[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 155 (Monday, August 12, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52487-52488]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-20335]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

[File No. 012 3191]


Tim R. Wofford/OKie Corporation; Analysis To Aid Public Comment

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Proposed consent agreement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this matter settles alleged 
violations of federal law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or 
practices or unfair methods of competition. The attached Analysis to 
Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the draft 
complaint that accompanies the consent agreement and the terms of the 
consent order--embodied in the consent agreement--that would settle 
these allegations.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 3, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed in paper form should be directed to: FTC/
Office of the Secretary, Room 159-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20580. Comments filed in electronic form should be 
directed to: [email protected], as prescribed below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kerry O'Brien, Federal Trade 
Commission, Western Regional Office, 901 Market St., Suite 570, San 
Francisco, CA 94103. (415) 848-5189.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 6(f) of the Federal 
Trade Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C. 46(f) and Sec. 2.34 of 
the Commission's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is hereby given 
that the above-captioned consent agreement containing a consent order 
to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to 
final approval, by the Commission, has been placed on the public record 
for a period of thirty (30) days. The following Analysis to Aid Public 
Comment describes the terms of the consent agreement, and the 
allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of 
the consent agreement package can be obtained from the FTC home page 
(for August 5, 2002), on the World Wide Web, at ``http://www.ftc.gov/
os/2002/08/index.htm.'' A paper copy can be obtained from the FTC 
Public Reference Room, Room 130-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20580, either in person or by calling (202) 326-2222.
    Public comments are invited, and may be filed with the Commission 
in either paper or electronic form. Comments filed in paper form should 
be directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary, Room 159-H, 600 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580. If a comment contains 
nonpublic information, it must be filed in paper form, and the first 
page of the document must be clearly labeled ``confidential.'' Comments 
that do not contain any nonpublic information may instead be filed in 
electronic form (in ASCII format, WordPerfect, or Microsoft Word) as 
part of or as an attachment to e-mail messages directed to the 
following e-mail box: [email protected]. Such comments will be 
considered by the Commission and will be available for inspection and 
copying at its principal office in accordance with Section 
4.9(b)(6)(ii) of the Commission's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 
4.9(b)(6)(ii).

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To Aid Public Comment

    The Federal Trade Commission has accepted an agreement to a 
proposed consent order from Tim R. Wofford, an officer of OKie 
Corporation (OKie). OKie did business as Prime Peripherals. Mr. Wofford 
and OKie advertised, labeled, offered for sale, sold, and distributed 
computer peripheral products to the public, including Prime Peripherals 
brand modems, CD-Rom drive kits, and recordable compact discs.
    The proposed consent order has been placed on the public record for 
thirty (30) days for reception of comments by interested persons. 
Comments received during this period will become part of the public 
record. After thirty (30) days, the Commission will again review the 
agreement and the comments received and will decide whether it should 
withdraw from the agreement or make final the agreement's proposed 
order.
    This matter concerns cash rebate offers that respondent and OKie 
made to consumers who purchased Prime Peripherals computer peripheral 
products. The complaint alleges that respondent engaged in false 
advertising and unfair practices relating to these rebate offers. 
Specifically, the complaint alleges that respondent falsely represented 
that he would mail cash rebates to purchasers of Prime Peripherals 
computer peripheral products within either six to eight or eight to ten 
weeks, or within a reasonable period of time, of respondent's receipt 
of their requests. In many instances, consumers never received their 
cash rebates or experienced delays ranging from one to six months.
    The complaint also alleges that, in the advertising and sale of 
Prime Peripherals computer peripheral products, respondent offered that 
consumers would receive cash rebates if they purchased a Prime 
Peripherals computer peripheral product and submitted a rebate form 
with proof of purchase. In making this offer, he did not require 
consumers to submit a telephone number, fax number, or e-mail address 
to be eligible to receive the offered cash rebates. In numerous 
instances, consumers accepted respondent's rebate offer by purchasing 
those products and submitting rebate forms with proof of purchase. 
After receiving rebate requests, respondent unfairly modified the terms 
or conditions of the rebate offer unilaterally by requiring that, in 
addition to submitting a rebate form with proof of purchase, consumers 
submit a telephone number, a fax number, and an e-mail address to 
receive a rebate. In breach of the original rebate offer, respondent 
rejected numerous rebate requests from consumers because they did not 
submit a telephone number, a fax number, and/or an e-mail address.
    Finally, the complaint alleges that respondent represented that 
purchasers of Prime Peripherals computer peripheral products would 
receive cash rebates if they purchased those products and submitted a 
rebate form with proper documentation, yet failed to disclose that 
consumers were required to possess and disclose their telephone number, 
fax number, and e-mail address on a rebate form to receive those cash 
rebates. The complaint alleges that his failure to disclose these facts 
was a deceptive practice.
    The proposed consent order contains provisions designed to prevent 
respondent from engaging in similar acts and practices in the future. 
Part I of the proposed order prohibits respondent from failing to 
disclose all terms, conditions, or other limitations of a rebate offer 
on the rebate form. It also requires the respondent to disclose in any 
rebate advertising that the rebate offer requires consumers to disclose 
a fax number and/or e-mail address on their rebate form if such is the 
case. Part I of the proposed order also prohibits respondent from 
misrepresenting the time in which any cash rebate, or rebate in the 
form of credit towards future purchases, will be mailed to consumers. 
It also prohibits respondent from failing to provide such rebates 
within the time

[[Page 52488]]

specified, or if no time is specified, within thirty days.
    Part I of the proposed order also prohibits respondent from 
violating any provision of the Federal Trade Commission's trade 
Regulation Rule Concerning Mail or Telephone Order Merchandise (the 
``Mail Order Rule'') in connection with rebates in the form of 
merchandise. Among other things, the Mail Order Rule prohibits 
marketers from failing to provide rebates in the form of merchandise 
within the time they specify for delivery, or if no time is specified, 
within thirty days, unless they offer consumers the option of 
consenting to a delay or canceling the rebate request and promptly 
receiving reasonable cash compensation instead of the merchandise 
originally offered. Finally, Part I of the proposed order similarly 
probhitis respondent from failing to provide rebates in the form of 
services or any other consideration (other than cash, credit towards 
future purchases, or merchandise) within the time he specifies for 
delivery, or if no time is specified, within thirty days, unless he 
offers consumers the option of consenting to a delay or canceling the 
rebate request and promptly receiving reasonable cash compensation 
instead of the rebate originally offered.
    Parts II through IV of the proposed order are reporting and 
compliance provisions. Part V is a provision ``sunsetting'' the order 
after twenty years, with certain exceptions.
    The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the 
proposed order, and it is not intended to constitute an official 
interpretation of the agreement and proposed order or to modify in any 
way their terms.

    By direction of the Commission.
Benjamin I. Berman,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 02-20335 Filed 8-9-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M