articles:

Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS): Chapter 104 (Contracts and agreements)

Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS): Chapter 47 (Uniform Commercial Code)

Texas Business and Commerce Code: Section 2.201 (Formal requirements for contract formation)

2. Fraud & Misrepresentation

Fraud or Misrepresentation: If Zelinda knowingly made false statements or misled you regarding her intentions (such as offering to help you with a move but never following through), you may have grounds for fraud or misrepresentation.

Relevant Articles:

Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) § 205.380 (Defining fraud in transactions)

Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) § 44-101 (Fraudulent misrepresentation in commercial transactions)

Texas Penal Code: Chapter 32 (Fraud offenses)

3. Emotional Distress & Negligence

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED): If Zelinda’s actions were particularly egregious or aimed at causing you emotional harm, you might explore claims related to intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Relevant Articles:

Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS): There is no specific statute for IIED, but Nevada courts follow common law principles regarding emotional distress claims.

Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS): No specific statute for IIED, but Arizona courts allow claims based on tortious conduct resulting in emotional harm.

Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code: Section 51.001, 51.002 (Tort claims and liability)

4. Consumer Protection Laws

If any deceptive practices were involved in her promises (e.g., misleading statements about finances, help with your move, or handling of personal issues), you could consider referencing consumer protection laws.

Relevant Articles:

Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS): Chapter 598 (Consumer protection statutes against deceptive trade practices)

Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS): Title 44, Chapter 11 (Arizona Consumer Fraud Act)

Texas Business and Commerce Code: Section 17.41 et seq. (Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act)

5. Family Law (if applicable)

If there are any elements of family law involved (e.g., Zelinda's divorce settlement or her responsibilities regarding her children), you might refer to family law statutes related to divorce settlements or parental obligations.

Relevant Articles:

Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS): Chapter 125 (Divorce and separation laws)

Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS): Title 25 (Marriage and divorce laws)

Texas Family Code: Chapter 7 (Divorce and property division)

6. Personal Injury Law (if applicable)

If you feel that you’ve suffered emotional or psychological harm due to Zelinda's actions and it crosses into personal injury, you may explore personal injury law.

Relevant Articles:

Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS): Chapter 41 (Personal injury claims)

Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS): Chapter 11 (Tort actions and personal injury law)

Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code: Chapter 41 (Personal injury and emotional damages)

Así o más perro?

[isfeed]

Meta to pay $1.4 billion settlement with Texas over facial recognition and photo tags

Image: The Verge Texas announced a massive settlement with Meta over the use of facial recognition on Facebook, resolving a lawsuit filed in 2022 claiming that tag suggestions on photos uploaded to Facebook violated the state’s Capture or Use of Biometric Identifier Act (CUBI) and Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Meta has agreed to pay $1.4 billion over five years to settle the suit, State Attorney…

[freshfocusnews]

I found this on NewsBreak: How to Spot and Report Price Gouging

I found this on NewsBreak: How to Spot and Report Price Gouging

Price gouging is illegal, and the Office of the Attorney General has authority to prosecute any business that engages in price gouging after a disaster has been declared by the governor or president. The attorney general has issued stern warnings about price gouging to businesses in times of disaster, but you should still be on your guard.

§17.46(b) of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act provides that it is a false, misleading or deceptive act or practice to take advantage of a disaster declared by the Governor under Chapter 418, Government Code, or the President by:

•Selling or leasing fuel, food, medicine, lodging, building materials, construction tools, or another necessity at an exorbitant or excessive price;

OR

•Demanding an exorbitant or excessive price in connection with the sale or lease of fuel, food, medicine, lodging, building materials, construction tools, or another necessity.

Please note that high prices alone do not mean that price gouging has taken place, as businesses are generally allowed to determine the prices for their products. However, if a disaster has been declared by the Governor of Texas or the President, and businesses raise the price of their products to exorbitant or excessive rates to take advantage of the disaster declaration, then it is quite likely that price gouging is taking place, and you should file a complaint with our office concerning the incident.

File a Consumer Complaint with our office to report a suspected price gouging incident.

👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇

[decentralvaccine]

Texas Lawsuit Claims Pfizer Exaggerated Covid 19 Vaccine Effectiveness

The attorney general of Texas is suing the pharmaceutical company Pfizer, alleging that it exaggerated the effectiveness of its Covid-19 vaccine and deceived the public.

