Langley T. V., Inc.

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IK THE 1:AT'I'n OF LANGLEY T. , INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER : ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION --\01' Docket C-151,. Complaint, June 1962-Decision, June 28, 1962 Consent order requiring four television repair concerns in the Washington, D. area to cease representing, in newspaper advertising and otherwise, that re built television picture tubes containing used parts were new and fully guaranteed, and to disclose clearly when the tubes they sold were not new in their entirety.

CO:1IPLAIXT Pursun,nt to the provisions of the Federal Trade COlIUllission Act ond by virtue of the authority vested in it by soic1 Act, the Federal 3 now, for example, would a lawyer be able to advise bis client as to tbe legality or so entertaining and honest a use 01' the word "free" as appears in the advertisement appended hereto? LA. GLEY T. , L , ET AL. 1867 1866 Complaint Trade Commission having reason to believe that Langley T. , Inc., a corporation, Belmont Eleotronics, Inc., a corporation, and Casper Sickmen and Robert Sickmen, individually and as offcers of said corporations, and Behnont of Virginia, Inc., a corporation, and Walter Sickmen, Abe :Mason, and Casper Sickmel1, indiyic1ually and as offcers of Belmont of Virginia, Inc., and Casper Sickmen and Abe Mason indiv dually and a,s eopartners tra,ding as Belmont Badia &, Telmrision Service, hereinafter re.ferred to as respondents: have violated the provisions of said Act, nnll it appearing to the Commission that. a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in thc public intercst, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows: PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Langley T. V. , Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Maryland, with its principal offce and place of business located at 8034 =" ew Hampshire Avenue, in the city of Silver Spring, State of Maryland.

Respondent Belmont Electronics, Inc. is a corporation organized existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Maryland, with its principal offce and place of business located at 12410 Layhill Road, in the city of Silver Spring, State of Maryland.

respondents Casper Sickmen find Robert Sickmen are offcers vf both corporate respondents. They formulate, direct and control the acts and practices of the corporate respondents, including the acts and practices hereinafter set forth. Their address is the same as that of the corporate respondent.s.

Respondent Belmont of Virginia, Inc., is a, corporation organized existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Virginia, with its principal offce and place of business 10. cated at 3676 King Street, in the city of Alexanc1rjn State of Virginia. Respondents IV alter Siekmen, Abe Mason and Casper Sickmen are offcers of said Belmont of Virginia, Inc. They formulate, direct and control the acts and practices of said corporate respondent, including the acts and practices hereinafter set forth. Their address is the same as that of the said corporate respondent. Respondents Casper Sickmen and Abc Mason are copartners trading as Belmont Radio & Television Service. Their place of business is located at 2414 14th Street, N.vY., Washington, D. All of the aforesaid respondents have cooperated in and acted jointly in the advertising practices hereinafter set forth and referred t.o.

Complaint 60 F.

PAR. 2. All of the aforesaid respondents are now, and for some time last past have been, engaged in the advertising, offering for sale, sale and distribution of radio and television parts, including rebuilt television picture tubes containing used parts, and a service in connection therewith, direct to the purchasing public and to others. PAR. 3. In the course and conduct of their business, respondents now cause, and for some time last past have caused, their said products, when sold, to be shipped from the,iI' respective places of buaine. to purchasers thereof located in the District of Columbia and surrounding states, and maintain, and at all times mentioned herein have maintained, a substantial course of trade in said products in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act.

PAR. 4. In the course and conduct of their business, and for the purpose of inducing the sale of their products, respondents made cert.ain statements concerning their products in a ,Vashington, D. newspaper of wide circulation, and by other media. Among and typical of such statements is the following: STA.BRITE AI..lJlIINI7.ED RCA LICExsr;D PICTURE TUIE ONLY ONE PRICE ANY 21 I:\CH ONLY 15. D;) Written 3 year gUfirantee on all installations.

