Go to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.comGo to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.com
VitalLaw®
  • Find answers to your questions
  • Log in to access your subscriptions
In depth. On point.
In depth. On point.
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
In depth. On point.
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations
    • TOP STORY—Cal. Sup. Ct.: False advertising claim against insurer under California Unfair Competition Law not barred by state insurance law
    • ADVERTISING—9th Cir.: First Amendment did not shield Electronic Arts from publicity rights claims for unauthorized use of player likenesses in NCAA Football video games
    • ADVERTISING—9th Cir.: Former NFL player’s Lanham Act claim for unauthorized use of likeness in Madden NFL video games barred by First Amendment
    • ADVERTISING—E.D. Mich.: Settlement approved in false advertising suit against Son over television claims
    • ANTITRUST NEWS: Complaint alleges conspiracy among U.S. providers of pressure pumping services for fracking
    • ANTITRUST NEWS: Jury finds American Quarter Horse Association violated antitrust laws by refusing to accept cloned horses
    • CONSUMER PROTECTION NEWS: FTC goes after debt collection operation over questionable tactics
    • CONSUMER PROTECTION NEWS: Marketers agree to refrain from selling debt relief services, telemarketing under FTC settlement
    • CONSUMER PROTECTION—M.D. Fla.: FTC contempt action against telemarketers unsealed
    • FRANCHISING & DISTRIBUTION—N.D. Cal.: Gasoline station franchisor’s termination of Right of First Refusal it provided to franchisee was “appropriate”
    • FRANCHISING & DISTRIBUTION—W.D. Wis.: Real estate office franchisee’s tort counterclaims barred by New Jersey’s economic loss doctrine
    • PRIVACY—4th Cir.: Election consultants’ robocalls on election night violated Telephone Consumer Protection Act
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Law Firms
  • Law Firms
  • Organizations
  • Organizations

    Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, CONSUMER PROTECTION NEWS: Marketers agree to refrain from selling debt relief services, telemarketing under FTC settlement, (Aug 1, 2013)

    The FTC announced today that it has settled an action filed last year against telemarketer Jeremy R. Nelson and four companies that he controlled for allegedly defrauding consumers with false promises of debt relief and charging them without their co ...

    The FTC announced today that it has settled an action filed last year against telemarketer Jeremy R. Nelson and four companies that he controlled for allegedly defrauding consumers with false promises of debt relief and charging them without their consent. Under the terms of a proposed consent decree, Nelson is banned from selling debt relief services, telemarketing, and making robocalls (FTC v. Nelson Gamble & Associates LLC, FTC File Nos. 122 3030 and X120048, Case No. SACV12-1504 JST (JPRx)).

    According to the FTC’s allegations, the defendants contacted consumers through prerecorded telemarketing “robocalls;” falsely claimed they would reduce their unsecured debt by 50 percent or more; made unauthorized charges to their bank accounts; and called phone numbers listed on the National Do Not Call Registry. The defendants claimed to be lawyers, the agency alleged. The agency contended that the defendants settled few, if any, debts for customers, and some consumers who did not order their services found that the defendants had debited money from their bank accounts.

    News: ConsumerProtection FederalTradeCommissionNews

    © 2026 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use