Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<b>Online Exclusive:</b> Do Not Call Violations Result in $50,000 Fine
The Federal Trade Commission ('FTC') settled charges against Executive Financial Home Loan and two of its officers for violating federal Do Not Call ('DNC') registry rules by allegedly calling 'tens of thousands of calls' to consumers on the DNC list. The fine was more than $1.3 million, but all but $50,000 was suspended, due to an inability of the defendants to pay. The company's officers are barred from making illegal telemarketing calls in the future.
Executive Financial said that it was buying lists of prospects from third parties, and that it was the responsibility of the third parties to ensure that callers were not on the No-Call Registry.
However, the FTC contends it is the caller's responsibility to check that the lists of prospects can be called. 'It was not enough for them to rely on the brokers' claims that the lists had been properly 'scrubbed' against the DNC registry,' said the FTC, referring to lists of people who have not said they do not want telemarketing calls. 'Further, although the defendants paid the brokers for the phone lists, they did not properly pay for access to numbers on the registry, leading them to illegally call thousands of registered consumers.'
The Federal Trade Commission ('FTC') settled charges against Executive Financial Home Loan and two of its officers for violating federal Do Not Call ('DNC') registry rules by allegedly calling 'tens of thousands of calls' to consumers on the DNC list. The fine was more than $1.3 million, but all but $50,000 was suspended, due to an inability of the defendants to pay. The company's officers are barred from making illegal telemarketing calls in the future.
Executive Financial said that it was buying lists of prospects from third parties, and that it was the responsibility of the third parties to ensure that callers were not on the No-Call Registry.
However, the FTC contends it is the caller's responsibility to check that the lists of prospects can be called. 'It was not enough for them to rely on the brokers' claims that the lists had been properly 'scrubbed' against the DNC registry,' said the FTC, referring to lists of people who have not said they do not want telemarketing calls. 'Further, although the defendants paid the brokers for the phone lists, they did not properly pay for access to numbers on the registry, leading them to illegally call thousands of registered consumers.'
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Warehouse Liability: Know Before You Stow!
As consumers continue to shift purchasing and consumption habits in the aftermath of the pandemic, manufacturers are increasingly reliant on third-party logistics and warehousing to ensure their products timely reach the market.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.