Ken Paxton announced the lawsuit on Thursday after filing it in Lubbock state district court in north-west Texas, the Texas Tribune reported.

Texas governor bars vaccine mandates in state as deaths approach 70,000

Paxton’s suit comes as a consensus of health experts and scientists have said that the vaccine prevents severe infection and death from Covid-19.

Paxton accused Pfizer of “[engaging] in false, deceptive, and misleading acts and practices by making unsupported claims regarding the company’s Covid-19 vaccine in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act”, according to a press release shared to X, formerly known as Twitter.

[dertaglichedan]

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced Thursday that the state is suing Pfizer for “misrepresenting COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and conspiring to censor public discourse.”

“We are pursuing justice for the people of Texas, many of whom were coerced by tyrannical vaccine mandates to take a defective product sold by lies,” said Paxton.

The facts are clear. Pfizer did not tell the truth about their COVID-19 vaccines. Whereas the Biden Administration weaponized the pandemic to force illegal public health decrees on the public and enrich pharmaceutical companies, I will use every tool I have to protect our citizens who were misled and harmed by Pfizer’s actions.

According to Paxton’s office, “Pfizer engaged in false, deceptive, and misleading acts and practices by making unsupported claims regarding the company’s COVID-19 vaccine in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.”

[ovpwebnetwork]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

October 11, 2023

Media Contact:

Danny Wimmer

AG Nessel Joins Multistate Amicus Brief in Support of Stronger Relief Options for Borrowers Harmed by Predatory Institutions

 The multistate brief urges the Fifth Circuit to uphold the U.S. Department of Education’s student loan discharge authority and other protections for harmed borrowers.

LANSING – Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has joined a coalition of 23 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in the case Career Colleges and Schools of Texas v. U.S. Department of Education, et al. The amicus brief urges the court to uphold the Department of Education’s “Borrower Defense Rule,” which ensures protections for student loan borrowers who experience fraud and abuse by educational institutions and safeguards defrauded borrowers from being burdened with student loan debt.

The amicus brief was filed in support of the U.S. Department of Education in a lawsuit brought in February 2023 by the Career Colleges and Schools of Texas (CCST), an organization representing for-profit colleges and trade schools, which seeks to challenge the Department’s “Borrower Defense Rule.” The Rule, among other protections, allows borrowers who experienced certain misconduct on the part of their schools to receive debt forgiveness on their federal student loans.

“The Borrower Defense Rule is vital to protecting student loan borrowers from fraudulent or abusive practices by their financial or educational institutions. However, states alone cannot relieve students of the burden of federal student loan debt incurred from institutional misconduct,” said Nessel. “We need federal regulations like the Borrower Defense Rule to prevent bad actors at for-profit colleges from exploiting their students. I gladly stand with my colleagues in asking the Court to uphold the full implementation of this Rule.”

In April 2023, CCST filed a motion for a preliminary injunction against the student borrower protections. The motion was initially denied by the federal trial court but then granted pending CCST’s appeal by the Fifth Circuit in July 2023, allowing CCST to temporarily evade compliance with the Department’s borrower defense protections. CCST’s appeal from the trial court’s denial of a preliminary injunction is set to be heard in November 2023.

The amici states’ brief describes how states regularly investigate and take enforcement action against predatory postsecondary institutions through their consumer protection offices to redress widespread and systemic unfair and deceptive practices, primarily by private, for-profit institutions. The states’ experience assisting thousands of student borrowers to secure meaningful relief under prior versions of the Department’s borrower defense regulations demonstrates the importance of such relief. CCST’s lawsuit seeks to eliminate such critical protections.

The amici states describe the importance of the Department’s “Borrower Defense Rule” and argue that the Rule has been lawfully implemented by the Department in accordance with the federal Higher Education Act. In cases where state investigations have revealed wrongdoing by predatory institutions, the Rule augments the other remedies available via state enforcement actions by providing borrowers with the possibility of discharging their federal student loans that were based upon institutions’ fraudulent misconduct—thereby not only granting meaningful relief to borrowers, but also deterring future institutional misconduct.

The amici states’ brief also rebuts CCST’s claim that, in order to be eligible for borrower defense relief based on their schools’ misconduct, borrowers must first go into default, with all the grievous harms default entails for borrowers, their families, and their communities. Rather, the amici states argue, the Department has the legal authority to grant student loan discharge through the Rule for borrowers who affirmatively seek it.

In accordance with the states’ experience investigating widespread and systemic misconduct and wrongdoing by predatory institutions, which often impacts large cohorts of borrowers, the amici states further argue in support of the Rule’s group application process. This process enables the states to file discharge claims on behalf of groups of affected borrowers instead of on a student-by-student basis. Not only does the Rule’s group discharge process better ensure that larger numbers of harmed borrowers are able to access relief, but also acts as a more cost-effective method of recourse than adjudicating individual claims.

A copy of the full multistate amicus brief may be found here.

The amicus brief was led by Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell. AG Nessel and AG Campbell are joined in filing this brief by California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.

###

[prelawland]

Brittany Dawn Davis And Influencer Law

By Elizabeth Wolnik, George Mason University Class of 2024

June 24, 2023

Brittany Dawn Davis was the face of the online fitness world. She championed body positivity and eating disorder recovery through fitness and nutrition. She even began a fitness website, bdawnfit.com, to sell fitness and nutrition packages to her fans. However, Davis's fitness empire took a turn for the worse when customers began noticing that their meal and fitness plans were generic and not personalized to their needs. Fans and customers started a petition and even called Davis out on her social media platforms. Davis deleted negative comments and continued to brag to her fanbase that she had thousands of clients through her fitness website.

The state of Texas saw the harm in what Brittany Dawn was doing and decided to file a lawsuit for deceptive trade practices. The lawsuit stated that because Davis "failed to provide the promised coaching and check-ins" to her clients, she should pay between $250,000 and $1 million in damages.

Davis's trial was set to begin in March of this year in Dallas, Texas, but due to scheduling conflicts the state and Davis decided to settle the case. The settlement deal has not yet been made available to the public, but the details will be sorted out in a final hearing.

In the aftermath of her public scandal and lawsuit, Davis has pivoted from posting fitness content to posting Christian content online. Since Davis lost thousands of followers in the wake of her lawsuit, this change in branding helped her gain back those followers. However, the new fans of Brittany Dawn are not likely to know about her past fraudulent behavior and could become negatively impacted by her future deceptive acts.

For full article please visit

Brittany Dawn, Civil Cases, and the Role of the Attorney General

at

Virginia PreLaw Land

[stuartbramhall]

Texas to Investigate COVID Vaccine Makers Over Gain-of-Function Research, False Efficacy Claims

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton today launched an investigation into whether Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson engaged in gain-of-function research and misled the public about doing so, and whether the companies misrepresented the efficacy of their COVID-19 vaccines, in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton today…

[thescoopess]

Texas sues fitness influencer 'Brittany Dawn', over giving people with eating disorders bad health advice

Texas sues fitness influencer ‘Brittany Dawn’, over giving people with eating disorders bad health advice

The State of Texas is suing North Texas influencer Brittany Dawn Davis, accusing her of deceptive practices. Davis, known as Brittany Dawn on social media, sold workout and diet plans. Texas Attorney General’s Office has filed a Deceptive Trade Practices Act lawsuit against Davis claiming she never provided any of the personal coachings promised and that the plans weren’t customized. It also…

[chingbenben29]

HEALTH NET'S INSTANCES AND MISCONDUCT

Health Net is one of the giants managed healthcare insurance companies. It has 6.6 million individuals in 27 states and the District of Columbia through group, individual, Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE, and Veterans Affairs programs. One of the country's huge publicly traded managed health care companies.

The health net is known as one of the Subsidiaries of Centene. In 2016, Health Net's subsidiaries proposed managed health care products correlated to prescription drugs and offer managed health care product coordination for multi-region employers and administrative services for medical groups and self-funded benefits programs.

Health Net Inc. has multiple allegations and lawsuits; so many settlements happened to cover the company's fraud. Health Net's behavioral health subsidiary, MHN, provides mental health benefits to approximately 7.3 million individuals in all 50 states. Health Net received accusations from different people, and this accusation revealed their illegal activities.

