Handy Technologies, Inc.

Also known as: Angi Services.

The FTC and the New York Attorney General sued Handy Technologies, now trading as Angi Services, over earnings claims that did not reflect reality for the overwhelming majority of workers on its platform, and over undisclosed fees and fines that withheld millions from them.

1Official action
$3MRedress ordered
2Business names used

Documented. Subject of a regulatory action, lawsuit, or other official proceeding on the public record.

Identity

Published so you can confirm this entry refers to the party you are checking, and not to somebody who shares a name.

Websites
https://www.angi.com
Registrations
FTC and People of the State of New York v. Handy Technologies, Inc. (S.D.N.Y., complaint filed 7 January 2025)
Locations
Southern District of New York (venue)
Jurisdictions
United States (federal) · New York · Southern District of New York

What is alleged

The FTC, together with New York Attorney General Letitia James, brought an action in the Southern District of New York against Handy Technologies, Inc., which currently does business as Angi Services.

The complaint charges that Handy peppered its advertisements with earnings claims that do not reflect the reality for the overwhelming majority of workers on its platform.

It further charges that Handy failed to clearly disclose fees and fines, and that those charges led to millions of dollars being withheld from workers.

Why a gig platform sits on this site

The people harmed here were not clients buying a service. They were the workers delivering it, recruited on a stated earning potential most of them would never reach, then charged fees and fines they had not clearly agreed to.

That is the same structure as every business-opportunity entry in this database, turned around. In those, someone pays up front for promised income that does not arrive. Here, someone works for promised income that does not arrive, and pays through deductions instead of a cheque.

Anyone recruiting contractors on advertised earnings figures should read the remedy, not just the allegation.

Outcome

Under the proposed settlement order Handy turns over $2.95 million for refunds to harmed workers, and must make substantial changes so that:

  • workers give clear consent to any fee the company charges them, and
  • the company gives workers clear direction on how to avoid fines.

In July 2026 the FTC announced it had sent more than $2.7 million to people harmed.

Note the ratio here, which is unusual on this site. Nearly all of the settlement reached the people affected, because the harm was measurable from the company’s own deduction records. Compare that with the entries where consumers paid an operator directly and recovery ran at pennies on the dollar.

What is not established

Allegations in a complaint are the government’s case rather than findings of fact, and a settlement resolves them without any admission of wrongdoing.

We have not yet contacted Handy Technologies or Angi for comment. When we do, the attempt and any response will appear on this entry.

Sources

Every claim above rests on one of these. Open them and check.

  1. Enforcement action January 7, 2025
    FTC case page: Handy Technologies (parties, case summary, and timeline)

Right of reply

No contact has been logged for this entry yet.

If you are named here and something is wrong, dispute this entry. There is no charge, the route never expires, and your response is published unedited.

Other b2b services entries

See all b2b services entries, or browse the full record.


First recorded July 31, 2026 · Last updated July 31, 2026