PAR. 5. Through the use of the aforesaid statement, the respondents represented, directly or by implication: 1. That CBrtain of their television picture tubes were new in the:ir entil' ety;

2. That their television picture tubes were guaranteed in a.ll respects. PAR. 6. Said statements \Were false, misleading and deceptive. In truth and in fact:

1. The television picture tubes a.advertised as set forth above were not new in their entirety but were rebut:it tubes and contained used part.s;

2. The guarantee provided for respondents' television picture tubes was limited both as to time and extent.

PAR. 7. Respondents did not disclose their nc1vcrt:Lsing, invoices 01' \varranties that said television pictures tubes were rebuilt and LANGLEY T. , INC., ET AI.. 1869 1866 Decision and Order contained llsed parts. \Vhcn television picture, tubes are rebuilt nnd contain used parts, in the absence of it disclosure to the contrary, such tubes are understood to be and arc readily accepted by the public as new tubes.

PAR. 8. By failing to disclose the facts as set forth in paragraphs 6 and 7, respondents also place in the hands of uninformed or unscrupulous dealers and technicians the mea.ns and instrumenta.1ities whereby they may mislead and deceive the public fls to the nature of their said television picture tubes.

m. 9. In the conduct of their business, at all times mentioned herein, respondents have been in substantial competi6on, in commerce, with corporations, firms and individuals in a business of a similar nature.

PAR. 10. The nse by l'sponclents of the aforesaid false, misleading and deceptive stateJllents and representations, and the failure of respondents to disclose in their advertising or in their invoices that their said television picture tubes nre rebuilt and contain used parts have had, a,nd now ha.ve the capacity and tendency to mislead mem bel's of the purchasing public into the erroneous and mistaken belief that said statements and representations "ere and are true, and into the purchase of substantial quantities of respondents' said products by reason of said erroneous and mistaken belief. PAR. 11. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, were, and are, all to the prejudic.e and injury of the public and of respondents' competitors and constituted, and now constitute unfa.1r met.hods of competition in commerce and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce" in yiolat.ion of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DECISION ,AXD ORD1m The Commission having heretofore determined to issue its complaint charging violation of the Feeleral Trade Commission Act, and the respondents named in the caption hereof and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing n consent order, a.n admission by the respondent.s of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the comp)aint to issue 11e1'ein a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute a.n a,c1mission by respondents that the la.w has been violated as set forth in such c.complaint, and ,,,waivers and pro\'i ions as requirct1 by the Commission s rules; and The Commission, having considered the agreement, hereby accepts salle issues its complaint in the fonn contemp1atec1 by sa ill agree:nent Decision and Order 60 F.

makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order:

1. Respondent Langley T. , Inc., is it corporation organized existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Maryland, with its principal offce and place of business located at 8034 Kew Hampshire Avenue, in the city of Silver Spring, State of Maryland.

Respondent Belmont Electronics, Inc., is a corporation organized existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of :'Iaryland, with its principal offce ,md place of business located at 12410 Layhill Road, in the city of Silver Spring, State of Maryland.

Itcspondents Casper Sickmen and Robert Sickmcn are offcers of both corporate respondents and their address is the same as that of the corporate respondents.

Respondent Belmont of Virginia, Inc., is a corporation organized existing and doing business under and by virtue of the In ws of the State of Virginia, with its principal office and place of business located at 3676 King Street, in t.he city of Alexandria, State of Virginia. Respondents vValter Sickmen, Abc :'1ason and Casper Sickmen are offcers of said Belmont of Virginia, Inc., and their address is the same as that of said corporate respondent.

Respondents Casper Sickmen and AlJe :iHasoll arc copartners trading as Belmont Radio & Television Service. Their place of business :is located at Q 1::114th Street, X.VV. "\V:lshingt:oll, D. 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding fluet of the respollc1ents, flud the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER Itd.8 onlei' That respondent L,i.ngley T. : Inc. , n c.orporation and its offcers, and Belmont Electronics, Inc., a corporation, and its offcers, and Casper Sickmen and Hobert 8ickme. , individually and as offcers of said corporations, and Belmont of Virginia, Inc., a corpora- , Abe IllSOll and Casper tion, and its offcers, and \Valter Siclnnen 8ic10nen, individually:y and as dEcel's of Belmont. of Virginia, Inc. , and Casper Siclemen and Abe YIason, individually and as copartners trading as Belmont Radio & Television Service, or nncler any other nalTIC or names, and respondents: representat.ives, agents ancl employees directly 01' through any corporate or other device, in connection with the offering for s, sale and distribution of rebuilt telei' ision picture tubes containing used parts, or any ot.her lnel'dwllc1ise, ill commerce WILLIALVIS PRESS, L 1871 1866 Complaint as "comllerce is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from;

