Telemarketing enforcement case where the FTC obtained a temporary restraining order against defendants who deceptively marketed limited benefit health plans as comprehensive health insurance. The scheme caused tens of millions of dollars in harm to consumers seeking health coverage. The court halted operations at the FTC's request.
The court entered a temporary restraining order stopping the defendants' operations, and the FTC is seeking refunds for affected consumers.
In-house legal teams should review vendor agreements with telemarketing firms and customer enrollment contracts for health insurance products. Key clauses to examine include marketing representations, disclosure requirements (especially distinctions between limited benefit and comprehensive plans), compliance with the Telemarketing Sales Rule, audit rights over marketing materials, and termination provisions for deceptive practices. Recommended changes: add clear definitions of plan types and coverage levels, mandate pre-approval of all marketing scripts and materials, include indemnification for misrepresentation claims, require regular compliance certifications from vendors, and strengthen audit rights to monitor telemarketing activities.
Entity
Top Healthcare Options Insurance Agency Inc
Also known as: Top Healthcare Options
Industry
HealthcareOfficial Press Release
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2026/01/ftcs-request-court-halts-operations-deceptive-health-care-telemarketers
TopHealth Complaint
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/TopHealth-Complaint.pdf
Federal Trade Commission Enforcement Page
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement
"Top Healthcare Options Insurance Agency Inc"
"FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR)"
"the FTC Act"
"deceptive telemarketing scheme that takes advantage of consumers looking for comprehensive health insurance"
$750K
The FTC finalized an order against Vanilla Chip LLC (doing business as TruHeight) and its principals for deceptively advertising height-enhancing supplements for children and teens without scientific evidence. The company also used fake reviews and incentivized 5-star ratings. The order requires a $750,000 payment and prohibits false health claims and deceptive review practices.
$2.3M
The FTC alleged that RentGrow, a tenant screening company, violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by failing to use reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy of its reports, including by reporting duplicate records and failing to disclose data sources. RentGrow agreed to pay a $2.25 million penalty and is prohibited from further FCRA violations and from misrepresenting dispute outcomes.
The FTC and New York Attorney General took action against Handy Technologies for deceptive earnings claims and failure to disclose fees and fines that led to millions of dollars being withheld from workers' wages. The FTC is sending over $2.7 million in refunds to 62,893 affected consumers.
$35.0M
The FTC alleged that Hopper, a travel booking app, charged consumers hidden and pre-selected fees (Tip and VIP Support) without their consent, misrepresented the benefits of VIP Support and Price Freeze services, and failed to clearly disclose total prices. Hopper agreed to pay $35 million for consumer redress and is prohibited from misrepresenting fees under a proposed order.
$1.5M
The FTC finalized a settlement with Publishing.com LLC and its principals for misleading consumers about potential earnings from self-publishing products. The company will pay $1.5 million and is prohibited from making unsubstantiated earnings claims, failing to disclose refund terms, and misrepresenting endorsements and reviews.
The FTC is seeking public comment on a proposed policy statement addressing concerns that AI companies may be manipulating AI system outputs contrary to consumer expectations for objectivity and accuracy. The statement explains that such conduct could be considered deceptive under Section 5 of the FTC Act. The public comment period runs until July 31, 2026.