Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FTC Wins Huge $7.5 Million Penalty Against "Do Not Call" List Violator

Posted by samzenpus on from the pay-up dept.

coondoggie writes "The Federal Trade Commission today said it has won a $7.5 million civil penalty – the largest ever — against Mortgage Investors Corporation, one of the nation's biggest refinancers of veterans' home loans for allegedly violating 'Do Not Call' requirements. According to the FTC’s complaint, Mortgage Investors Corporation called consumers on the Federal Trade Commission’s National Do Not Call Registry, failed to remove consumers from its company call list upon demand, and misstated the terms of available loan products during telemarketing calls."

6 of 136 comments (clear)

  1. I guess it was worth it then... by An+dochasac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Surely Mortgage Investors Corporation pulled in far more than $7.5 Million with this fraud. And they certainly caused more than $7.5 Million in damages to their victims and the rest society by blowing phone spam into the property bubble. What's to stop them or anyone else from doing it again? This should have been a criminal case. Prison for the CEO and board of directors would be more of a deterrent for corporate crimes.

    1. Re:I guess it was worth it then... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      they should have been fined 101% of their total gross income, since the start of the company.

      don't take SOME of their money. take ALL of it.

      if you don't, they still (the generic 'they') will see a profit from their bad behavior.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:I guess it was worth it then... by dkf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That works, but I agree that violating DNC should carry very heavy pernalties. If I put my number out there specificlaly to say "don't call me", then I damn well don't want to be called.

      Much as I dislike phone spammers, let's save the very heavy penalties for the fraud and misrepresentation. HOWEVER... They weren't just being annoying asses (not generally illegal, alas) and violating an agreement they'd signed up to (clearly a civil penalty thing), they were also telling lies about the details of what they were selling (assuming TFS is accurate). That's the sort of thing that sounds like it ought to be investigated on a criminal basis.

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    3. Re:I guess it was worth it then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We never want you to call, ever. You shitbags gamed the system by hiding 'please call me' boxes which were auto checked on a hidden iframe, or weaseled it into some tiny print on a statement, or some other shady business.

      I hope that you suffer some great harm. Yes, you, symbolset, I hope that you personally suffer some great harm or negative event in your life for being such a shitbag.

    4. Re:I guess it was worth it then... by Le+Marteau · · Score: 5, Funny

      "I used to deal with guys like you every day and not only could you not remember that you gave me permission to call you - you asked me to. "

      Think about it. You spent your day... you made your living... virtually barging in on people who don't know you, who for the most part don't want to talk to you, and who get "all twitchy" because they can't remember if they ticked off an opt-out box or not.

      You were, in other words, a professional asshole.

      --
      Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
  2. Re:Why "allegedly"? by Main+Gauche · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It was a settlement. No guilt was ever established. This may also explain the low dollar figure everyone else is talking about.