1. Representing, directly or by implication, that television picture tubes, or any other products, are ncw, when contrary to the facts; 2. Fa.filing to clearly disclose in advertising, in invoices and warranties that said tubes are rebuilt and contain used parts, when such is the fact;

3. Representing, directly or by implication, that any merchandise is guaranteed, lmless the nature and extent of the guarantee and the manner in which the guarantor \vill perform thereunder arc dearly and conspicuously disclosed;

L1. Placing any means or instrumentality in the hancls or others whereby they may mislead the public as to the nahlre and condition of his television picture tubes.

It i8 further ordered That the respondents herein shah, within sixty (60) days after service upon them of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the nUlllllCl' and form in which they ha ye complied "with this order. Ix TH J\fATT OF WILLIA1IS PRESS, INC.

COXSEXT ORDER, ETC. , II\ REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SEC. 2( OF THE CLAYTON ACT Docket 0-155. Omnplaint, June 1962-Decision, June, 1962 COIlsent order requiring the Albany, , publisher of "Flmver Grower" magazine to cease discriminating in price in violation of Sec. 2(d) of the Clayton Act by paying promotional ailowances to certain retail customers-some of WhOil operated chain retail outlets in railroad, airport, and bus terminals and outlets in hotels and offce bnildings, and others of whom furnished services in connection with the handling of respondent' s publication such as the taking of purchase orders and distributing, biling, and collecting-while not making such payments available on proportionally equal terms to competitors of those favored, including drug chains, grocery chains, and other newsstands.

fPLAINT The Federal Trade Commission having reason to believe that the pa.rty respondent named in the caption hereof and hereinafter more particularly designated and described has violated and is now violating t.he provisions of subsection (d) of Section" of the Clayton Act (D. C. Title 15, See. 13), as amended by the Robinson-Patman Act 1872 FEDERAL TRADE COMNfISSIO T DECISIONS Complaint 60 F.

hereby issues its c01nplaint stating its charge,s ,with respect thereto a, follows:

PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent "\Villiams Press, Inc" is a corporation orglwized and doing' business under the la "'6 of the State of N c", York ",ith its ollk" ,wd principal place of business located at 99 North Brmtclway, Albany, New Yark. Said respondent, among other things has been engaged and is presently engaged in the business of publishing and distributing various publications including magazines under copyrighted titles including " Flower Grower . Respondent's sales of publications during the calendar :year 1060 e.xceec1ecl one million seven hundred thou and dollars.

PAR. 2. Publications published by respondent are distributed by respondent to customers t.through its national di t.ributor, Fil'Vcett Publications, Inc.

Fawcett has acted and is llOlV acting as national distributor for the publicatiolls of several independent Pllblisllers, including" respondent publisher. Fa cett; as nat.ional distributor of publications published by respondent and other independent publishers, has performed and is now perfol'lling vn,rious service.s for the e pub llshe.r . Among the services performed and still being performed by Fa\ycett for the benefit of these publishers are the taking of purchase orders and the distributing, billing and collecting for such publications from CllS tamers. Fawcett also had participated in t.he. negot.iation of various promotiollal nlt lngemCllts ,dth the retall customers oT s(l cl publishers. including said respondent.

