Imagine a series of promotions that include promises of pain relief, awareness claims, endorsements, 30-minute radio spots, “risk-free” money-back guarantees, “free” trial offers, negative options, telemarketing, and offers to purchase club memberships. Upsell. What issues might arise for consumers?
Where do you want to start?
The Federal Trade Commission and the Maine Attorney General announced settlements with six defendants and charges against three others for marketing FlexiPrin, a purported painkiller, and CogniPrin, a product designed to improve memory and reduce mental decline. The marketing defendants filed a complaint.
The FlexiPrin defendants promised that the pills, which contained (among other things) extracts of hops, cockscomb, turmeric, ginger and black pepper, would “reduce joint pain, inflammation and stiffness in just two hours.” Defendant Ronald Jahner, a naturopathic doctor who endorsed the product, claimed that “in almost all cases, within two hours to two days, you will get relief from acute pain . . . Then you get ingredients that the body uses to rebuild joints, bones and synovial fluid.”
CogniPrin’s ad targets people who “have been dealing with memory issues, forgetfulness, brain fog.” A self-proclaimed “brain scientist” named Samuel Brant – who is, in fact, defendant Brazos Minshew – gave a glowing endorsement : “CogniPrin is backed by research demonstrating its effectiveness. This support includes more than 64 global clinical studies and more than 2,800 research papers documenting the effectiveness and safety of this brain-boosting, memory-protecting nutrient.” Elsewhere In an advert, FlexiPrin spokesperson Ronald Jahner gave his assessment: “Thanks to breakthroughs in nutrition, we can now safely and easily reverse mental decline for up to 12 years. This means we can now improve memory by 44%. “
The FTC and Maine AG claim that numerous health claims for both products are unsubstantiated or simply false, but that’s just the beginning of the illegal conduct alleged in the complaint. Here are some other examples:
recognized. The lawsuit alleges that Brazos Minshew — also known as brain scientist Samuel Brant — was not an expert in neurology or brain science. Additionally, the FTC and the attorney general claim the ads portrayed Jana’s views as objective and independent, when in fact he received royalties for every bottle sold. The complaint also alleges that consumer testimonials in the ads were fabricated.
Format. FlexiPrin is marketed through a 30-minute radio show that claims to feature “cutting-edge health and wellness news.” The CogniPrin defendants used a similar radio format. But according to the FTC and AG, they are paid advertisements, not objective news or information programming.
Risk-free, money-back guarantee. Consumers were told they could try the products “risk-free,” but the FTC and the attorney general allege that the defendants created undisclosed hurdles that consumers had to jump through, including sending back empty bottles and paying expensive shipping fees.
Free trial offer. The defendants claimed to provide consumers with a risk-free opportunity to try the products. Let’s say this much: Many consumers do feel like this is a trial.According to the complaint, when consumers called customer service to cancel toward the end of their trial period, they learned that the defendants had started the clock and when the person place order, not when they receive it.
Continuity Plan. When consumers took advantage of FlexiPrin or CogniPrin’s “free trials,” the defendants signed up to receive additional automated shipments. But according to the complaint, this was done without clear disclosure and the consumer’s express consent — meaning the defendants violated the Telemarketing Rules by charging the consumer’s credit or debit card without the consumer’s authorization. , the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, Reg E, and Maine law.
Upsell. Defendants’ marketing efforts accelerated when consumers called to request FlexiPrin or CogniPrin. They upsell items such as buying clubs and health savings plans sold by third parties. These also included misleading conditions, deceptive trial periods and inadequately disclosed negative options that resulted in buyers’ credit cards being charged more without authorization for things they didn’t want, according to the complaint.
Defendants XXL Impressions, Jeffrey R. Powlowsky, J2 Response, Justin Bumann, Justin Steinle and Brazos Minshew settled their charges. The proposed order includes broad injunctive provisions and imposes a $6.57 million judgment against the defendants, which will be partially suspended based on the defendants’ financial circumstances. Complaints against Fusco, Jahner and Synergixx are pending in federal court in Maine.
What does this case mean for other businesses? The lawsuit continues, but the settlement announced reflects the FTC’s longstanding concerns about unsubstantiated health claims, deceptive “free” offers, misleading auto-shipments, and unauthorized credit card charges. Additionally, consumer-facing companies are not the only ones obligated to comply with the law. In naming the various parties involved in the marketing of FlexiPrin and CogniPrin, including individuals and companies who played important roles behind the scenes, the FTC focused on facts to determine who drafted, reviewed or approved advertisements, telemarketing scripts and other content. Promotional activities that cause significant harm to consumers.
