Penalty Amount
$1,000,000
Consumers Affected
46,204
Harris Jewelry defrauded servicemembers with deceptive marketing, inflated prices, and hidden fees. A multistate settlement requires $34.2 million in refunds and debt relief, stops debt collection, and dissolves the business, affecting over 46,000 servicemembers.
Harris Jewelry must pay $1 million to states, stop collecting $21.3 million in debt, provide $12.9 million in refunds for protection plans, vacate judgments, delete negative credit entries, and dissolve all businesses. An independent monitor will oversee the relief process.
In-house legal teams should scrutinize customer financing agreements, warranty sales contracts, and any third-party financing partner agreements for clauses that permit deceptive marketing representations (e.g., false promises of credit improvement or charitable ties), ambiguous pricing structures that enable inflation, and hidden fee disclosures. Specific attention must be paid to compliance with the Military Lending Act, including APR caps and clear disclosure requirements for servicemember borrowers. Contracts may require amendments to add unambiguous, prominent disclosures about total costs, the non-impact on credit scores from 'investment' programs, and explicit opt-out mechanisms for warranties. Debt collection and credit reporting clauses must be revised to ensure immediate cessation of collection efforts and mandatory credit score correction processes for affected servicemembers.
Entity
Harris Jewelry
Industry
Retail$34.0M
Connecticut Attorney General announced a $34 million multistate settlement with Harris Jewelry for deceptive marketing and false promises to servicemembers, tricking them into high-interest loans for overpriced jewelry, with refunds and debt relief for affected consumers.
The FTC rescinded its 2021 Policy Statement on Breaches by Health Apps and Other Connected Devices, which had purported to apply the Health Breach Notification Rule to health apps and connected devices that collect consumer health information. The rescission follows the Commission's 2024 update to the Health Breach Notification Rule, which already covers health apps and connected devices like fitness trackers, and implements an executive order directing agencies to eliminate obsolete guidance documents. No company was charged or penalized; this is a deregulatory action.
$12.0M
The FTC alleged that payment processor Humboldt Merchant Services knowingly processed payments for more than 1,000 shell merchant entities serving as fronts for fraudulent companies engaged in unauthorized billing scams, despite red flags including chargeback rates nearly 10 times higher than card-brand thresholds. Under the proposed stipulated order filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Humboldt will pay $12 million for consumer redress and is permanently banned from processing payments for merchants with a heightened risk of potential fraud.
$4.8M
The FTC charged Canada-based payment processor Nuvei Corporation and its subsidiaries with knowingly processing payments for fraudulent merchants, including more than $30 million in payments for the Reimage tech support scam from 2017 to 2023, as well as merchants making false earnings claims and impersonating government tax authorities. Under the stipulated order filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, Nuvei will pay $4.85 million for consumer redress, is banned from serving tech support telemarketers, and must implement robust merchant screening and chargeback monitoring practices. Note: this is a payments-fraud facilitation action under the FTC Act and Telemarketing Sales Rule, not a data privacy violation.
The FTC announced a seven-day extension of the public comment period on its proposed enforcement policy statement regarding personalized pricing, pushing the deadline from Sept. 18, 2026 to Sept. 25, 2026. Personalized pricing refers to using personal data to set prices based on what the company believes an individual consumer is willing to spend. This is a procedural announcement about draft agency guidance, not an enforcement action against any company, and no entity was named, no violation found, and no penalty imposed.
Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser joined the FTC and 22 state attorneys general in filing a lawsuit against Amazon for manipulating the auctions used to set advertising prices, replacing actual auction results with higher prices since 2019 and overcharging nearly 1.2 million U.S. advertising customers. The FTC estimates total improper surcharges from 2018 to 2026 exceed $20 billion, with costs ultimately passed to shoppers through higher prices. The states seek a permanent injunction and monetary relief; no penalty has been imposed yet as this is a newly filed complaint.