Beware - Misleading CG Renewal site

[Jason Flare]

Originally Posted by mogulskibum

If the intent is to deceive the consumer, then yes it is "illegal." It's not a criminal crime, but a civil crime, and the FTC is who enforces that law.

People tend to think that "small print disclaimers" are a get out of jail free card for scammers - but the reality is that they are not. It's just that many of the big time scams are well known enough that people don't fall for them.

If enough people are deceived by advertising, that is all the proof that the FTC needs to enact fines (although they might get off with a warning if they could convince a regulator that they didn't mean to mislead).

Think about it: misleading advertising is a violation of civil law (I could dig up the CFR reference if you really want) - if people are misled by someone's advertising, then that is de facto proof that truth in advertising regulations were violated.

"But XYZ industry makes ridiculous claims in their advertising all the time" - yes, but people don't fall for those claims/misrepresentations, so there's a pretty good built in defense that the advertising wasn't in fact misleading. If almost no one is ever misled, then it's hard to argue that the advertising was misleading.

A bunch of people saying "I really thought this was the official USCG notice and instructions, and I ended up spending a lot of money on a 'service' that I didn't need or want" is all the evidence that the FTC needs to start cracking down on them, and no amount "fine print" will get them out of it.

There may never a big X thousand dollar fine that would make all of us happy, but if enough people complain to the FTC to get it onto their radar, they can, and will, hassle these jerks and generally make their business miserable.

You almost never want to be a small business that's on the wrong side of federal regulator...

Pitchforks.

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by wingless

What is the basis for filing the suit?

Since you seem to be a proponent of reading comprehension, have you taken time to read Mass Gen. Laws chapter 93A? If so and if you did comprehend what it says you would not be asking this question. The fake sites are using DECEPTIVE practices clearly intended to deceive an AVERAGE consumer into thinking they are USCG affiliates or even a USCG site themselves, small print not withstanding. Further search of Code of Mass Regulations (CMR) related to MGL 93A would uncover a more detailed description of what constitutes "unfair and deceptive practices" and also would answer your question.

I understand that many here in their "free market" zeal fail to notice or accept the fact the free market can only function as "free" when all parties to a transaction possess full and nondeceptive information concerning that transaction. And that when one party unduly burdens the other party from from possessing such information, whether by very small barely readable print or false verbal or other representations, etc. there is no "free market arms length transaction" to speak off. And this is exactly what that MGL c93A statute was enacted to address.

For better or worse, these days in many jurisdictions it is - to paraphrase ancient Latin phrase - "caveat vendit".

[wingless]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

Since you seem to be a proponent of reading comprehension, have you taken time to read Mass Gen. Laws chapter 93A? If so and if you did comprehend what it says you would not be asking this question. The fake sites are using DECEPTIVE practices clearly intended to deceive an AVERAGE consumer into thinking they are USCG affiliates or even a USCG site themselves, small print not withstanding. Further search of Code of Mass Regulations (CMR) related to MGL 93A would uncover a more detailed description of what constitutes "unfair and deceptive practices" and also would answer your question.

Thanks, but no, I am not going to research so you can make your "point".

Link, quote and interpret to make your case.

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by wingless

Thanks, but no, I am not going to research so you can make your "point".

Link, quote and interpret to make your case.

A long time ago a guy I clerked for gave me this great advise. He would say -"if you ask a friend who is a doctor to help you move - he's doing you a favor as a friend. If you ask the same of a friend who is a mover - you're asking him to work for free". I'm certainly not in a habit to work for free.

[wingless]

Good point, tell it to the judge to research your point. You're certain to win every time.

[Island Time O25]

Originally Posted by wingless

Good point, tell it to the judge to research your point. You're certain to win every time.

I guess your reading comprehension skills are grossly overestimated. When I'm in front of a judge I AM working and thus come prepared.

Oh and btw, most judges do employ their clerks precisely to do the research for them to decide which side's argument to accept. Most good judges do that anyway of course. The lazy ones go along with the side they like the most. Or dislike the least.

[wingless]

Yes, there may be documents out there to prove your point and there are words waiting to be authored, that make eloquent arguments, also possibly proving your point.

Congratulations on the potential future victory of your argument.