Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
CHAPTER 24: CONSUMER LAW 17
whole or in part.
7. What are some of the tactics that may not be used by collection agencies to collect debts? A collection
agency may not (1) contact the debtor at the debtor’s place of employment if the debtor’s employer objects; (2)
contact the debtor during inconvenient or unusual times (e.g., call the debtor at 3 o’clock in the morning) or at any
time if the debtor is being represented by an attorney; (3) contact third parties other than the debtor’s parents, spouse,
or financial advisor about payment of a debt unless a court authorizes such action; (4) use harassment or intimidation
whole or in part.
circumstances, and [that] (3) * * * is material. The deception need not be made with intent to deceive; it is enough that
remanded for a determination of the size of this award.
How did the defendants’ billing system operate? The court explained, “When a computer user visited a
website providing adult-entertainment services, the website offered the user the ability to buy adult content using a
downloadable ‘dialer program.’ The user downloaded the dialer program after clicking through a series of website
Why did consumers believe that they had to pay the charges for these calls? The court explained that,
among other things, “The bills . . . contained a ‘1-800’ number provided for line subscribers to call with questions
about their bills. That number was widely used.” Between July and September 2000, for example, “91,683 bills were
sent to line subscribers and at least 24,986 subscribers contacted Verity about the bills. Calling the customer-service
center was not a positive experience for many invoice recipients. The center was so understaffed that 72% of the calls
How might the defendants have avoided the charges against them in this case? Of course, if the
defendants had conducted a more reputable business in a less questionable manner, there may have been no basis
for the charges against them. The FTC brought its charges, however, after receiving more than 500 complaints from
consumers about the defendants’ billing practices. If the defendants had attempted to mollify those consumers
powers to obtain information from, in this case, the phone service providers. For example, during the relevant time
period, one of the providers (AT & T Corporation) gave a phone credit to any consumer who complained about a
charge on its bill. The FTC might subpoena AT & T (and the other providers) to discover how much of this credit was
granted to the defendants-appellants’ customers.
whole or in part.
whole or in part.
whole or in part.
circumstances, and [that] (3) * * * is material. The deception need not be made with intent to deceive; it is enough that
remanded for a determination of the size of this award.
How did the defendants’ billing system operate? The court explained, “When a computer user visited a
website providing adult-entertainment services, the website offered the user the ability to buy adult content using a
downloadable ‘dialer program.’ The user downloaded the dialer program after clicking through a series of website
Why did consumers believe that they had to pay the charges for these calls? The court explained that,
among other things, “The bills . . . contained a ‘1-800’ number provided for line subscribers to call with questions
about their bills. That number was widely used.” Between July and September 2000, for example, “91,683 bills were
sent to line subscribers and at least 24,986 subscribers contacted Verity about the bills. Calling the customer-service
center was not a positive experience for many invoice recipients. The center was so understaffed that 72% of the calls
How might the defendants have avoided the charges against them in this case? Of course, if the
defendants had conducted a more reputable business in a less questionable manner, there may have been no basis
for the charges against them. The FTC brought its charges, however, after receiving more than 500 complaints from
consumers about the defendants’ billing practices. If the defendants had attempted to mollify those consumers
powers to obtain information from, in this case, the phone service providers. For example, during the relevant time
period, one of the providers (AT & T Corporation) gave a phone credit to any consumer who complained about a
charge on its bill. The FTC might subpoena AT & T (and the other providers) to discover how much of this credit was
granted to the defendants-appellants’ customers.
whole or in part.
whole or in part.
