Court Rules
All enforcement actions
SettlementCritical Risk

FTC Fines Vivint $20M for Credit Report Misuse

Vivint Smart Homes, Inc.April 1, 2021Federal Trade Commission

Penalty Amount

$20,000,000

Summary

The FTC settled with Vivint Smart Homes, Inc. for $20 million over allegations that the company misused consumer credit reports to secure financing for unqualified customers, harming consumers' credit. The FTC is now distributing approximately $500,000 in refunds to affected consumers.

Remedy

Vivint was ordered to pay $20 million in penalties and is distributing refunds to harmed consumers.

Monetary PenaltyConsumer Refunds

Contract Impact

In-house legal teams should review all customer financing agreements, vendor contracts with third-party lenders, and service agreements involving credit-based financing. Key clauses to examine include those governing the authorization and scope of credit report pulls, requirements for obtaining explicit cosigner consent, data sharing permissions with financing partners and debt collectors, and representations regarding applicant eligibility. Contracts may need amendments to mandate strict verification of applicant identity before credit pulls, prohibit the use of unrelated third parties' credit data, require clear disclosure of cosigner obligations, and establish procedures for promptly correcting credit reporting errors and addressing identity theft claims.

Contract Search Terms

credit report authorization clausecosigner consent provisionthird-party credit information usefinancing eligibility verificationdebt collection practices addendumdata sharing with financing partnersconsumer report user obligationspermissible purpose for credit pullsdispute resolution for credit errorsidentity theft mitigation procedures

Violation Types

Entity Details

Entity

Vivint Smart Homes, Inc.

Also known as: Vivint

Industry

Technology

Official Sources

Source Evidence

Entity Name
"Vivint Smart Homes, Inc."
Fine Amount
"Will Pay $20 Million"
Violation Types
"obtained financing for unqualified customers by using the credit history of an unrelated third party with the same or similar name, or adding cosigners without their permission."
Event Date
"in April 2021"

Related Enforcement Actions

FTC

GovAssist LLC, Entry LLC, and Scott Zuckerman

The FTC filed a complaint alleging that GovAssist LLC, Entry LLC, and Scott Zuckerman used deceptive paid search ads, misleading service and pricing claims, and fake reviews to deceive consumers seeking passport services. The complaint alleges violations of the FTC Act, the Impersonation Rule, and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act; the case will be decided by the court, and no penalty or remedy is reported as imposed.

FTC

Federal Trade Commission

The FTC issued its annual report to Congress describing fraud trends affecting older adults and the agency’s enforcement, education, and outreach efforts. The report is not a specific privacy enforcement action and announces no penalty or remedy.

FTC

REPS & Company Inc.

The FTC referred a complaint against REPS & Company Inc. and company executives, alleging they bypassed ticket-issuer security controls and purchasing limits to acquire millions of tickets for resale. The complaint was filed by the Department of Justice, and the case will be decided by the court; the press release does not report a penalty or other remedy imposed.

FTC

Accelerated Debt Settlement Inc.; ADS Resolve LLC; Financial Solutions Group LLC; Unified Capital Services LLC; Mediwerks; Resolution Specialists LLC; and Futura Capital

$106.8M

A federal court entered a $106.8 million default judgment against corporate defendants in an alleged debt-relief scheme that impersonated banks and government entities and targeted seniors and veterans. The judgment permanently bans the defendants from the debt-relief industry and imposes additional prohibitions, including on impersonation, telemarketing, and misrepresentations.

FTC

Digital Forensics Corporation LLC

The FTC sued Digital Forensics Corporation LLC and affiliated defendants, alleging they misled sextortion victims with promises of investigative and monitoring services that often were not provided, and used fake positive reviews. A federal court granted the FTC’s request to temporarily halt the defendants’ activities; the complaint remains for the court to decide.

FTC

Greenway Auto Group

The FTC alleged that Greenway Auto Group advertised vehicle prices thousands of dollars below the amounts consumers actually paid and used mailers falsely suggesting recipients had won cash prizes. Greenway agreed to an order requiring transparent pricing and prohibiting deceptive prize mailers and other misrepresentations; the press release does not state a monetary penalty.