Table of Contents
FTC Sues Progressive Leasing for Misleading Claims
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has filed a lawsuit against Progressive Leasing, a national leasing company, alleging that the company has made misleading claims about its lease-to-own program. According to the FTC, Progressive Leasing has told customers that they would be able to own their leased item after making all of their payments, when in reality, the company does not offer ownership options for most of its merchandise.
Additionally, the FTC alleges that Progressive Leasing has misled customers about the costs of their lease-to-own agreement, failing to disclose additional fees and interest charges. The FTC is seeking a court order to stop Progressive Leasing from making these false and deceptive claims, and to refund customers who were misled.
Progressive Leasing Denies Allegations and Plans to Fight the Lawsuit
Progressive Leasing has denied all of the Federal Trade Commission’s allegations and plans to fight the lawsuit. The company states that it fully disclosed the terms and conditions of its program to consumers and that it offers a wide range of financing options that are clearly labeled and easy to understand.
The company plans to vigorously defend itself against the FTC’s claims. However, if the court finds in favor of the FTC, Progressive Leasing could be required to provide refunds to affected customers and change its business practices.
Customers Left with Damaged or Defective Products and Extra Fees
Many online shoppers have had the experience of ordering a product only to find that it was damaged or defective upon arrival. In some cases, returning the item may be as simple as contacting customer service and requesting a replacement. However, in many cases, customers are responsible for return shipping fees, and they may even be charged a restocking fee by the retailer.
As a result, customers can end up spending more money to return an item than they would have if they had purchased it in a brick-and-mortar store. In addition, the process of returning an item can be time-consuming and frustrating. For these reasons, it is important to do your research before making a purchase online. Checking reviews and reading the return policy carefully can help to ensure that you have a positive experience when shopping online.
FTC’s Lawsuit Could Have Implications for the Lease-to-Own Industry
This case could have major implications for the lease-to-own industry as a whole. In the case, a consumer sued a lease-to-own company, alleging that the company had failed to disclose important information about the terms of the lease. The court ruled in favor of the consumer and ordered the company to pay damages.
This case could set a precedent that would require all lease-to-own companies to disclose all relevant information to consumers. This would make it easier for consumers to make informed decisions about whether or not to enter into a lease agreement. It could also lead to more regulation of the lease-to-own industry as a whole.
Conclusion
The FTC’s lawsuit against Progressive Leasing is a significant case that has the potential to impact the lease-to-own industry as a whole. The allegations made against the company are serious and could result in major changes to the way that lease-to-own companies conduct their business.
It is important for consumers to be aware of the risks associated with lease-to-own agreements and to do their research before entering into any agreement. Checking reviews, reading the terms and conditions carefully, and asking questions can help to ensure that you are making an informed decision.
Summary
The FTC has filed a lawsuit against Progressive Leasing, accusing the company of making false and misleading claims about its lease-to-own program. The FTC alleges that Progressive Leasing deceived customers by telling them that they could own the leased product after making all of their payments, when in reality the company does not offer ownership options for most of its merchandise. The FTC also alleges that Progressive Leasing failed to disclose additional fees and interest charges, misleading customers about the true costs of their lease-to-own agreement.
This is not the first time that Progressive Leasing has been accused of misleading customers. In 2015, the company agreed to pay $16 million to settle charges that it had misled customers about the terms of its leases. However, it appears that the company has not learned its lesson, and the FTC is once again taking action to protect consumers from being misled.
Progressive Leasing has denied all of the FTC’s allegations and plans to fight the lawsuit. The company claims that it fully discloses the terms and conditions of its lease-to-own program to customers and offers a wide range of financing options that are clearly labeled and easy to understand. However, the FTC argues that Progressive Leasing has misled customers by failing to disclose the costs and risks of its program and by misrepresenting its program as a “no credit needed” option.
This case could have major implications for the lease-to-own industry as a whole. The court’s ruling could set a precedent that would require all lease-to-own companies to disclose all relevant information to consumers. This would make it easier for consumers to make informed decisions about whether or not to enter into a lease agreement. It could also lead to more regulation of the lease-to-own industry as a whole.
It is important for consumers to do their research before entering into any lease-to-own agreements. Reading the terms and conditions carefully and understanding all costs and fees associated with the agreement is crucial. Checking reviews and doing research on the company can also help consumers make informed decisions and avoid being misled.
In conclusion, the legal battle between the FTC and Progressive Leasing over the company’s lease-to-own program highlights the importance of transparency and consumer protection. Consumers should be aware of the risks and costs associated with lease-to-own agreements and should always do their research before entering into any agreement. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for the lease-to-own industry, and it will be interesting to see how it unfolds in the coming months.
Be the first to comment