Global U.S. Resources stopped by FTC

Court Halts Deceptive Envelope-Stuffing Operation

Consumers Misled to Believe They Could Earn Substantial Income, FTC Alleges

At the request of the Federal Trade Commission, a U.S. district court has temporarily halted an envelope-stuffing operation that allegedly scammed cash-strapped consumers by falsely promising they could make substantial income working from home.

As part of ongoing efforts to protect Americans who are struggling to cope with the economic downturn, the FTC charged that Louis Salatto and his company, Global U.S. Resources, deceived consumers into paying up-front fees by making phony promises about the earning potential of their envelope-stuffing operation.

According to the FTC’s complaint, Salatto bought classified ads in local pennysavers and community newspapers that promised weekly earnings ranging from $1,200 to $4,400.  Consumers who paid the up-front fee did not receive the materials they needed to do the envelope stuffing, nor the income promised, nor the refund that Salatto said they could get upon request.

The court order halts the allegedly illegal tactics of Salatto and Global U.S. Resources and freezes their assets while the FTC moves forward with its case seeking a permanent prohibition against the defendants’ false and deceptive claims.

Since at least 2005, Salatto has advertised nationwide through large classified advertising networks such as Gateway Media Inc. and National Advertising Network Inc., according to the FTC complaint.  Ads in pennysavers and community papers stated “No Experience Necessary! Start Immediately!”  They provided a toll-free number at which consumers were instructed to leave a message with their contact information.  Consumers who responded to these ads received a “registration form” that typically stated they would receive $8 for every brochure they stuffed, plus 25 percent of every sale made as a result of their mailing, the complaint alleged.  They were instructed to pay a “refundable” fee – typically $40 – by cash, check, or money order.

After paying the fee, consumers typically received either nothing or a pamphlet titled “Secret Home Employment Guide,” which listed other bogus work-at-home opportunities and provided instructions on how to market them, the FTC complaint stated.  Consumers who requested refunds were typically unable to reach anyone, and could only obtain the refunds by submitting a complaint to a Better Business Bureau or law enforcement agency.

The FTC acknowledges the assistance of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut, the United States Postal Inspection Services, the Office of Attorney General in Connecticut, and the Better Business Bureau serving Connecticut.

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the FTC complaint and seek a temporary restraining order was 4-1, with Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch voting no.  The FTC filed its complaint and requested a temporary restraining order against the defendants from the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut.  On September 13, 2010, the court granted the request for the temporary restraining order.

NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has reason to believe that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest.  The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendants have actually violated the law.

The actual case is:

Federal Trade Commission, Plaintiff, v. Global U.S. Resources, also doing business as American Publishing, American Publications, American Power Publications, ESM Group, and East Shore Marketing Group, and Louis Salatto, individually and as an officer of Global U.S. Resources, Defendants

Shortcuts to Internet Millions – Not Recommended

Jeff Paul’s Shortcuts to Internet Millions was recently part of the FTC’s Operation ShortChange Crackdown on companies the FTC claimed were Trying to Take Advantage of the Economic DownTurn.

While Jeff Paul’s ShortCuts to Internet Millions makes some pretty astounding claims about how quickly and easily customers can earn money, the FTC apparently had a different take on things. According to the FTC complaint against Jeff Paul, LLC – also d/b/a/Shortcuts to Millions, LLC:

“64. Since at least Januar 2006, Defendants have aired at least two versions of the “Jeff Paul’s Shortcuts to Internet Millions” infomercial.

65. The infomercials represent that consumers who purchase the Jeff Paul system will receive proven, turnkey Internet businesses. The infomercials 25 represent that consumers are likely to quickly and easily earn substantial amounts of money through these businesses. The Jeff Paul infomercial represents that the system is so simple that consumers do not need any prior experience with Internet businesses to make it work.”

