Penalty Amount
$650,000
The FTC settled charges against Experian Consumer Services for violating the CAN-SPAM Act by sending marketing emails to consumers who signed up for credit management accounts without providing an opt-out mechanism. The emails promoted products like Experian Boost and Dark Web scans but lacked unsubscribe links. Experian must pay $650,000 and is prohibited from future violations.
Experian must pay a $650,000 penalty and is enjoined from sending marketing emails without an opt-out mechanism through a consent decree.
In-house legal teams should review all customer-facing agreements, particularly those for credit management, credit monitoring, or identity protection services (e.g., Experian Boost enrollment). Focus on clauses governing marketing communications, consent to receive promotional emails, and the specific mechanism provided for opting out. Agreements must clearly distinguish between transactional/account-related messages and marketing offers, and must include a functional, conspicuous unsubscribe method in every marketing email as mandated by the CAN-SPAM Act. Teams should audit how consent is obtained during account sign-up and ensure marketing email practices align with the explicit terms of the customer agreement. Updates may be needed to add or clarify opt-out instructions, revise consent language, and implement processes to honor opt-out requests promptly.
Entity
Experian Consumer Services
Also known as: Experian
Industry
Financial ServicesOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2023/08/ftc-charges-experian-spamming-consumers-who-signed-company-accounts-marketing-emails-they-couldnt
1ECSComplaint
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/1ECSComplaint.pdf
4 2 ECSProposedOrder
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/4-2-ECSProposedOrder.pdf
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"Experian Consumer Services"
"$650,000"
"CAN-SPAM Act"
"failed to provide clear and conspicuous notice of consumers’ ability to opt out"
"did not contain an unsubscribe link"
The FTC referred a complaint against REPS & Company Inc. and company executives, alleging they bypassed ticket-issuer security controls and purchasing limits to acquire millions of tickets for resale. The complaint was filed by the Department of Justice, and the case will be decided by the court; the press release does not report a penalty or other remedy imposed.
The FTC sued Digital Forensics Corporation LLC and affiliated defendants, alleging they misled sextortion victims with promises of investigative and monitoring services that often were not provided, and used fake positive reviews. A federal court granted the FTC’s request to temporarily halt the defendants’ activities; the complaint remains for the court to decide.
The FTC alleged that Greenway Auto Group advertised vehicle prices thousands of dollars below the amounts consumers actually paid and used mailers falsely suggesting recipients had won cash prizes. Greenway agreed to an order requiring transparent pricing and prohibiting deceptive prize mailers and other misrepresentations; the press release does not state a monetary penalty.
The FTC sent warning letters to 24 large healthcare services companies, cautioning that incomplete, inaccurate, or untimely pricing information for scheduled medical care may be unfair or deceptive. The letters urge recipients to review their price-disclosure practices and take corrective action; they announce no fine or formal order.
$1.9M
The FTC alleged that Premier Franchising Group LLC and Franchise Fastlane LLC made deceptive and unsubstantiated claims about the Premier Martial Arts franchise opportunity and violated the Franchise Rule. The proposed settlements require the companies to pay a combined $1.85 million to compensate franchisees, prohibit certain misrepresentations, and require Franchise Rule compliance; certain franchisees may also cancel their agreements without penalty.
The FTC, Utah, and Nevada sued Lens.com Inc., alleging that it advertised artificially low contact lens prices while hiding mandatory checkout charges and misleading consumers about its AutoRefill subscription. The complaint seeks to stop the alleged practices; the court has not yet decided the case, and no penalty or remedy has been imposed.