Thursday, March 11th, 2010
A company that made bold promises about its ability to protect against identity theft has settled with the Federal Trade Commission after the validity of its claims was questioned.
LifeLock is a company that protects customers' identities from theft, and alerts customers about identity theft security breaches, according to the company web site. LifeLock will even help consumers if their identity is stolen, by canceling and replacing stolen cards and verifying information changes.
According to federal regulators, however, LifeLock has made claims about its ability to protect customers from identity theft that it cannot uphold, leading to an agreement for the company to pay $12 million in settlements.
CNNMoney is reporting that the fine will settle charges that LifeLock made deceptive claims about its identity theft protection abilities. $11 million of the fine will go to the FTC, while another $1 million will go to a group of attorneys general from around the country. According to the FTC, this is one of the largest joint settlements between the FTC and the states.
According to the chairman of the FTC, Jon Liebowitz, LifeLock claimed that it could protect consumers against identity theft completely, including all types of identity theft.
The protection it actually provided,
said the chairman, left enough holes that you could drive a truck through it.
LifeLock advertises its services in a brash manner, by displaying the social security number of the company's CEO, Todd Davis, on the side of a truck that drives around in public, as well as on national television commercials. This show of confidence is meant to publicize their $10 per month services that they claim will keep users safe from identity theft.
The case that the FTC made against LifeLock was that the company made "deceptive claims" about its protection services. Among these claims were that LifeLock could guarantee protection against identity theft, and that, according to CNNMoney, "it was the first company to prevent identity theft from occurring."
There are certain types of identity theft that LifeLock claimed it could protect against, and the FTC argued that these fraud alerts did not actually protect against one of the most common types of identity theft: the misuse of existing accounts.
There was also the charge that LifeLock claimed, falsely, to be able to prevent changes to customers' address listings that weren't authorized, and that it constantly monitored customer credit report activity.
The FTC also said that LifeLock made untrue statements about data security, claiming that sensitive data was only accessed on a "need-to-know" basis. According to the FTC, however, LifeLock collected social security numbers and credit card numbers on a routine basis.
Davis, the CEO of LifeLock, said of the settlement that he was pleased with it, and that it would help to establish the advertising standards for the identity theft protection industry. He went on to say that the activities in the FTC charges were from several years ago, and that LifeLock agreed to settle the case as a way to put the issues behind them.
We agreed to settle this matter,
he said, in order to quickly put this behind us so we can get back to doing what we do best—helping to protect our members from identity theft.
Posted in FTC, Financial Literacy, Identity Theft, lifelock | Comments Off
Sunday, March 7th, 2010
The Federal Trade Commission recently issued its annual report on consumer complaints filed in the last 12 months (summary available here, for the complete report, see below).
Identity theft was by far the largest complaint category, concerning 21 percent of all complaints filed. The top fifteen list looks like this:
- Identity theft (21 percent)
- Third party and creditor debt collection (nine percent)
- Internet services (six percent)
- Shop-at-home and catalog sales (six percent)
- Foreign money offers and counterfeit check scams (five percent)
- Internet auctions (four percent)
- Credit cards (three percent)
- Prizes, sweepstakes and lotteries (three percent)
- Advance-fee loans and credit protection/repair (three percent)
- Banks and Lenders (two percent)
- Credit bureaus, information furnishers and report users (two percent)
- Television and electronic media (two percent)
- Health care (two percent)
- Business opportunities, employment agencies and work-at-home plans (two percent)
- Computer equipment and software (two percent)
The FTC reports that identity theft complaints also constituted the largest single group of consumer worries last year, but have dropped as an overall percentage of the whole. In addition to the release of 2009’s data, the FTC has posted an animated video detailing how and when to file a complaint (available here).
A Potential Data Breach You Should Know About
In another recent news release, the FTC noted that it has warned almost 100 companies that information they store on peer-to-peer websites (used for everything from playing video games to sharing text, audio and video files to conducting online phone calls) may be vulnerable to data breaches.
Specifically, if peer-to-peer (P2P) software is improperly configured, any sensitive data may be accessible to anyone on the network. This presents a huge security risk, and could lead to identity theft or other costly and frustrating scams.
What this could mean for you is that, if you have given your personal information to one of the companies in question, your information could be at risk.
While no companies have necessarily broken the FTC’s regulations regarding storage of sensitive information, some may be at risk for significant future data breaches.
Additional Resources
FTC 2009 Full Report on Consumer Complaints.
Posted in FTC, Identity Theft, data breach | Comments Off
Friday, January 29th, 2010
The Federal Trade Commission announced this month that it has settled charges with three debt collectors accused of various types of abusive debt collection. The settlement, which reportedly includes the largest civil penalty ever levied on a debt collection agency, comes in conjunction with future restrictions for the defendants.
Fair Debt Collection Practices Violated
According to the case, the defendants violated terms of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which outlines acceptable behavior for agencies responsible for collecting on debts. These guidelines prohibit a variety of actions, including:
- Contacting a debtor before 8:00 am or after 9:00 pm local time
- Contacting a debtor after receiving a written request not to do so
- Contacting a debtor at her place of work after being told not to
- Calling the debtor with the intent to annoy, harass or abuse
- Contacting the debtor directly when he is known to have an attorney
- Misrepresenting a debt or using deceit to collect money
- Threatening arrest or legal action when neither is an option
- Seeking more than a person legally owes
- Publishing a person’s name on a “bad debt” list
- Reporting information incorrectly to a credit reporting bureau
- Contacting a third party about a consumer’s debt
- Contacting a debtor by embarrassing media (like a post card)
In this case, the men were charged with threatening arrest and legal action when none was warranted as well as using harassment and abusive contact to collect debts. The men in question were senior managers at debt collection agencies and as such either participated in the illegal actions or were responsible for such actions among their employees.
The Settlements
One of the three defendants, Keith Dickstein, owner of Academy Collection Service, Inc., apparently paid a $2.25 million settlement in 2008. The two defendants who settled early this year, Edward S. Bastian and Edward Hurt, were saddled with fines of $375,000 and $300,000 respectively for abusive collection practices.
The fines were suspended after each man paid $7,500, based on their ability to pay; payment of the remainder will depend upon their future compliance with debt collection laws.
Your Consumer Rights
Federal law outlines many protections for consumers. Make sure you have an idea of what consumer rights you have so you can take legal action, if necessary, should they be violated.
Additional Resources
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (PDF)
Posted in Creditors, FTC, Financial Literacy, debt collection | Comments Off
