Furs By Vanity, Inc.

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

IN THE MATTER OF FURS BY VANITY, mc., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-1077. Complaint, June 24, 1966-Decision, June 24, 1966 Consent order requiring a Philadelphia, Pa., retail furrier to cease misbranding and falsely invoicing its fur products. COMPLAINT 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 Furs By Vanity, Inc., a corporation and Sol Shane and Elizabeth Diaco, individual1Jy and as offcers of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as fo1Jows: PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Furs by Vanity, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Pennsylvania.

Respondents Sol Shane and EJizabeth Diaco 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 manufacturers and retailers of fur products with their offce and principal place of business located at 3226 West Cheltenham Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 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 manufacture for 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 manufactured for sale, sold, advertised, offered for sale, transported and FURS BY VANITY , INC. , ET AL. 1061 1060 Complaint 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 Act.

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 and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

PAR. 4. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not labeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder inasmuch as required item numbers were not set forth on labels, in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. PAR. 5. 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, were 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 artifically colored, when such was the fact.

PAR. 6. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced with respect to the name or designation of the animal or animals that produced the fur from which the said fur products had been manufactured, in violation of Section 5 (b) (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products which were invoiced as Broadtail" thereby implying that the furs contained therein were entitled to the designation "Broadtail Lamb" when in truth and in fact they were not entitled to such designation. PAR. 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 the following respects: 1. Information required under Section 5 (b (1) of the Fur products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated Decision and Order 69 F.

thereunder was set forth on invoices in abbreviated form, in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regulations. 2. The term "Dyed Broadtail-processed Lamb" was not set forth on invoices in the manner required by law, in violation of Rule 10 of said Rules and Regulations.

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

4. Required item numbers were not set forth on invoices, in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. PAR. 8. 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 Federal Trade Commission having initiated an investigation of certain acts and practices of the respondents named in the caption hereof, and the respondents having been furnished thereafter with a copy of a draft of complaint which the Bureau of Textiles and Furs proposed to present to the Commission for its consideration and which, if issued by the Commission, would charge respondents with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondents of alj the jurisdictional facts set forth in the aforesaid draft of complaint, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondents that the law has been violated as alleged in such complaint, and waivers and provisions as required by the Commission s rules; and The Commission, having reason to believe that the respondents have violated the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and having determined that complaint should issue stating its charges in that respect, hereby issues its complaint, accepts said agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings and enters the following order: 1. Respondent Furs By Vanity, Inc., is a corporation organized FURS BY VANITY , INC. , ET AL. 1063 1060 Order existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Pennsylvania, with its offce and principal place of business located at 3226 West Cheltenham Avenue, Philadelphia Pennsylvania.

Respondents Sol Shane and Elizabeth Diaco are offcers of the corporate respondent and their address is the same as that of said 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 Furs By Vanity, Inc., a corporation, and its offcers, and respondents Sol Shane and Elizabeth Diaco, 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, or "manufacture for introduction into commerce, or the sale advertising, or offering for sale in commerce, or transportation and distribution in commerce, of any fur product; or in connection with the manufacture for sale, sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation, or distribution, of any fur product which is 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. Misbranding fur products by:

1. Failng to affx labels to fur products showing in words and in figures plainly legible aJl of the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. 2. Failing to set forth on labels the item number or mark assigned to each such fur product.

B. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: 1. Failing to furnish invoices, as the term "invoice" is defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, showing in words and figures plainly legible aJl the information required to be disclosed in each of the subsections of Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. 2. Setting forth on invoices pertaining to fur products any false or deceptive information with respect to the Complaint 69 F.

name or designation of the animal or animals that produced the fur contained in such fur product. 3. Setting forth information required under Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form.

4. Failng to set forth the term "Dyed Broadtail-processed Lamb" in the manner required where an election is made to use that term instead of the words "Dyed Lamb.

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

6. Failng to set forth on invoices the item number or mark assigned to each such fur product.

It is 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.