Lamar J. Gore doing business as LaMarr Portrait Company

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MATTER LAMAR .J. GOHE DOING nUSI ESS AS LAMARR PORTRAIT COMPANY DECISION IN HEGAHD TO TI-lE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF Tile "FEDERAL TRADE CO::fJflSSION ACT Docket 6169. Complaint, Feb. 10, 1.954-Deeisi.on, June 20 , 1954 Where an individual engaged in the interstate sale and distribution of photographic enlargements and frames therefor through field representatives Wholly1 he supplied with sample enlargelnent, frames, and other supplies including suggested sules talks, and who solicited prospective purchasers under a praetiee in accordance with which the first representative advised the purchaser of an enlargement that another would call upon him at a later date, show proofs, and exhibit suitable frames but with no obligation to purchase, and collected at that time all or a part of the purchase price of the enlargement- (a) Falsely represented, in soliciting for the sale of said enlargements, that the product would be finished or painted by ham! in oj) by some famous named artist, would lJe equal in appcaraIlt€, quality, and workrnanship to the samples exhibited, and that the price of $5.85 or $8.80 charged therefor was a special and reduced price;

(b) Neglected to advise tJle purchaser of the enlargement, at the time of purchase, that the tlnisl1ed l'l'oduet ,vould lw of a special shape requiring a special frame which the representative stated to the purchaser, when exhibiting the proofs along with the frame, could be purchased only from respondent:

II eld, That such acts and practices, under the eircUlnstances set forth, were all to the prejudice of the public and constituted unfair and deceptive acts and practices in COllmerce.

Before Air. l-Valiam L. Pack hearing examiner. lJh. William J. Tompkins for the Commiosion. Wingo Finch of Hattiesburg, Miss., for respondent. DECISION OF THE COJlIJlISSIOX Pursuant to Hule XXII of the Commission s Rules of Practice, and as set forth in the Commission s "Decision of the Commission and Order to File Heport of Compliance " dated June 20, 1954, the initial decision in the instant matter of hearing examiner "William L. Pack, as set out as followo, became on that date the decision of the Commission. INITIAL DECISION BY WILLIA:: L. PACK, HEARING EXAJlHNEH The complaint in this matter charges respondent with the use of unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce in violation of LAMARR PORTRAIT CO. 1021 1020 Findings the Federal Trade Commission Act. After the filing of respondent' answer to the complaint, counsel supporting the complaint and counsel for respondent entered into a stipulation of facts which provides that, subject to the approval of the hearing examiner, the statement of facts included in the stipulation may be taken as the facts in the proceeding and in lieu of evidence in support of or in opposition to the charges in the complaint, and that the hearing examiner may proceed upon such statement of facts to make his initial decision, stating his findings as to the facts, including inferences which may be drawn from the :facts stipulated, and his conclusion based thereon, and enter his order disposing of the proceeding without the filing of proposed findings or conclusions or the presentation oJ oral argument. The stipulation further provides that if the proceeding should come before the Commission upon appeal from the initial decision of the hearing examiner or by review upon the Commission s own motion, the Commission may, if it so desires, set aside the stipulation and remand the case to the hearing examiner for further proceedings under the complaint. The stipulation having been approved by the hearing examiner, and the proceeding having regularly come on for final consideration upon the complaint, answer, and stipulation, the hearing examiner finds that this proceeding is in the interest of the public and makes the following findings as to facts, conclusion drawn therefrom, and order. FINDINGS AS TO THE FACTS PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Lamar J. Gore is an individual doing business under the trade name of LaMarr Portrait Company, with his offce and principal place of business located at 1903 Hardy Street Hattiesburg, Mississippi.

PAR. 2. Respondent is engaged in the sale of photographic enlargements and frames therefor to the purchasing public. In the course and conduct of his business respondent causes his photographic enlargements and frames, when sold, to be transported from his place of business in the State of Mississippi to purehasers located in various other states. He maintains a course of trade in such products in commerce among and between the various states of the United States the volume of such trade being substantial. PAR. 3. Respondent employs field representatives who call upon prospective purchasers in their homes and solic:it the saJe of enlargements and :frames. Respondent furnishes his Tepreoentatives with sample enlargements, frames and other materials and supplies, including suggested sales talks, which the representatives use in soliciting the sale of enlargements and frames therefor. "When soliciting Findings 50 F. T. C.

the sale of enlargements, the representatives exhibit the sample enlargements and state that they are hand painted with oils by a famous artist and that, if the prospect desires to purchase an enlargement, it win be finished or painted by hand in oil by such artist or some other artist and wil be equal in appearance, quality and workmanship to the samples exhibited; and that the price of $5. 95 or $9.90 charged for an enlargement is a special and reduced price. In case the prospect agrees to buy an enlargement, the representative then states that another representative will call upon the purchaser at a later date and show a proof or bromide 01' the enlargement and that, while the finished enlargement does not come with a Jrame, such representative will exhibit suitable frames at the time he shows the proof but that there is no obligation to purchase one. In the event a sale is made the first representative collects an or a part of the purchase price. When the proofs are later exhibited to the purchaser, along with frames, by the second representative, the purchaser is informed and learns :for the first time that the finished enlargement wil be of a special shape requiring a special frame which the representative states can only be purchased from respondent.

PAR. 4. These representations are false and misleading. Actually, the enlargements are not finished or painted by any artist or by hand or in oil. The finished enlargements delivered to purchasers are inferior in appearance, in quality and in workmanship to the samples exhibited. The prices of $5.95 and $9.90 are not special or reduced prices for the enlargements but are the prices at which respondent usually and regularly sells them.

PAR. 5. It appears that the representations in question, while made to prospective purchasers by respondent's field representatives in the regular course of their employment, were never authorized by respondent, being made without his knowledge, consent or approval, and that respondent had instructed his representatives to make no misrepresentations regarding his products.

PAR. 6. The use of the representations set forth above has the tendency and capacity to mislead and deceive a substantial portion of the purchasing public with respect to respondent' s products, and the tendency and capacity to cause such members of the public to purchase such products as a result of the erroneous and mistaken belief so engendered. And the failure of respondent' s representatives to disclose, prior to the taking of an order and the payment by the purehaser of the purchase price or a part thereof, that the enlargements are of a special shape for which frames can be purchased only from respondent has the tendency and capacity to induce members of the public to purchase respondent's enlargements when they would not have done so had such fact been disclosed.

LAMARR PORTRAIT CO. 1023 1020 Order CONCLUSION The acts and practices of respondent as herein found are all to the prejudice of the public and constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

O1WER It is oTdeTerl That the respondent, Lamar J. Gore, an individual doing business as LaMarr Portrait Company, or under any other name, his agents, representatives and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the offering for sale sale and distribution in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, of photographic enlargements or frames, do forthwith cease and desist from: 1. Representing, directly or by implication (a) That said enlargements are finished or painted by hand or in oil, unless such is the fact.

(b) That said enlargements are equal in appearance, quality, workmanship, or in any other respect to samples exhibited, unless such is the fact.

(c) That any price is a special or reduced price when it is the price at which said enlargements are usually and regularly sold. 2. Concealing from, or failing to disclose to, customers at the time be soenlargements are ordered that the finished enlargement wil shaped or designed that it can ordinarily be used only in an odd-style frame which is sold by respondent.

ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF COMPLIANCE It is ordered That the respondent herein shall within sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which it has complied with the order to cease and desist r as required by said declaratory decision and order of .June 20, 1954 J. &;

Opinion 50 F. T. C.