Newsletter November 11, 2026

Wiley Consumer Protection Download (November 11, 2026)

November 11, 2026

Select Federal Enforcement Actions
Select State Enforcement Actions
Select NAD Advertising Challenge Case Decisions
Federal and State Regulatory Announcements
More Analysis from Wiley

Welcome to Wiley’s update on recent developments and what’s next in consumer protection enforcement and regulation. We cover developments with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Commission), the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or the Bureau), and state Attorneys General (AGs), as well as self-regulatory advertising challenges decided by BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division (NAD). Please reach out to any of our authors with any questions about recent regulatory or enforcement activity on the federal or state level.

To subscribe to this newsletter, click here.

Select Federal Enforcement Actions

FTC and Four States Settle with Rental Housing Companies Over Allegedly Deceptive Practices. On November 6, the FTC, the Arizona and Colorado Attorneys General (AGs), the State of Indiana, and the Utah Division of Consumer Protection filed a complaint and stipulated order in federal court to settle allegations against a single-family rental property manager and its private equity owner for alleged violations of the FTC Act, Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), Consumer Review Fairness Act (CRFA), and state consumer protection laws. Specifically, the FTC alleged that the defendants violated the CRFA by offering provisions in form contracts that restrict consumers’ ability to provide reviews, performance assessments, and similar analyses of the defendants’ products, services, and conduct. The FTC and state AGs also alleged that the defendants advertised false rental prices, charged hidden fees, misrepresented that rental homes were inspected and move-in ready, and improperly withheld security deposits. The defendants agreed to pay $49.75 million in addition to injunctive relief.

FTC Sues Debt Collection Operation Over Allegedly Deceptive Practices. On November 2, the FTC filed a complaint in federal court against a debt collection operation and its owners for alleged violations of the FTC Act, Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and GLBA. The FTC alleges that the defendants falsely held themselves out as a law firm or as affiliated with attorneys and used deceptive threats of legal action, wage garnishment, property liens, and contacting consumers’ employers and family members to collect debts that consumers often did not owe or that the defendants lacked authority to collect. On November 5, the court entered a temporary restraining order freezing the defendants’ assets. The FTC seeks monetary and injunctive relief.

FTC and Washington Settle with Payment Processor Over Allegedly Deceptive Sales and Cancellation Practices. On November 2, the FTC and the Washington state AG filed a complaint and stipulated order in federal court to settle allegations against a payment processor, an affiliated equipment leasing company, and their owners for alleged violations of the FTC Act, GLBA, and Washington State Consumer Protection Act. The FTC and Washington AG allege that the defendants falsely promised small businesses savings on payment processing services, failed to adequately disclose fees and auto-renewing contracts, made cancellation difficult despite promising “risk-free” cancellation, and made false and unsubstantiated earnings claims to prospective sales agents. The defendants agreed to injunctive relief, a 60-day period in which all customers can cancel their agreements without penalty, and a $32.08 million monetary judgment, which is suspended upon payment of $600,000 based on the defendants’ inability to pay.

FTC and States Sue Restaurant Software Company Over Allegedly Deceptive Fees, Subscriptions, and Cancellation Practices. On October 29, the FTC, the State of California, and the Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Utah AGs filed a complaint in federal court against a restaurant software company and affiliated entities for alleged violations of the FTC Act, Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act, and state consumer protection laws. The FTC and states allege that the defendants charged hidden and unauthorized fees and unwanted subscription add-ons, failed to provide consumers with a simple mechanism for canceling subscriptions, and advertised continuously available customer support despite reports of customer service being difficult to reach. The complaint seeks monetary and injunctive relief.

FTC Staff Sends Warning Letters to Health Care Plan Marketers and Lead Generators. On October 29, the FTC announced that its staff is sending warning letters to 25 companies that engage in the marketing or lead generation of Affordable Care Act Marketplace health insurance and health care-related products – such as limited benefit plans or medical discount programs – related to potential violations of the FTC Act. The letters identify several types of practices that may violate the law, including misrepresentations concerning a plan’s benefits, limitations, insurance status, or costs, as well as false claims regarding free offers, cash rewards, rebates, or other incentives. The letters also highlight that advertising and marketing health-related products practices can violate the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule and Impersonation of Government and Businesses Rule (Impersonation Rule), which carry civil penalties up to $53,088 per violation, encourage the companies to review their advertising practices for compliance with applicable laws and rules, and state that the agency will continue to actively monitor this marketplace for potentially deceptive or unfair acts or practices.

Select State Enforcement Actions

New York AG Settles with News Company for Allegedly Deceiving Consumers About Subscription Terms. On November 2, the New York AG announced a $500,000 settlement with a news company for allegedly failing to inform customers of subscription terms, including automatic renewals that included significant price increases. An investigation by the New York AG alleged that the news company also made it difficult for customers to cancel online, failed to provide a subscription acknowledgment, as required by New York’s auto renewal law, and failed to notify customers before automatic renewal.

