The FTC amended its lawsuit against telehealth provider Hims and Hers, adding Arizona, Florida, Nebraska, Ohio, and Wisconsin as co-plaintiffs. The complaint alleges that the company shared consumers’ sensitive health information with advertising platforms despite privacy claims, and misled consumers about prescription charges and subscription cancellation; the case remains for the court to decide.
Review vendor and data-processing agreements with advertising platforms for limits on using or disclosing health information, permitted purposes, consent requirements, and controls against onward sharing. Check customer-facing privacy notices and service terms for consistency with actual data practices, and review subscription, billing, and cancellation clauses for clear disclosure of when prescription charges occur and straightforward cancellation procedures. Ensure vendor obligations support these representations and include appropriate audit, cooperation, and remediation requirements.
Entity
Hims & Hers Health, Inc.
Industry
Healthcare"telehealth provider Hims and Hers"
"the FTC Act, the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act and California and Utah consumer protection laws"
"Arizona, Florida, Nebraska, Ohio and Wisconsin state consumer protection laws"
"shared consumers’ sensitive health information with third-party advertising platforms, despite claiming its services maintain consumers’ privacy"
"it has made it difficult for consumers to cancel subscriptions"
"November 10, 2026"
The FTC alleged that Stream Auto Outlet advertised vehicles at prices lower than consumers ultimately had to pay, including by adding required down payments, dealer fees, and unwanted add-ons. The proposed order prohibits misrepresenting vehicle costs or terms and requires price advertisements to prominently show the actual price, apart from government-required charges.
$49.8M
The FTC and four states alleged that Progress Residential and Pretium Partners misled renters about rental prices and fees, improperly withheld security deposits, and engaged in other unlawful conduct. Under a proposed settlement, the companies will pay $49.75 million and must change their pricing, deposit, and customer-service practices.
The FTC and 22 state attorneys general filed an updated complaint alleging that Amazon secretly added surcharges to advertising auction prices and misled advertisers about the reasons for price increases. The release describes newly unredacted allegations; it does not report a judgment, settlement, or monetary penalty.
The FTC alleges that McDonnell & Associates LLC and other defendants used false legal threats and other deceptive tactics to collect more than $20 million in debts consumers often did not owe. A federal court issued a temporary restraining order freezing the defendants’ assets and placing the company under a court-appointed receiver while the case continues.
$600K
The FTC and Washington alleged that Riverside Payments and affiliates misrepresented savings and cancellation terms, concealed fees and auto-renewing contracts, and obtained consumers’ financial information using false or fraudulent statements. The proposed stipulated order requires a $600,000 payment, customer notice and a period to rescind agreements without penalty, and prohibits deceptive claims while requiring clear disclosures, informed consent for negative-option billing, and a simple cancellation method.
FTC staff announced warning letters to 25 healthcare plan marketers and lead generators about deceptive or unfair claims concerning plan benefits, coverage, costs, and enrollment incentives. The letters do not allege wrongdoing by their recipients or impose penalties; they encourage companies to review their advertisements for compliance.