In its ea.pacit.y as national distributor fol' l' csponclent in dealing with the cnstome.rs of Tcsponc1ent., l a\'' cett. served and is no serving as a conduit or intermediary for the sale, distribution and promotion of pubhcations published(l by re ponclent. PAR. 3. Respondent, through its conduit or intermediary, Fa\\cett has sold and clistributed and now sells and dist.ributes its publications in subst.nntial quantities in COnmll'1'Ce, as "commerce " is c1efinecl in the Clayton Act as amended, to competinp; customers loc.ated throughout va.rious States or the unit.ed States and in the District of Columbia. PAn. 4. In the course. and conduct of its business in commerce. respondent has pa.id or contracted for the payment or something of value to or for the be.next or senne or its customers as compensation or in consideration for services or raci1ities :fllrni hec1, or contracted to be furnished, by or through such customers in connection with the handling, sale, or oiIering for sale or publi('ations sold to them by respondent. Such payments or allowances were not made available on _ _ WILLIAMS PRESS , INC. 1873 1871 Decision and Order proportionally equal terms to all other customers of respondent competing in the distribution of such publications. PAR. 5. As an example of the practices alleged herein, respondent has made lXlyments or allowances to certain retail customers who operate cllRin retail outlets in railroad, airport and bus terminalsj as \vell as outlets located in hotels and offce, buildings. Snell payments or allowances ",were not offered 01' othenyise made available on proportionally equal terms to all other customers (including drug chains grocery cha.ins and other IH ",YSstancls) competing with the favored customers in the sale and distribution of the publications of respondent publisher. Among the favored customers receiving paYJJents in )60, and during the first. six months of 1961, which were not ot1elect to other competing customers in connection with the purchase and saJe of respondent's publications were:

Appro:'\lllate amount received Customer 196U , 19m (lan.

Union News Co" Xew York City- Fred Harvey, Chicago, Ill_ : f I $ 1.28Armstrong Co. , noston, )'Iass-- ----_U-- 3.48 Respondent made said payments to its favored customers on the basis of individual negotiations. Among said favored customers such payments \Were not made on proport.iona.lly equal terms. UL 6. The acts and practices of respondent as nl1cgec1 above are in violation of the pro\-i ions of subsection (c1) of Section :2 of the Clnyton Act, fls amended.

DECISION AND Order The Commission having heretofore cletenninec1 to issue its complaint cha.rging the respondent named in the caption hereof with violation of subsection (d) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act, as amended, and the respondent having been servctl with notice of said c1etel'minatioll 1nd with a copy of the complaint the Commission intended to issue together with a proposed form of order; and The respondent and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondent of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the complaint to issue herein, a statement that the signing of said agl'eerncnt is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondent that the law has been violated as set fort.h in such complaint and waivers and provisions as reqnirec1 by the COlnmission s rnles; and 1874 FEDERAL TRADE COJHMISSION DECISIONS Decision and Order 60 F.

The Commission, having considered the agreement, hereby accepts same, issues its cOlnplaint in the form contemplated by said agreement makes the following judsdictional findings, and enters the following order:

1. Respondent, "\Villiams Press, Inc., is a corporation organized existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its offce and principal place of business Jocated at 99 North Broadway, in the city of Albany, State of :tew York.

2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondent. ORDER It is o1'dered That respondent 'Villiams Press, Inc., a corporation its offcers, employees, agents and representatives, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the distribution sale or offering for sale of publications including magazines in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the amended Clayton Act, do forthwith cease a,nd desist, from:

Paying or contracting for the payment of an allowance or anything of value to, or for the benefit of, any customer as compensation 01' in consideration for any services or facilities furnished by or through such customer in connection with the handling, offering for sale, sale or distribution of publications including magazines published, sold or offered for sale by respondent, unless such payment or consideration is affrmatively offered and otherwise made available on proportionally equal terms to all of its other customers competing with such favored customer in the distribution of such publications including magazines.

The vmrd "customer" as used above shall be deemed to mean anyone who purchases from 1Villiams Press, Inc., acting either as principal or agent, or from a distributor or wholesaler where such transaction with such purchaser is essentially a sale by such respondent, acting either as principal or agent.

, within It is further ordel'ed That the respondent herein shall sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order, fiJe with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form In which it has complied with this order.

() STEIK BROTHERS FUR CO. , INC. , ET AL. 1875 COllplaint