New York AG Settles with Company for Allegedly Deceptive Free Trial Book Program. On October 28, the New York AG announced a $23,500 settlement with a book publisher for allegedly misleading consumers with a “free no-risk preview” program for their books. According to the New York AG’s investigation, the company deceived New York seniors and their caregivers by billing them for books they believed they were receiving for free. According to the New York AG, the company “sent thousands of deceptive offers through the mail to New Yorkers, claiming that consumers could preview a book for free with ‘no risk,’ while obscuring the actual terms of the trial program in fine print.” In addition to the $23,500 penalty, the settlement requires the company to refund New Yorkers who were misled and paid for books that they believed were free.

Maryland AG Settles with Financial Technology Company for Allegedly Deceptive Lending Practices. On October 27, the Maryland AG announced a settlement with a financial technology company to resolve allegations that the company engaged in unlicensed lending and misled consumers regarding its earned wage access product. The Maryland AG alleged that the company failed to clearly disclose fees for expedited access to advances, represented that consumers could obtain advertised advance amounts for which they might not qualify, and prevented consumers with outstanding advances from canceling subscriptions or recurring charges. The settlement requires the company to pay $600,000 to the Maryland AG’s Consumer Protection Division in addition to other injunctive relief.

Select NAD Advertising Challenge Case Decisions

NAD Upholds Moisturization Claims for Body Wash Product. On November 9, NAD upheld claims that a body wash product “nourishes deeply for 24 hours” and “actively regenerates skin’s natural moisture” after the product maker provided a satisfactory short-term moisturization study, as well as studies that show fatty acids in the body wash help restore lipids that support moisture retention. NAD also upheld a “round-the-clock deep moisture” claim and the “Deep Moisture” product name as properly supported.

NAD Rejects Health Benefits, Personalization Claims for Compounded Weight Loss Medication. On November 4, NAD recommended an online telehealth platform that markets prescription weight loss products discontinue or modify claims regarding health benefits and personalization for a compounded tirzepatide product. Specifically, NAD found the platform’s evidence supported health benefit claims only with respect to tirzepatide, but not for the compounded product with additives. NAD also rejected the claim that the product was a “personalized medication ... tailored to meet individual patient needs” selected by a prescribing doctor among available formulations and dosages did not mean that the product was individually crafted or formulated for the patient.

NAD Recommends Changes to Savings, Comparative Performance Claims of Deodorant Product. On October 30, NAD recommended that the maker of a deodorant and antiperspirant product clearly and conspicuously disclose that advertised savings were dependent upon enrollment in a subscription program and the number of products purchased. NAD also found insufficient support for claims that the product was “the first deodorant to have 100 hours of clinically tested sweat and odor control” and that competing products were ineffective and worthless.

Federal and State Regulatory Announcements

FTC Highlights Efforts to Combat Imposter Scams. On October 29, the FTC issued a press release related to its enforcement against government and business impersonation scams under the FTC’s Impersonation Rule. The FTC reported that, since the Impersonation Rule took effect in 2024, the agency has completed 14 enforcement actions resulting in more than $80 million in consumer redress and that, over the past year, the FTC has sent warning letters identifying apparent Impersonation Rule violations, which resulted in the removal of 19 FTC-imposter websites. The agency noted that it is separately seeking public comment on whether to update the Impersonation Rule or develop a new rule addressing the role of digital marketplace platforms in promoting impersonation scams.

FTC Launches Inquiry into Personalized Pricing and Compensation. On October 28, the FTC announced that it had issued orders under Section 6(b) of the FTC Act to nine companies seeking information about their use of personal data to set prices and compensation. The orders were issued to several companies – including ride share, food delivery, and airline companies – seeking information regarding the inputs, tools, and procedures used to adjust or set prices and compensation, including whether prices vary based on loyalty program participation or analysis of personal data and whether gig-worker compensation is affected by personal data. The orders follow an August 2026 request for public comment on a proposed enforcement policy statement describing how the undisclosed use of personal information to set a price unique to a consumer could violate the FTC Act. The recipients have 45 days from receipt of the orders to respond.

New York City Administration Proposes Regulations on AI Customer Service “Doom Loops.” On October 20, the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) proposed a rule targeting what it calls artificial intelligence (AI) customer-service “doom loops.” DCWP describes the initiative as proposed “first-in-the-nation municipal protections” to ensure consumers can reach a human agent and to provide accountability to ensure companies meet the commitments they advertise about customer service. The proposed rule includes three specific prohibitions on deceptive and unconscionable conduct: (1) failing to promptly disclose the consumer is interacting with an automated customer service system rather than a human representative; (2) representing that customer service is available while “repeatedly and unreasonably” directing consumers to menus that do not address their inquiries or responding to their inquiries with “unresponsive, irrelevant, or erroneous information”; and (3) failing to provide consumers engaged in customer service interactions with either a single-step transfer mechanism to interact with a human representative, or if a human representative is not available, instructions for how to obtain assistance from a human representative by one of six methods described in the rule. DCWP will hold a public hearing on the proposed rules on December 18, 2026, and written comments are due by December 18, 2026. More information can be found here.