Consumer Law LibrarySearchBy decadeBy respondentBy topicBy outcomeDataAbout

Crawford Industries, Inc., et al.

Volume 59 · 59 F.T.C. 398

Citation
59 F.T.C. 398
Docket
8423
Complaint
1961-06-02
Decision
1961-10-10
Document type
consent order
Case type
consumer protection
Statutes
FTC Act (section 5)
Industry
home repairs
Outcome
consent order entered
Relief
cease_and_desist
Source
Original volume PDF
Original PDF
This decision as a PDF

deceptive advertisingbait and switchpricing comparisons

Cite this decision

Crawford Industries, Inc., et al., 59 F.T.C. 398 (1961). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v059-0077

Report an error in this record (decision id v059-0077)

Order status: unknown. Sunset may be extended by the latest qualifying federal-court complaint alleging an order violation; complaints, dismissal/appeal outcomes, and respondent-specific extensions are not fully tracked.

Cited by 0 later FTC decisions

Cites

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

CRAWFORD INDUSTRIES, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT AND DEFAULT ORDERS, ETC., 1N REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACT Docket §423. Complaint, June 2, 1961—Decisions, Sept. 6.1961, and Oct. 10, 1961 Consent order dated Sept. G. 1961. and the same order issued in default Oct. 10. 1961, requiring an individual and a corporation, respectively, in Pikesville, Md., to cease selling home repairs through bait advertising, false savings ’ claims, and other nisrepresentations, as in the orders below specified. Complaint Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Act, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Crawford Industries, Tne., a corporation, and Joseph Silver, alias James Crawford, and trying Zimmerman, individually and as officers of the said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Act, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it. in respect thereof would be in the pubiic interest, hereby issues its complaint, stating its charges in that respect.as follows: Paracrapy 1. Respondent Crawford Industries, Inc., isa corperation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Maryland. Its office and principal place of business is located at 5107 Baltimore Avenue, Hyattsville, Maryland. Respondents Joseph Silver, alias James Crawford, whose acliress !s soge :

553% West Montgomery Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Irving Zimmerman, whose address is 21 Randall Street, Pikesville. Maryland, ave officers of the respondent corporation. They formulate. direct and control the acts and practices of the respondent corperation, including those hereinafter set forth.

Par. 2. Respondents are new, and for some time last past have been, engaged in advertising. offering for sale, and sale of home repairs, including the furnishing and installation of aluminum siding, jalousies and awnings, recreation rooms and porch enclosures. Complaint 59 E.T.C.

Decision OF THE Commission as TO REsponpEN'’T Wittiam J. Kraus Pursuant to Section 3.21 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall, on the 6th day of September 1961, become the decision of the Commission. I~ tue 3iarrer or

← 59 F.T.C. 393 · 59 F.T.C. 398 →