Aside from that, let us talk about Health net's instances of Misconduct since 1995, including the five other pending resolutions. Failing to correct and accurately pay claims to health care providers. Health Net requires giving $2500 00 by the California Department of Managed Health Care year 2005. Health Net failed to pay accurately for the emergency and hospital-based doctors not contracted with the HMO.

Misconduct of Cost/Labor Mischarge fined January 13, 2015, by the Court of Administrative. According to the law, HMO promoted to adopt payment Health Net was fined for "failing to correctly and accurately pay practices that would result in systematic underpayment to doctors and health care providers. Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Fraud, Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices and Conspiracy the plaintiffs sued Health Net for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, unfair or deceptive acts or practices, and conspiracy regarding the sale of the health plans.

Health Net fined Misconduct of Consumer Affairs by the Civil Court with a Disposition of Judgment against Defendant. Texas plan and awarded damages eventually reduced to $36.7 million in compensatory and $45.5 million in punitive damages.

The court entered judgment as to the Oklahoma and Louisiana receivers, awarding damages totaling $26.5 million, On November 4, 2005. Claim Underpayments Health Net Inc.'s Disposition of Settlement for Misconduct of Cost/Labor Mischarge on February 11, 2005. Health Net, Inc. entered into a settlement agreement with Tenet Healthcare Corporation to resolve the underpayment of Health Net.

As part of the settlement agreement, Health Net agreed to pay Tenet $28.5 million. Shane v. Humana, et al. Underpaid providers for medical services to members have delayed payments to providers, imposed unfair contracting terms on providers, and negotiated capitation payments inadequate to cover the costs of the health care services provided. Disposition of Settlement with Misconduct of Cost/Labor Mischarge fined by the Civil Court year 2005.

 Health Net will pay $40 million to a general settlement fund and over $20 million for the plaintiffs' legal fees. Withholding Mandated Benefits and Improper Reimbursement On January 24, 2003, Health Net Inc. failed to provide mandated infertility benefits published by New Jersey Banking and Insurance Commissioner. Health Net reimburses providers and members $814,000 plus interest and has agreed to pay $60,000 and fined ordered by the Administrative for Misconduct of Cost/Labor Mischarge. The court breached the Stock Purchase Agreement Settlement because of Misconduct of Securities; Health Net was fined $132 million in 2003. It's for the settlement with Superior National Insurance Group.

FHC made certain misrepresentations and omissions in connection with the sale of Business Insurance Group (BIG) and breached the stock purchase agreement governing the sale dated October 23, 2003. Using an Outdate Schedule for Reimbursement On April 13, 2004, The Department's Report on Examination revealed that Health Net utilized an outdated schedule to determine certain reimbursements for out-of-network physicians and other medical providers between July 1999 and December 2002. Health Net Misconduct for Cost/Labor Mischarge settled the year 2004.

Health Net fined Health Net paid $500,000 along with the $4.99 million refunds. Health Net failed to disclose to investigators the existence of the bonus program, which awarded bonuses to employees who met or exceeded goals for health insurance policies that large medical claims paid by the California Department of Managed Health Care. Health Net fined 1M for Misconduct of Health with a consent of agreement dated 11/16/2007. McCoy/Wachtel/Scharfman ERISA Lawsuits Three separate lawsuits were filed in New Jersey federal court by beneficiaries in POS plans administered by Health Net.

Health Net Health Net violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA"). Health Net fined $215 million and made $40 million. According to the civil court, Health Net misconduct of Health with the disposition of settlement dated November 1, 2007. Claims Handling and Rescission Practices September 9, 2008, Health Net agreed to pay the California Department of Insurance $3.6 million.

With the penalties, $14.2 million in reimbursement and $7.2 million in waived insurance premiums and agreed to reinstate healthcare coverage of 926 people whose individual and rescinded family policies during the past four years. Underpaying New Jersey Subscriber Claims Misconduct of Cost/Labor Mischarge restitution announced August 27, 2008, by the Administrative.

Health Net paid more than $800,000 in restitution to more than 4,700 members for underpayments occurring between July 2001 and October 2002. Bates v. Health Net (Policy Rescission) Health Net had failed to satisfy the obligation of good faith and fair dealing it owed to Patsy Bates and ordered Health Net to pay Bates' unpaid medical bills, plus damages and interest.

