|
|
NEWS
RECALLS
COMPLAINT FORM
SCAM ALERTS
RESOURCES
Small Claims Guide Class Actions Lemon Laws FAQ Newsletters |
Share |
| Automotive Education Employment Electronics Family Finance Health Homeowners Insurance Pets Shopping Travel |
|
|
|
![]() |
Illinois Charges Pay-Per-Call Scheme Defrauds Job Seekers |
|||
|
July 21, 2004
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan filed charges against Clear Three Corp., which allegedly scammed Chicagoans out of $260,000 to hear information they could have gotten for free or for the cost of a long-distance call. The alleges Clear Three Corp.'s ads lured job seekers to call a number for information about federal jobs in Chicago. While the ad includes the words "$19.95 flat rate," callers actually are charged $29.95. "When consumers search for a job, they shouldn't have to worry about a black hole of fraud in the middle of the help wanted pages," Madigan said. "Clear Three Corp. preyed on the vulnerability of the unemployed and rang up profits using a deceptive pay-per-call scheme." Clear Three allegedly placed deceptive advertisements in the Chicago Sun-Times and other local newspapers since at least January 2003. In just 15 months, between January 2003 and March 2004, the company collected $259,000 in gross revenue on calls placed to the pay-per-call number listed in its advertisements. The advertisements proclaimed:
When consumers called the number listed they were charged $29.95 for the call. Callers to Clear Three's pay-per-call phone line allegedly heard a short, one-minute message providing basic information about a federal government job hotline and Web site. According to Madigan's complaint, this information could easily be obtained by a consumer for free. Madigan's suit alleges Clear Three and Canio Carl Saluzzi, the company's board chairman, engaged in unfair and deceptive practices in violation of Illinois' Consumer Fraud Act. It notes that the company is not authorized to transact business in Illinois, Madigan's suit also maintains that the defendants violated Illinois' Pay-Per-Call Act by charging a fee significantly higher than the $19.95 flat rate mentioned in the advertisement. Also in violation of the Act, Clear Three failed to provide disclosure information at the beginning of the call to inform consumers of the cost of the call and callers were not given the opportunity to disconnect before the charges were incurred. Consumers did not learn of the charges until they received their next telephone bill. Madigan said Clear Three also violated the Illinois Job Referral Act when it accepted money for job referral services without providing consumers with sufficient information in the advertisements or the legally-required written contract. Madigan's suit seeks to prohibit Saluzzi and Clear Three from conducting further business in violation of Illinois law. The lawsuit also seeks restitution for the victims and civil penalties of $50,000 for each violation of Illinois law. The lawsuit also names SBC Illinois as a nominal defendant. The lawsuit does not allege that SBC Illinois had any knowledge of the misrepresentations and illegal activities perpetrated by Clear Three. Madigan said SBC Illinois has been included as a nominal defendant to grant her office the power to request that the telephone company disconnect Clear Three's pay-per-call line. In 2002, the City of Chicago requested that SBC Illinois disconnect a number used by Saluzzi in a similar scheme promoting "city jobs." In addition, the New York Attorney General filed a similar lawsuit against Saluzzi in February 2004. The defendant settled that case. |
|||
Back to the top | |
||||
|
|
Custom Search
|
||||
|
AUTOMOTIVE Dealers Manufacturers Service Extended Warranties Lemon Laws Recalls Tires Transporters FAMILY Aging Children, Parenting Recalls Dating Education Entertainment Pets Weddings |
FINANCE Annuities Banks Credit Cards Debt Collection Debt Counseling Insurance Investing Loans Mortgages Payday Loans Student Loans Tax Prep HEALTH Doctors Drugs, Pharmacies Health Clubs Hearing Care Hospitals Nursing Homes Nutrition, Diets Vision Care Weight Loss |
HOUSE & HOME Appliances Cookware Furniture Home Improvements Lawn & Garden Movers Pools & Spas Realtors, Rental Agents Recalls Utilities ELECTRONICS Cable TV/DBS Cameras Cell Phones Computers Home Electronics Internet Access Local Phone Service Long Distance VoIP |
SHOPPING In-Home Online Retail Stores Sporting Goods Supermarkets Telemarketers TRAVEL Airlines Bus Lines Car Rental Cruises Hotels Travel Agents Trains RESOURCES Class Actions Complaint Form Small Claims Guide Lemon Laws |
CONSUMER NEWS Latest News Automotive Telecom Financial Health Homeowners Scams Seniors Travel More ... RECALLS Automotive Children's Products Drugs Food Household Products Sporting Goods ABOUT US FAQ Privacy Policy Advertise With Us Newsroom Syndication Terms of Use |
Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use
Copyright © 2003-2009 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. All Rights Reserved. The contents of this site may not be republished, reprinted, rewritten or recirculated without written permission. |
|