The FTC complaint then gives details from a couple of Jeff Paul Infomercials (in items 66., 67., & 68. ) including the allegation that  ”The Jeff Paul infomercials also contain numerous claims about the potential earnings consumers can expect if they purchase and use the Jeff Paul system” and then continues:

“69. The Jeff Paul infomercials also represent that consumers who 5 purchase the Jeff Paul system will receive a free 30-day membership to Jeff Paul’s “Big League,” also known as Jeff Paul’s “Internet Millionaires Club.” This is a service that includes seminars and access to advisors who can answer consumers’ questions. The Jeff Paul infomercials never disclose that the Big League is actually a continuity plan and that, once the 30-day free membership expires, consumers will be charged $39.95 per month unless they contact Defendants to cancel their memberships.

70. When consumers call the toll-free number in the infomercials to order the Jeff Paul system, they are guided through an automated ordering system in 14 which they provide billing and shipment information in response to pre-recorded 15 prompts. At no point before consumers provide their payment information as part 16 of the automated ordering process do Defendants disclose that the Big League is 17 actually a continuity plan, and that once the 30-day free membership expires, 18 consumers will be charged $39.95 per month unless they contact Defendants to cancel their memberships. At no point prior to providing their payment information do consumers give their consent to be charged for their “Big League” (aka “Internet Millionaires Club) memberships once the 30-day free memberships expire.

71. After consumers’ 30-day free memberships expire, unless consumers have taken affirmative steps to cancel, Defendants automatically charge 25 consumers’ credit cards $39.95 per month. In numerous instances, consumers are
unaware they have been charged for the Big League/Internet Millionaires Club membership until they notice the $39.95 charges on their credit card statements.

72. Consumers who purchase the Jeff Paul system receive a kit 24 containing a DVD and several informational booklets in written and/or electronic format. The Jeff Paul materials do not contain step-by-step instructions for 3 accessing or using a proven, turnkey Internet business. Instead, the materials tell 4 consumers to create their own informational products from scratch, and then 5 market those products on the Internet.

73. Consumers also discover that the “three clicks” or “instant” websites they receive with the Jeff Paul system are not the “proven” Internet businesses that are promised in the infomerciaL. Rather, the websites are simplistic, basic websites, and consumers must do extensive work to enhance them, which involves learing how to edit and modify websites. In addition, consumers discover that,
after activating their “three clicks” websites, they must do all of their own marketing to potentially attract customers. Therefore, the representation that consumers who purchase the Jeff Paul system are likely to quickly and easily earn substantial amounts of money through the proven, turnkey Internet businesses they receive is false.

74. The consumer endorsers shown in the Jeff Paul infomercial are not 17 representative of consumers who purchase and use the Jeff shown in the Jeff Paul infomercial are not 17 representative of consumers who purchase and use the Jeff Paul system because, even if they earned money, they did not do it in the way the infomercial describes. Few, if any, of the consumer endorsers earned money through Jeff Paul’s “proven” 20 Internet businesses. At least one consumer endorser displays checks that are completely unrelated to the Jeff Paul system. In addition, many of the consumer endorsers were personally coached by Inventor Defendant Jeff
Paul, or were Jeff Paul’s personal friends. Therefore, the consumer endorsers fail to substantiate the infomercial’s claims.

75. Few, if any, consumers who purchase and use the Jeff Paul system quickly and easily earn substantial amounts of
money. Therefore, Defendants’ representation that consumers who purchase the Jeff Paul system will quickly and easily earn substantial amounts of money from proven, turney Internet businesses is false and unsubstantiated.”

You can read the entire FTC complaint here:

Cash Grant Institute – Not Recommended (FTC Action)

Cash Grant Institute information From the FTC’s Press Release on “Operation ShortChange”:

Cash Grant Institute and its principals allegedly waged an automated robocall campaign promoting bogus claims that consumers were qualified for grant money from the government, private foundations, and wealthy individuals that they could use to overcome their financial problems. They made similar misleading claims about “free grant money” on their Web sites, cashgrantsearch.com and requestagrant.com. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York.”

The FTC Complaint also includes the following companies and websites:

  • Global Ad Agency
  • Global Advertising Agency
  • Domain Leasing Company
  • Cash Grant Search – CashGrantSearch.com
  • Global BPO
  • Asia Telecom
  • RequestAGrant.com