Robart' S Furriers, Inc.

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

IN Tile MATT ROBART' S FURRIERS, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER , ETC., I REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE' FEERL TRADE COMMISSION THE FU PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-628. Complaint, Dec. 11, 1965-Decision, Dee, , 1963 Consent order requiring retail furriers in Hartford, Conn., to cease violating' the Fur Products Labeling Act by failng to disclose on labels and voices the true animal name of furs and when fur was artificially colored; labeling fur products with the name of another animal than that producing the fur; failng to show the country of origin of imported furs on invoices; failng in other respects to comply with labeling and invoicing' requirements; making pricing claims in newspaper advertising without keeping the required records; rcmoving the original labels prior to ultimate sale of "fur products; and substituting nonconforming labels for those originally affxed to fur products while failng to keep the records required.

COMPLANT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission having reason to believe that Robart' s Furriers, Inc., a corporation, and 'Villimll Weinbaum, Helaine .Weinbaum, Golcine .Weinbaum and Maurice M. Weinbaum, individually and as offcers of said corporation hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Acts and the Ilules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act, and it appearing to the Commission that a pro- ROBART' S FURRIE'RS ET AL. 1669 Complaint1668ceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows: PARAGRAPH 1. Uespondellt Hobart' s Furriers, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Connecticut.

Respondents 'Viliam 'Veinbaum, Helaine 'Veinbaum, Goldine Weinbaum, and Maurice M. Weinbaum are offcers of the corporate respondent and formulate, direct and control the acts, practices and policies of the said corporate respondent including those hereinafter set forth.

Respondents are retailers of fur products with their offce and principal place of business located at 84 Pratt Street, formerly doing business at 66 Pratt Street, in the City of Hartford, State of Connecticut.

PAR. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 9, 1952, respondents have been and are now engaged in the introduction into commerce, and in the sale, advertising, and offering for sale in commerce, and in the transportation and distribution in commerce, of fur products; and have sold, advertised, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur products which have been made in whole or in part of furs which have been shipped and received in commerce, as the terms "commerce, "fur" and "fur product': are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Aet.

PAR. 3. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that they were not labeled as required under the provisions of Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder. Among such misbranded fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products with labels which failed:

1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in the fur product. 2. To disclose that the fur contained in the fur product was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, when such was the fact.

P 1.1(. 4. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that labels attached thm-eto, set forth the name of an animal other than the name of the animal that produced the fur from which the said fur products had been manufactured, in violation of Section 4 (3) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

PAIL 5. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not labeled in 780-0.18- 105 , Complaint 63' F. accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects :

(a) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth on labels in abbreviated form, in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regulations (b) Trade names, coined names, or other names or words descriptive of a fur as being the fur of an animal which is in fact fictitious or nonexistent were used on labels, in violation of Rule 11 of the Hules and Regulations.

(c) The term "natural" was not used on labels to describe fur products which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Rule 19(9) of said Rules and Hegulations.

(d) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was not completely set out on one side of labels, in violation of Rule 29 (a) of said Rules and Regulations.

(e) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the R.llles and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in handwriting on labels, in violation of Rule 29(b) of said Rules and Regulations.

(f) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was not set forth in the required sequence, in violation of Rule 30 of the said Rules and Regulations.

(g) Information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated tbereunder was not set forth separately on labels with respect to each section of fur products composed of two or more sections containing different animal furs, in violation of Rule 36 of said Rules and Regulations. (h) Required item numbers were not set forth on labels, in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. PAR. 6. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced by the respondents in that they were not invoiced as required by Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under such Act. Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur products, but not limited thereto cre fur products covered by invoices which failed: 1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in the fur product. 2. To disclose that the fur contained in the fur product was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, when such was the ff'.. ct.

ROBART' S FURRIERS , IXC., ET AL. 1671 1668 Complaint 3. To show the country of origin of imported furs used in fur products.

m. 7. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not invoiced in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in that required item numbers were not set forth on invoices in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. PAR. 8. Respondents advertised certain of said fur products for sale through the use of certain advertisements intended to aid, promote and assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale and offering for sale of such fur products.

Among and included in the aforesaid advertisements, but not limited thereto, were certain advertisements of respondents which appeared in issues of the Hartford Courant, a newspaper published in the City of Hartford, State of Connecticut. In advertising fur products for sale, as aforesaid, respondents made pricing claims and representations of the types covered by subsections (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Rule 44 of the Regulations under the Fur Products Labeling Act. Respondents in making such claims and representations failed to maintain full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such pricing claims and representations were based, in violation of Rule 44 (e) of the said Rules and Regulations.

PAR. 9. Respondents have removed and have caused and participated in the removal of, prior to the time fur products subject to the provisions of the Fur Products Labeling Act were sold and deli vered to the ultimate consumer, labels required by the Fur Products Labeling Act to be affxed to such products in violation of Section 3 (d) of said Act.

PAR. 10. Itespondents in introducing, seIJing, advertising, offering for sale in commerce, and in processing for commerce, for products; and in selling, advertising, offering for sale and processing fur products which have been shipped and received in commerce, have misbranded such fur products by substituting thereon, labels which did not conform to the requirements of Section 4 of the Fur Products Labeling Act, for the labels affxed to said fur products by the manufacturer or distributor pursuant to Section 4 of the said Act, in violation of Section 3 (e) of the said Act.

