Youngstown Carpet Guild Distributors Co

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

In roe Marrer or YOUNGSTOWN CARPET GUILD DISTRIBUTORS CO., ET AL.

MODIFIED ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACT Docket 8719. Complaint, Oct. 24, 1966—Decision, July 13, 1970 Order modifying an. earlier order dated December 20, 1966, 70 F.T.C. 1701, by adding a new paragraph requiring respondent to maintain adequate records which disclose the facts relating to former retail prices from which the validity of savings can be established. Orver Mopiryrne Orver To Crease anp Desist The Commission on December 20, 1966 [70 F.T.C. 1701], having issued its order in this matter requiring respondents, in connection with the offering for sale, and sale and distribution of merchandise, in commerce, to cease and desist from: , 1. Using, in any manner, a sales plan, scheme or device wherein false, misleading or deceptive statements or representations are made in order to obtain leads or prospects for the sale of merchandise or services.

2. Making representations purporting to offer merchandise for sale when the purpose of the representation is not to sell the offered merchandise but to obtain leads or prospects for the sale of other merchandise at higher prices.

3. Representing, directly or by implication, that any merchandise or services are afforded for sale when such offer is not a bona fide offer to sell said merchandise or services. 4. Failing or refusing to furnish ordered merchandise or services to purchasers in accordance with the terms and conditions of any advertised offer.

5. Failing or refusing to furnish free merchandise to purchasers, irrespective of a prior request therefor, upon fulfillment of the terms and conditions of any advertised offer. 6. Representing, directly or by implication, that the availability of any offer of products or services is limited to three days only, or is limited in any other manner: Provided, however, Order {7 FTC.

That it shall be a defense in any enforcement proceeding instituted hereunder for respondents to establish that any represented limitation was actually imposed and in good faith adhered to by respondents.

7. Representing, directly or by implication, that any price for respondents’ products or services is a special or sale price, unless: such price constitutes a significant reduction from an established selling price at which such products or services have been sold in substantial quantities by respondents in the recent regular course of their business; or misrepresenting in any manner the savings available to purchasers or prospective purchasers of respondents’ products or services.

And the Commission on June 8, 1970, having issued its order to show cause why this proceeding should not be reopened and its order of December 20, 1966, modified by the addition of a new paragraph numbered 8 which would read:

8. Failing to maintain adequate records which disclose the facts upon which representations as to former prices, comparative prices, and the usual and customary retail prices of merchandise, and as to savings afforded to purchasers, and similar representations of the type dealt with in Paragraph 7 of this order, are based, and from which the validity of any such claim can be established. Respondents having filed an answer in which the order to show cause is not opposed; and The Commission being of the opinion that the public interest will be best served by modifying its order of December 20, 1966: Tt is ordered, That this proceeding be, and it hereby is reopened. It is further ordered, That the Commission’s order of December 20, 1966 [70 F.T.C. 1701], be and it hereby is, modified by adding thereto as Paragraph 8 the following:

8. Failing to maintain adequate records which disclose the facts upon which representations as to former prices, comparative prices, and the usual and customary retail prices of merchandise, and as to savings afforded to purchasers, and similar representations of the type dealt with in Paragraph 7 of this order, are based, and from which the validity of any such claim can be established.

ELLERMAN MANUFACTURING CO., ET AL. 915 Complaint