FTC Secures Settlement in Deceptive Mortgage Advertising Suit

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

1316747_53964704On June 6, 2014, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania entered a Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction and Civil Penalty Judgment (the “Order”) against Heritage Homes Group, Inc. and a number of related companies (“Heritage”) and in favor of the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”).  The FTC alleged in a complaint filed on June 4, 2014, that Heritage misled consumers concerning certain mortgages that it advertised in connection with the purchase of homes.  The FTC used its power under the Mortgage Acts and Practices Advertising Rule (the “MAP” Rule) and “Regulation N” to bring its action against Heritage.

Heritage’s Alleged Deceptive Mortgage Advertising

In its Complaint, the FTC alleged that “[s]ince at least August 19, 2011, [Heritage had] made numerous commercial communications offering prominently, among other things, ‘ZIP. ZERO. NADA.,’ ‘$0 Money Down,’ and ‘$0 For Paid Closing Costs.’  In fact, the program and financing offered by [Heritage] requires consumers to pay a minimum deposit of up to $2,000 at contract signing, a funding fee of 2%, an annual fee of .4% of the loan at settlement, and other charges.”  Perhaps most troubling, Heritage offered home financing through the United States Department of Agriculture’s (“USDA”) Rural Development Loan Program (“Rural Loan Program”) without adequately disclosing the program’s qualifying restrictions.  Instead, at best, Heritage occasionally published advertising that advised “restrictions apply,” but failed to include detail as to what those restrictions were.

The Settlement

As part of its settlement for deceptive mortgage advertising, Heritage agreed to be enjoined from “misrepresenting, expressly or by implication, any term of any mortgage credit product.”  Additionally, Heritage is now prohibited from failing to maintain certain evidence of compliance with the Order.  Heritage has a 20 year reporting requirement, and agreed to a judgment totaling Six Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($650,000.00), which has been suspended pending financial verification.

Protect Yourself

The FTC has been cracking down on what it perceives as “deceptive advertising” in general, and “deceptive mortgage advertising” in particular.  With the regulatory environment becoming more restrictive every day, it is increasingly important that companies approach their business practices with caution, and consult competent counsel to review all associated marketing practices. 

If you are interested in discussing your marketing practices, or if you have been served with legal process relating to your advertising, please e-mail us at info@kleinmoynihan.com or call us at (212) 246-0900.

The material contained herein is provided for informational purposes only and is not legal advice, nor is it a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney.  Each situation is unique, and you should not act or rely on any information contained herein without seeking the advice of an experienced attorney.

Attorney Advertising

David O. Klein

David O. Klein

David Klein is one of the most recognized attorneys in the telemarketing, technology, Internet marketing, sweepstakes and telecommunications fields. Skilled at counseling clients on a broad range of technology-related matters, David Klein has substantial experience in negotiating and drafting complex licensing, marketing and Internet agreements.

Schedule a Call
In The Know

Trending Topics

New York Sweepstakes Law blog- Klein Moynihan Turco

New York Sweepstakes Law: Are You Compliant?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

In general, a lottery exists when entrants pay for the chance to win a prize. States alone reserve the right to administer lotteries. Businesses can eliminate one element of what would otherwise be an illegal lottery, in order to transform it into a legal promotional game. If the requirement to

TCPA surveys

An Ad or not an Ad: NY Weighs in on TCPA Surveys

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Another day, another court decision that refines constitutes a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) unsolicited fax advertisement. A Manhattan-based federal court recently issued a decision that removes faxed invitations to participate in a survey from the TCPA definition of advertisement. In drawing this distinction for TCPA surveys, the Court held

NY sports gambling law- Klein Moynihan Turco

Agreement Reached to Enact NY Sports Gambling Law

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

This week, Governor Andrew Cuomo and the New York State Legislature agreed to a budget deal that will bring mobile sports betting to the State through a unique NY sports gambling law.  Upon the Governor’s signature, NY sports gambling is primed to become the nation’s largest market. However, New York

UK and US Social Media Influencer Laws

UK and US Social Media Influencer Laws

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

In September of 2020, the United Kingdom’s (“UK”) Committee of Advertising Practice (“CAP”) reviewed the Instagram accounts of 122 UK-based social media influencers to determine whether content was being properly flagged as advertising in accordance with applicable social media influencer laws. This past March, the UK Advertising Standards Authority (“ASA”)

Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin