English Cards, LTD

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

In THE Marrer oF ENGLISH CARDS, LTD., ET AL CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACT Docket C-2126. Complaint, Jan. 38, 1972—Decision, Jan. 3, 1972 Consent order requiring New York City wholesalers and retailers of greeting cards to cease preticketing their merchandise or furnishing others the means to mislead purchasers as to the prices of respondents’ products. Complaint Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Act, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that English Cards, Ltd., a corporation, and Irving Epstein, also known as Irving Evans, individually and as an officer of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Act, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows: Paracrapu 1. Respondent English Cards, Ltd.. is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York with its principal office and place of business located at 230 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York. Respondent Irving Epstein, also known as Irving Evans, is an individual and officer of the corporate respondent. He formulates, directs and controls the acts and practices of the corporate respond- Complaint 80 F.T.C.

ent including the acts and practices hereinafter set forth. His address is the same as that of the corporate respondent. Par. 2. Respondents are now, and for some time last past have been, engaged in the offering for sale, sale and distribution to wholesalers and retailers of greeting cards for resale to the purchasing public.

Par. 3. In the course and conduct of their business as aforesaid, respondents now cause, and for some time last past have caused, their products, when sold, to be shipped from their place of business in the State of New York to purchasers thereof located in various other states of the United States and in the District of Columbia. Respondents 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 aforesaid business, and at all times mentioned herein respondents have been, and now are, in substantial competition in commerce with corporations, firms and individuals engaged in the sale of products of the same general kind and nature as those sold by respondents.

Par. 5. Respondents, for the purpose of inducing the purchase of their products, have engaged in the practice of using fictitious prices in connection therewith by the following method and means: By distributing, or causing to be distributed, to retailers, certain of respondents’ Christmas cards in consumer packages wpon which are clearly and conspicuously printed prices. In the manner aforesaid, respondents thereby represent directly or indirectly, that the amounts shown are respondents’ bona fide estimate of the actual retail prices of said products in respondents’ trade area and that they do not appreciably exceed the highest prices at which substantial sales of said products are made at retail in said trade area, _ In truth and in fact said amounts shown are not respondents’ bona fide estimate of the actual retail prices of said products in respondents’ trade area and they appreciably exceed the highest prices at which substantial sales of said products are made at retail in said trade area.

Therefore, the statements and representations set forth above are false, misleading and deceptive.

Par. 6. By the aforesaid acts and practices, respondents place in the hands of retailers the means and instrumentalities by and through ENGLISH CARDS, LTD., ET AL. 19 17 Decision and Order which they may mislead the public as to the usual and regular retail price of said products.

Par. 7. The use by respondents of the aforesaid false, misleading and deceptive statements, representations, acts and practices has had, and now has, the capacity and tendency to mislead and deceive the purchasing public into the erroneous and mistaken belief that said statements and representations were and are true and into the purchase of substantial quantities of respondents’ merchandise by reason of said erroneous and mistaken belief.

Par. 8. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, were and are all to the prejudice and injury of the public and of respondents’ competitors and constituted, and now constitute, unfair methods of competition in commerce and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce in violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Decision AND ORDER The Federal Trade Commission having initiated an investigation of certain acts and practices of the respondents named in the caption hereof, and the respondents having been furnished thereafter with a copy of a draft of complaint which the Bureau of Consumer Protection proposed to present to the Commission for its consideration and which, if issued by the Commission, would charge respondents with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondents of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the aforesaid draft of complaint, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that the Iaw has been violated as alleged in such complaint, and waivers and other provisions as required by the Commission’s rules; and The Commission having thereafter considered the matter and having determined that it had reason to believe that the respondents have violated the said Act, and that complaint should issue stating its charges in that respect, and having thereupon accepted the executed consent agreement and placed such agreement on the public record for a period of thirty (80) days, now in further conformity with the procedure prescribed in Section 2.14(b) of its rules, the 20 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS.

Decision and Order 80 F.T.C.

Commission hereby issues its complaint, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order: 1. Respondent English Cards, Ltd., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its principal office and place of business located at 230 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York. Respondent Irving Epstein, also known as Irving Evans, is an individual and an officer of said corporation. He formulates, directs and controls the policies, acts and practices of the proposed corporate respondent, including the acts and practices under investigation. His address is the same as that of the corporate respondent. 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondents, and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER It ts ordered, That respondents English Cards, Ltd., a corporation, and its officers, and Irving Epstein, also known as Irving Evans, individually and as an officer of said corporation, and respondents’ agents, representatives and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the advertising, offering for sale, sale or distribution of greeting cards, in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from:

1. Disseminating or distributing any purported retail selling price for respondents’ merchandise or preticketing respondents’ merchandise with such price amount unless (a) it is respondents’ bona fide estimate of the actual retail price of the product in the area where respondents do business and (b) it does not appreciably exceed the highest price at which substantial sales of said product are made in said trade area. 2. Misrepresenting,.in any manner, the prices at which respondents’ merchandise is sold at retail. 8. Furnishing to others any means or instrumentalities whereby the purchasing public may be misled or deceived as to the retail prices of respondents’ products. It is further ordered, That respondent corporation shall forthwith distribute a copy of this order to each of its operating divisions. It is further ordered, That the respondents herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon them of this order file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with this order. RP & L, INC, ET AL. 21 Complaint