PAR. 11. Respondents in substituting labels as provided in Section 3 (e) of the Fur Products Labeling Act have failed to keep and preserve the records required, in violation of said Section 3 (e) and Rule 41 of the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the said Act. 1672 FEDERAL TRADE COl\INI:SSION DECISIONS ision and: Order 63 F.

PAR. 12. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act. DECISION AND ORDER The Commission having heretofore determine to issue its complaint charging the respondents named in the caption hereof with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and the respondents having been served with notice of said determination and with a copy of the complaint the Commission intended to issue, together with a proposed form of order; and The repondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by respondents of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the complaint to issue herein, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that the law has been violated as set forth in such complaint, and waivers and provisions as required by the Commission rules; and The Corrunission, having considered.d the agreement, hereby accepts same, issues its complaint in the form contemplated by said agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order:

1. H,respondent, Robart's Furriers, Inc., is a corporation organized existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Connecticut, with its offce and principal place of business located at 84 Pratt Street, in the City of Hartford, State of Comlectieut.

respondents 'William 'Weinbaum, Helaine 'Weinbaum, Goldine 1V cinbaum, and 11aurice 1\1. \Veinbaum, arc offcers of said corporaion, and their address is the same. as that of said corporation. 11808 jurisdiction of the subject 2. The Federal Trade COITunission matter of this proceeding and of the respondents, and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER I t is ordered. That respondents Robares Furriers Inc' 1 a corporation and its offcers, and 'ViJ1ifl1l '\Veinba, , Helaine '\Veinbaum Goldine 'Veinbaml1j and J\laurice :M. 'Veinbaum individual.lly and as uffem' s of said corporation, and respondents' representatives, agents , ROBART' S FURRIERS, IXC. , ET AL. 1673 1668 Decision and Order and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction into commerce, or the sale, advertising or offering for sale in commerce, or the transportation or distribution in commerce, of any fur product; or in connection with the sale, advert.ising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution, oT any :fur product which is made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped ftnd 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. Misbranding fur products by:

1. Failing to affx labels to fur products showing in words and in figures plainly legible aU of the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

2. Setting forth information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Prod ucts Labeling Act and the Rules and Reguations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form on labels affxed to fur products.

3. Setting forth on labels attached to fur products the name or Da,mes of any animal or animals other tha,n the name of the animal producing the fur contained in the fur product as specified in the Fur Products Name Guide, and as prescribed by the Rules and Regulations.

4. Failing to set forth the term "natural" as part of the information required to be disclosed on labels under the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe fur products which are not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored.

5. Setting forth trade names, coined names, or other names or words descriptive of a fur as being fur or an animal which is in fact fictitious or nonexistent. 6. Failing to completely set out information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Hules and Regulations thereunder on one side of the labels affxed to the fur products.

7. Setting forth in formation required under Secti on 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in handwriting on labels affxed to fur products.

8. Failing to set forth information required under Section 4 (2) of the F11 Products Labeling Act and the Hules and 1674 FEDERAL TRADE CG:fJISSION DECISIONS Decision and Order 63 F.

Regulations promulgated thereunder in the sequence required by Rule 30 of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations. 9. Failing to set forth separately on labels attached to fur products composed of two or more sections containing different animal fur the information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder with respect to the fur comprising each section.

10. Failing to set forth on labels the item number or mark assigned to a fur product.

B. Falsely and dcceptively invoicing fur products by: 1. Failing to furnish invoices to purchasers of fur products showing in words and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed in each of the subsections of Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. 2. Failing to set forth on invoices the item number or mark assigned to fur products.

C. Making claims 'lld representations of the types covered by subsections (a), (b), (c), and (d) of Rule 44 of the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act unless there are maintained by respondents full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims and representations are based.

It is further o,-dered That respondents Robart's Furriers, Inc. , !I corporation and its offcers, and 'Wiliam Weinbaum, Helaine Weinbaum, Goldinc Weinbaum and Iauricc M. Weinbaum, individually and as offcers of said corporation and responde.nts' representatives agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device do forthwith cease and desist except as providcd in Section 3 (e) of the Fur Products Labeling Act, from removing, or causing or participating in the removal of, prior to the time any fur product subject to the provisions of the Fur Products Labeling Act is sold and delivered to the ultimate consumer, any label required by the said Act to be affxed to such fur product.

It is further ordered That respondents Robart's Furriers, Inc., a corporation and its offcers, and Wiliam 'Veinbaum, Helaine Weinbaum, Goldine Weinbaum, and Maurice Weinbaum, individually and as offcers of said corporation and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction, sale, advertising, or offering for sale, in commerce, or the processing for commerce, of fur products; or in connection with the sellng, advertising, offering for sale, or GREANS , INC. , ET AL. 1675 Complaint1668processing of fur products which have been shipped and received in commerce, do forthwith cease and desist from: A. Misbranding fur products by substituting for the labels affxed to such fur products pursuant to Section 4 of the Fur Products Labeling Act labels which do not conform to the requirements of the aforesaid Aet and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

B. Failing to keep and preserve the records required by the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in substituting labels as permitted by Section 3 (e) of the said Act.

It i8 further 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 this order.