Health Net announced a freeze on policy cancellations "without a binding external, third-party review process" and promised a review of its broker training policies. With the Judgment against Defendant Health Net fined $9,368,117 Date of Arbitration Decision February 21, 2008, Policy Rescission (L.A. City Attorney Lawsuit) Health Net and the City Attorney's Office settled the lawsuit. Under the settlement terms, more than 800 rescission victims will receive $6.3 million in automatic payments year 2009. Health Net fined a total of 8,800,000 due to consumer affairs.

[palmtreepalmtree]

As a lifelong fan of the L.A. Dodgers, this sign-stealing scandal has been a bit of a bummer.  And while I’m somewhat enjoying the schadenfreude of the back-and-forth accusations between the players and management on each team, I have to admit, I’m most enjoying the lawsuits that have just begun to roll:

Like this one where an Astros fan has sued the club under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act for raising season ticket prices while knowingly putting a “deficient product” on the field.  looooooool that lack of loyalty from your own fans, omg!

And then there’s this one from a Dodgers relief pitcher who claims the sign-stealing effectively ended his career.  Much respect to Mike Bolsinger, who may have a legitimate claim as far as I can tell, and has asked for $31 million in punitive damages to be donated by the Astros to charity.  Go get ‘em, Mike.

I am rubbing my hands together for more.  Let’s go!

[celineksoto-blog]

Sunday Riley: Wrote Fake Sephora Reviews for Almost Two Years - says FTC

By Celine Soto

SUMMARY: Sunday Riley is a Texas-based, high performance skincare brand, powered by science and balanced by nature that launched in 2009. Its products are sold at Ulta Beauty and Sephora. They are praised for their use of green technology, meaning that its commitment to produce a clean formula and recipe for its products such as using flower and plant extract oils, rather than artificial fragrances, all while producing products in small batches makes it stand out from its competitors (Sunday Riley, 2019).

In October 2018, about one year ago, a Reddit user who claimed to be a former employee at Sunday Riley disclosed emails that showed employees were requested by the Sunday Riley company to create Sephora accounts and write fake reviews leaving positive comments about the company’s products. The email was as extensive as giving instructions to the employees on how to install a Viral Private Network (VPN), which makes reviews untraceable to the company’s IP address.

The leak was initially posted on Instagram and Sunday Riley fired back in defense of its scheme. The comment wrote, "The simple and official answer to this Reddit post is that yes, this email was sent by a former employee to several members of our company, at one point, we did encourage people to post positive reviews at the launch of this product, consistent with their experiences” (Elassar, p. 18, 2019). Also stating that the company believes competitors would “often post negative reviews” in order to defeat the brand.

Eventually, this triggered an investigation by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to file a complaint against the company. This was an ongoing process, but as of Monday, October 21 2019, the skin care brand finally settled with the FTC. The consent agreement form in the settlement read that “this matter settles alleged violations of federal law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or practices” (FTC, p. 1, 2019). According to the FTC, “The complaint alleges that the respondents violated Section 5(a) of the FTC Act by misrepresenting that certain reviews of Sunday Riley brand products on the Sephora website reflected the independent experiences or opinions of impartial ordinary users of the products, when they were written by Ms. Riley and her employees” (FTC, p. 15, 2019).

After almost two years (2015-2017) of violating Section 5(a) of the FTC Act by creating fake reviews on its retailer’s websites in order to boost sales, Sunday Riley agreed to not post any more fake reviews. “False Advertising and Fake Review Fraud distort the markets by harming honest companies” said FTC commissioners Rohit Chopra and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter. The verdict of this settlement was that the FTC ordered that Sunday Riley will not and can not break the law again.

