Skip to main content

$43.6 Million in Financial Relief from Water Treatment Financing Company Aqua Finance

 


A Federal Trade Commission action against household water treatment funding company Aqua Finance, Inc. (AFI) has led to a settlement that will provide $20 million in refunds and an additional $23.6 million in debt forgiveness for consumers harmed by its dealers’ deceptive sales tactics.

The FTC’s complaint against AFI charges that the company’s nationwide network of dealers went door-to-door, deceiving consumers about the financing terms for water filtering and softening products. According to the complaint, the bogus claims left consumers with thousands of dollars in unexpected debt and huge interest payments, while its financing terms impaired some consumers’ ability to sell their homes.

“AFI and its dealers used deceptive teaser rates to lure consumers into signing up for AFI’s loans, costing them hundreds of dollars extra apiece,” said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “As this order makes clear, the FTC will continue to use every tool available to hold upstream actors accountable for profiting from consumer harm.”

Since at least 2018, according to the complaint, AFI has provided dealers across the country with access to a variety of financing programs they can use when going door-to-door to sell consumers products and equipment that will supposedly increase the quality of the water in their home.

The FTC charges that AFI’s dealers have frequently used deception to lure consumers into taking on expensive financing and misleading them about the terms of AFI’s programs that offer deferred payments and low initial interest rates.

The complaint states that dealers frequently led consumers to think introductory rates and payments were permanent or failed to inform them that, even when payments were deferred, the loans were continuing to accumulate interest. Consumers were then left with payments they were unable to afford, leading to delinquencies and harm to their credit.

According to the complaint, in many cases dealers failed to clearly inform consumers that AFI’s financing products include AFI’s obtaining a security interest in the equipment sold to consumers and installed in their homes. This security interest essentially functions as a lien making it difficult or at times impossible for many consumers to sell their homes.

The complaint notes that AFI was aware that its dealers were misleading consumers and repeatedly failed to act to sanction or stop dealers from selling its financing. In a 2020 email, an AFI vice president wrote to the CEO regarding complaints the company received from consumers, “Two systemic issues we see repeatedly; lack of understanding of how interest works/thinks they are being over charged and a dissatisfaction with the product.”

Since 2018, the company received thousands of complaints both directly from consumers and through outside organizations, according to the FTC. Beyond issues with financing, consumers also told AFI that dealers had sold them non-functioning systems or deceived them about the terms or existence of warranties, charging them hundreds to fix systems that consumers believed were guaranteed.

In addition, the complaint points to practices by AFI itself that harmed consumers’ credit, including requiring consumers who had previously opened what they believed to be lines of credit to seek additional loans even when they should have still had credit available under their existing credit lines, causing harm to their credit ratings.

Under the terms of a proposed settlement agreed to by AFI, the company will be required to:

  • Closely monitor dealers: The order would require AFI to put robust monitoring programs in place for its dealers, including closely tracking complaints and investigating dealers, and terminating agreements with dealers who repeatedly mislead consumers.
  • Make required disclosures: The order would require AFI to provide consumers with clear and conspicuous disclosures about the nature of the liens against consumers’ property that come with the company’s financing.
  • Provide money for refunds: AFI will be required to pay $20 million to be used to provide refunds to consumers harmed by its dealers’ deception.
  • Provide loan forgiveness: AFI will also be required to forgive loans totaling $23.6 million for certain consumers, including ensuring that any liens against those consumers’ property are lifted.
  • Stop misrepresenting financing terms: AFI will be prohibited from misleading consumers about the terms of the financial products they offer.

Popular posts from this blog

More Than $5 Million in Refunds to Consumers Harmed by Bogus Credit Repair Scheme

  The Federal Trade Commission is sending more than $5 million in refunds to consumers harmed by a deceptive credit card debt relief scheme known as ACRO Services. The FTC filed a lawsuit  in November 2022  against ACRO Services, which operated under multiple names such as American Consumer Rights Organization, Consumer Protection Resources, Reliance Solutions, Thacker & Associates, and Tri Star Consumer Group. The complaint charged the company and its owners with running a deceptive telemarketing operation that made numerous phony debt relief promises to consumers, including that they could greatly reduce or eliminate consumers’ credit card debt in 12 to 18 months. They charged consumers thousands of dollars in unlawful upfront enrollment fees and told them it was part of the debt that will be eliminated as part of the program. Consumers were also charged monthly fees ranging from $20-$35 for “credit monitoring” services. The individual defendants agreed to a se...

Williams-Sonoma Will Pay Record $3.17 Million Civil Penalty for Deceptive use of Made in the USA

  Home products company Williams-Sonoma will be required to pay a record civil penalty of $3.175 million for violating a 2020 Federal Trade Commission order requiring the retailer to tell the truth about whether the products it sells are Made in USA. In a  complaint   filed by the Department of Justice upon notification and referral from the FTC, the agency charges that Williams-Sonoma listed multiple products for sale as being “Made in USA” when in fact they were made in China and other countries. The company  has agreed to a settlement   that requires them to pay the civil penalty, which is the largest ever in a Made in USA case. “Williams-Sonoma claimed its products were made in the United States even though they were made in China,” said FTC Chair Lina M. Khan. “Williams-Sonoma’s deception misled consumers and harmed honest American businesses. Today’s record-setting civil penalty makes clear that firms committing Made-in-USA fraud will not get a free pass.”...

Adobe used hidden fee to trap people into paying for subscription plans

Maybe you want to try out a product for a little while before you make a long-term decision. So, you sign up for a monthly subscription plan. Everything is fine until you want to cancel and it turns out to be a yearly subscription with monthly payments. Surprise! That’s what the FTC says happened to people who signed up for monthly subscriptions with Adobe. When people signed up on Adobe’s website for access to its software, the FTC says Adobe pre-selected the option for its “annual paid monthly” plan that put subscribers on the hook for a whole year of payments, paid in monthly increments — a fact that Adobe failed to explain or properly disclose. The lawsuit says Adobe used similar tactics when people signed up for a free trial and didn’t cancel before the trial ended. Adobe automatically placed them on the “annual paid monthly” plan without making it clear they were entering a one-year contract. When people tried to cancel before the year was up, they had to pay a hefty early te...