Volk Bros. Co.

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

In Toe Martrer oF VOLK BROS. CO. ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 6990. Complaint, Dec. 16, 1957—Decision, June 18, 1958 Consent order requiring a furrier in Dallas, Tex., to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by advertising in newpapers which failed to disclose the names of animals producing the fur in certain products, that some furs were artificially colored, and the country of origin of imported furs, and failed to set forth other required information; which falsely represented sale prices as reduced from regular prices which were, in fact, fictitious, and made percentage savings claims while failing to maintain adequate records as a basis therefor.

Mr. S. FP. House supporting the complaint. Turner, Rodgers, Winn, Scurlock & Terry, of Dallas, Tex., for respondents.

InrviaL Decision By Joun B. Pornpexter, Hearing Examiner On December 16, 1957, the Federal Trade Commission issued a complaint against Volk Bros. Co., a corporation, and Harold F. Volk, individually and as an officer of said corporation, charging them with having violated the Fur Products Labeling Act, the rules and regulations issued thereunder, and the Federal Trade Commission Act, by falsely and deceptively advertising the prices of their fur products, failing to keep records to substantiate pricing claims and with irregularities in labeling and invoicing their fur products. After issuance and service of the complaint, the respondents, their counsel, and counsel supporting the complaint entered into an agreement fora consent order. The order disposes of the matters complained about. The agreement has been approved by the Director and Assistant Director of the Bureau of Litigation. The pertinent provisions of said agreement are as follows: Respondents admit all jurisdictional facts; the complaint may be used in construing the terms of the order; the order shall have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing and the said agreement shall not become a part of the official record of the proceeding unless and until it becomes a part of the decision of the Commission; the record herein shall consist solely of the complaint and the agreement, respondents waive the requirement that the decision must contain a statement of findings of fact and conclusions of law; respondents waive VOLK BROS. CO. ET AL. 1829 1828 Order further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission, and the order may be altered, modified, or set aside in the manner provided by statute for other orders; respondents waive any right to challenge or contest the validity of the order entered in accordance with the agreement and the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that they have violated the law as alleged in the complaint. The undersigned hearing examiner having considered the agree- . ment and proposed order and being of the opinion that the acceptance thereof will be in the public interest, hereby accepts such agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and issues the following order:

JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS 1. Respondent Volk Bros. Co., is a corporation existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Texas, with its office and principal place of business located at 1806 Elm Street, Dallas, Tex. Respondent Harold F. Volk is president and treasurer of said corporation and formulates, directs, and controls the acts, policies and practices of said corporation. His address is the same as that of the corporate respondent.

2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondents and the proceeding is in the public interest. ) ORDER It is ordered, That respondent Volk Bros. Co., @ corporation, and its officers and Harold F. Volk, individually and as an officer of said corporation, and respondents’ representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction into commerce, or the sale, advertising, offermg for sale, transportation or distribution of fur products in commerce, or in connection with the sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution of fur products which have been made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce, as the terms ‘“‘commerce”, “fur” and “fur product” are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease and desist from: A. Falsely or deceptively advertising fur products through the use of any advertisement, representation, public announcement, or notice which is intended to aid, promote, or assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale or offering for sale of fur products, and which: 1. Fails to disclose:

(a) The name or names of the animal or animals producing the fur Decision 54 F.T.C.

or furs contained in the fur products, as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide and as prescribed by the rules and regulations; (b) That the fur product contains or is composed of bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored fur, when such is the fact; (c) All of the information required under section 5(a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the rules and reculations thereunder in type of equal size and conspicuousness and in close proximity with each other;

(d) The name of the country of origin of any imported furs contained in a fur product.

2. Represents directly or by implication that: The regular or usual price of any fur product is in an amount which is in excess of the price at which the respondents have usually and customarily sold such products in the recent regular course of their business.

3. Represents directly or by implication through percentage savings claims that the regular or usual retail prices charged by respondents for fur products in the recent regular course of their business are reduced in direct proportion to the amounts of savings stated when contrary to the fact.

B. Making price claims and representations of the types referred to in subparagraphs A2 and A3 above unless there are maintained by respondents full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims or representations are based.

DECISION OF THE COMMISSION AND ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF COMPLIANCE Pursuant to section 3.21 of the Commission’s rules of practice, the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall, on the 18th day of June, 1958, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly: It is ordered, That the respondents herein shall within sixty (60) days after service upon them of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with the order to cease and desist. AUTOMATIC CANTEEN CO. OF AMERICA 1831 a Complaint