REACTION & PAGE PRINCIPLES:

Even after the FTC found the alleged accusation of Sunday Riley’s scheme to be true by the ex-employee that leaked the emails, the Sunday Riley cosmetic/skincare brand is still not admitting to any wrongdoings. An article in The New York Times wrote, “The settlement does not provide consumers with refunds, and it does not force Sunday Riley to admit any wrongdoing: The company simply agreed to not break the law in the future” (Garcia, p. 3. 2019). The company was only charged with making false or misleading claims of the products and deceived the public by not disclosing that the reviews were written by the CEO and her employees. I am sure that this has happened before with other companies, but not to this extent. Not to the extent of registering Sephora accounts under different identities and lying to potential customers who take product reviews into account when making purchase decisions. In 2016, a study showed that a one-star rating increase on Yelp could mean a 5 to 9 percent increase in revenue; therefore, statistics prove that online reviews affect customers. (Garcia, p. 11, 2019).

Tell the Truth: According to Arthur W. Page, tell the truth means to let the public know what’s happening with honest and good intention; provide an ethically accurate picture of the enterprise’s character, values, ideals and actions. Telling the truth is a principle that did not align with Sunday Riley’s settlement. Posting deceptive and inaccurate comments to a well-known website such as Sephora, can not only skew consumers choices, but also there will be a lack in confidence that the reviews are truthful. Not only were the customer reviews biased and fake, but Sunday Riley did not have to disclose that the reviews were written by employees and the CEO herself. After reviewing this incident, myself, I noticed that Sunday Riley did not make any announcements via social media. Its Instagram and Twitter were completely free of any PSAs from the CEO or a higher-up. Its content showed regular promotion of its products and links to its “Sunday Riley Edit” blog attached to its website. The only space that they spoke out on was the Instagram account “Esteé Laundry” which is an anonymous beauty collective blog. I have attached the announce in the comments by Sunday Riley back in October of 2018, but has since had no further comment. The FTC did tweet about this incident, along with many upset customers of Sephora.

Realize an Enterprise’s True Character is Expressed by its People: Every employee – active or retired – is involved with public relations. It is the responsibility of corporate communications to advocate for respect in the workforce and to support each employee’s capability and desire to be an honest and knowledgeable ambassador to customers. I believe that this principle is the exact opposite of how Sunday Riley handled the law-breaking incident. First, the CEO, higher-ups and employees that abided by the rules that were given to them all showed their true character. The people involved knew that they were breaking the law and were not being honest ambassadors to Sunday Riley customers.

Prove It with Action: When this was exploited by former customer “whistleblower” a year ago in October 2018, Sunday Riley did not admit to any wrongdoing, instead stated that was an email sent by a former employee. A year later after its settlement with the FTC, although it is fresh, Sunday Riley has yet to come clean about the incident publicly. Personally, I will give the company the benefit of the doubt that this all just happened on Monday, October 21 and it is only two days passed the release of the settlement. The company still has a chance to prove it with action by maybe just releasing a personal statement apologizing to its customers.

SOURCES:

Chopra, R. Slaughter, R. (2019, October 21). “Statement of Commisioner Rohit Chopra Joined by Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter.” Federal Trade Commission. Retrieved from https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/1550127/192_3008_final_rc_statement_on_sunday_riley.pdf

Elassar, A. (2019, October 23). “Skin care brand Sunday Riley wrote fake Sephora reviews for almost two years, FTC says.” CNN. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/us/sunday-riley-fake-reviews-trnd/index.html

Federal Trade Commission. (n.d.). Sunday Riley Modern Skincare, LLC; Analysis to Aid Public Comment. Retrieved from https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/federal_register_notices/2019/10/192_3008_sunday_riley_skincare_-_analysis_frn.pdf

Garcia, S. (2019, October 22). “Sunday Riley Settles Complaint That It Faked Product Reviews.” The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/22/us/sunday-riley-fake-reviews.html

The Page Principles. (n.d.). Arthur W. Page Society. Retrieved from https://page.org/site/the-page-principles

[eleganteventss]

AG Pax­ton Amends Google Law­suit to Include “Incog­ni­to Mode” as Anoth­er Decep­tive Trade Prac­tices Act Violation

-KEN PAXTONATTORNEY GENERAL TEXAS FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 19, 2022 http://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov PRESS OFFICE: (512) 463-2050 Communications@oag.texas.gov   AG Paxton Amends Google Lawsuit to Include “Incognito Mode”    as Another Deceptive Trade Practices Act Violation   AUSTIN –Attorney General Paxton filed an amended petition that adds Google’s Incognito mode to his previous…