National Sales Group
The FTC alleged that National Sales Group advertised nonexistent sales jobs, overstated its recruiting access, and imposed inflated or unauthorized fees. A proposed consent order banned sales of employment products and services.
Resolved. Refunded, settled, ceased operating, or the claim did not hold up. Kept for the record.
Identity
Published so you can confirm this entry refers to the party you are checking, and not to somebody who shares a name.
- Registrations
- FTC v. National Sales Group (FTC file X110015, 2012)
- Jurisdictions
- United States (federal)
Settlement banned sales of employment services
The Federal Trade Commission alleged that National Sales Group and other defendants promoted nonexistent sales jobs to financially distressed consumers. According to the complaint, advertisements appeared on CareerBuilder.com and other online job boards. Telemarketers allegedly said the operation recruited for Fortune 1000 employers and had a unique ability to obtain interviews and jobs for consumers.
The FTC alleged that consumers were charged fees described as payments for background checks and other services. Some consumers who agreed to pay $29 or $38 were charged $97. The defendants also allegedly imposed recurring monthly fees of $13.71 or more without consent. In February 2011, a court halted the challenged practices and froze the defendants’ assets while the litigation proceeded.
The proposed settlement order banned National Sales Group, Anthony J. Newton, and I Life Marketing LLC from selling employment products or services. It also prohibited specified misrepresentations, unauthorized billing, certain telemarketing practices, use or sale of customer information, and attempts to collect from past customers.
The order imposed a $13 million judgment that would be suspended after Newton paid $279,000, ended a vehicle lease, and surrendered his interest in a Huntington Beach residence. The FTC filed the proposed consent order in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.
What is not established
The release states that the consent order was for settlement purposes only and did not constitute an admission that the law had been violated. It was subject to court approval.
Sources
Every claim above rests on one of these. Open them and check.
- Enforcement action January 31, 2012
Right of reply
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 January 31, 2012 · Last updated January 31, 2012