|
CONSUMER NEWS RECALLS COMPLAINT FORM SCAM ALERTS |
| Small Claims Guide | Class Actions | Lemon Law | FAQ | Resources | Newsletters | Spanish | |
|
|
![]() |
States Sue Peoples Benefit ServicesFirst Prosecution of Allegedly Fraudulent Medicare Drug Plan |
|||||
|
November 3, 2005
The complaint and special injunction grow out of a 20 month multi-state investigation by Corbett and Attorneys General from Arkansas, Illinois and Massachusetts into the business practices of Peoples Benefit Services Inc Pennsylvania led the multi-state probe into claims that the defendant violated the states' consumer protection laws, the Social Security Act, U.S. Postal rules regarding deceptive mail, and Pennsylvania's Fictitious Names Act and Telemarketer Registration Act. The special injunction asks the court to prohibit Peoples from advertising, promoting and selling its products and memberships to senior citizens and Medicare recipients in a deceptive manner. It also seeks to prevent thousands of consumers from purchasing the defendant's drug cards, which were deceptively marketed to replicate government-approved Medicare Part D Prescription Drug Plans. Enrollment for the government approved drug coverage is scheduled to begin this November 15. Failure to enroll in the true government approved programs could result in loss of critical drug coverage and benefits or a requirement to pay a penalty for delayed enrollment. In addition, the complaint asks the court to require Peoples to comply with all applicable state and federal laws plus cease conducting business in the states until it issues full refunds to consumers and pays civil penalties including enhanced fines for victims age 60 or older. "Prescription drug coverage is the biggest change to the Medicare program in the last 40 years," Corbett said during a news conference in Philadelphia to announce the lawsuit. "It is no coincidence that the defendant's drug cards are being advertised as 'look-a-likes' to the federal government approved plans that will begin accepting enrollees in two weeks.” According to investigators, the defendant in 2002 was issued a warning by the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General that its business practices were in violation of the state's Consumer Protection Law. The warning followed complaints from consumers that Peoples denied their requests for refunds on its prescription drug discount products despite the company's "full 60-day Money-Back Guarantee." The complaints were resolved through mediation. Then in January 2003, Peoples began marketing its new prescription drug discount card for seniors at the same time of the intended start-date for enrollment in the Medicare-endorsed prescription drug card plan. The defendant's program was called the "Senior Security Prescription Plan" or "Senior Security Supplement Initiative." The defendant advertised its $5.95 per month prescription drug discount card through statewide telemarketing activities, TV ads and direct mail pieces that were sent to approximately 1.3 million Pennsylvania households. The lawsuit claims that the print and broadcast ads contained similar words, typeface, phrases, logos and other characteristics to convince consumers that they were signing-up for the government-endorsed or approved prescription drug card program, including:
In May 2003, the defendant's circular logo, also used by its sister company Peoples Benefit Life Insurance of the same address, resulted in a Cease and Desist notice from the Inspector General of the Social Security Administration (SSA). The notice informed the business that its logo and use of the name "Senior Security Supplement" was in violation of federal law barring the use of SSA's program words, letters, symbols or emblems that create the false impression that the ad is approved, endorsed or affiliated with the government. Other alleged deceptions in the ads include:
Investigators said consumers contacted their Attorney General soon after the ads were released to complain that the solicitations were deceptive and misleading. In Pennsylvania, consumers claimed that they thought the mailings were from the U.S. government because of the similar color, layout, font and wording. Others said some of the print ads included a fictitious bill implying that consumers already agreed to a purchase. Still other Pennsylvania residents complained that the defendant contacted them at their homes even though their names and addresses were officially registered on the state's "Do Not Call" list. The Commonwealth's suit accuses the defendant of engaging in illegal telemarketing activities by failing to purchase the state's "no call" list prior to contacting consumers. The lawsuit and special injunction asks the court to require the defendants to:
Report Your Experience
|
|
||||
Advertisement
|
Home |
Rogues Gallery |
Good Guys |
Complaint Form |
News |
Recalls |
Search |
Video |
FAQ |
|
Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use
Copyright © 2003-2008 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. All Rights Reserved. |