New: a trial court in 1 of every 10 U.S. counties. Read the post
Court Rules
All enforcement actions
SettlementCritical RiskMultistate

FTC, DOJ Ban MyLife's Negative Option Marketing, Secure $21M for Consumers

MyLife.com, Inc.December 15, 2021Federal Trade Commission

Penalty Amount

$33,900,000

Summary

The FTC and DOJ settled with MyLife.com, Inc. and its CEO for deceiving consumers with misleading background reports that falsely implied criminal records and for engaging in difficult-to-cancel subscription practices. MyLife violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act, Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act, and Telemarketing Sales Rule. The settlement includes a permanent ban on negative option marketing, $33.9 million in judgments for consumer refunds, and a monitoring program.

Remedy

Permanent ban on negative option marketing, $33.9 million in judgments for consumer refunds (with $16 million partially suspended), and requirement for MyLife to implement a monitoring program for FCRA compliance.

BanMonetary PenaltyConsent DecreeCompliance ProgramConsumer Refunds

Contract Impact

In-house legal teams should review all customer-facing subscription agreements, service terms, and any vendor/data provider contracts where background reports are involved. Key clauses to scrutinize include: negative option/auto-renewal provisions, cancellation and termination procedures (ensuring they are simple and not 'difficult-to-cancel'), disclosures related to report content and limitations (especially regarding criminal/arrest records), billing and payment terms, refund policies, and any representations about data accuracy. Given the FCRA violation, contracts involving consumer reports must include robust compliance warranties and indemnification clauses. Changes may be needed to simplify cancellation processes, add clear, non-misleading disclosures about what reports contain (or do not contain), implement explicit consent for billing cycles, and strengthen FCRA-related obligations and audit rights.

Contract Search Terms

negative option marketingauto-renewing subscriptioncancellation mechanismbackground report disclosureFCRA complianceteaser reportbilling transparencysubscription termsconsumer consent for billingrefund policy

Laws Cited

Fair Credit Reporting ActRestore Online Shoppers’ Confidence ActTelemarketing Sales Rule

Violation Types

Entity Details

Entity

MyLife.com, Inc.

Also known as: MyLife.com

Industry

Data Broker

Multistate Coalition

Department of Justice

Official Sources

Source Evidence

Entity Name
"MyLife.com, Inc."
Fine Amount
"Tinsley and MyLife agreed to separate judgments totaling $33.9 million."
Laws Cited
"violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)"
Laws Cited
"violated the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act"
Laws Cited
"violated the Telemarketing Sales Rule"
Violation Types
"deceived consumers with misleading 'teaser background reports'"

Related Enforcement Actions

FTC

MyLife.com, Inc.

The FTC filed a complaint against MyLife.com, Inc. and its CEO for deceiving consumers with 'teaser background reports' that falsely claimed to include criminal and arrest records, and for violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to ensure accuracy and permissible purpose. The company also engaged in misleading billing practices under the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act and Telemarketing Sales Rule.

FTC

REPS & Company Inc.

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.

FTC

Digital Forensics Corporation LLC

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.

FTC

Greenway Auto Group

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.

FTC

24 healthcare services companies (not individually named)

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.

FTC

Premier Franchising Group LLC and Franchise Fastlane LLC

$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.