You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Federal Trade Commission v. Washington Data Resources

Citations: 856 F. Supp. 2d 1247; 2012 WL 1415323; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56233Docket: Case No. 8:09-CV-2309-T-23-TBM

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida; April 23, 2012; Federal District Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

This case involves the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) suing multiple corporate and individual defendants for deceptive practices in marketing mortgage loan modifications, violating both the FTC Act and the Telemarketing Sales Rule. The defendants operated as a common enterprise, with entities like Jackson Crowder and Washington Data Resources interlinked through shared management and resources. The FTC argued that the defendants misled homeowners by overstating their ability to achieve loan modifications and falsely implying government affiliations. The court held that these representations were material, likely misleading reasonable consumers, and that the defendants had sufficient control over operations to be held liable. The FTC sought injunctive relief and disgorgement of $3,941,588 as net revenue, arguing this sum corresponded with consumer harm. The court determined that the relief under Sections 13(b) and 19(b) of the FTC Act was appropriate, considering both the deceptive practices and the substantial control defendants had over the enterprise. Ultimately, the court ordered monetary judgments and permanent injunctions against the defendants to prevent future violations.

Legal Issues Addressed

Common Enterprise Doctrine under FTC Law

Application: The entities involved were considered a common enterprise due to shared officers, commingled funds, and joint advertising efforts, making them collectively liable for deceptive practices.

Reasoning: The case references highlight that entities such as Jackson Crowder, AFS, Washington Data, Nationwide Marketing, RABC, and TABC operated as a common enterprise, with overlapping management and shared resources in Clearwater, Florida.

Deceptive Practices under FTC Act and Telemarketing Sales Rule

Application: The FTC alleged that the defendants engaged in deceptive marketing practices by misrepresenting their ability to secure significant mortgage loan modifications and overstating their affiliation with the U.S. government.

Reasoning: The FTC alleges violations of the FTC Act, claiming the defendants misled homeowners into believing they could reduce mortgage payments in nearly all cases and that they were affiliated with the U.S. government.

Equitable Relief under Sections 13(b) and 19(b) of the FTC Act

Application: The FTC sought and was entitled to injunctive relief and disgorgement of net revenues as remedies for consumer injury resulting from the defendants' violations.

Reasoning: The FTC seeks relief under Sections 13(b) and 19(b) of the FTC Act, aiming to recover $3,941,588, reflecting the Enterprise’s alleged net revenue and consumer harm.

Liability and Control in Common Enterprises

Application: Individual defendants were held liable due to their substantial control and participation in the deceptive practices of the common enterprise.

Reasoning: The FTC demonstrated that each defendant was aware or should have been aware of the misrepresentations.

Material Misrepresentation and Consumer Reliance

Application: The court found that the defendants’ representations were material and likely to mislead reasonable consumers, as they induced consumers to pay for services under false pretenses.

Reasoning: A representation is considered material if it is likely to influence a prospective purchaser's decision. Material representations include significant information that impacts consumer choices.