Judge Orders Halt to Illegal Robocalls
Judge John F. Grady of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois issued on May 15 a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the parties involved in a telemarketing campaign of illegal robocalls.
Judge John F. Grady of the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Illinois issued on May 15 a temporary restraining
order (TRO) against the parties involved in a telemarketing campaign of illegal robocalls.
The TRO stops telemarketing company Voice Touch Inc., its principals James and Maureen Dunne, its business partner Network Foundations LLC, and Network Foundations principal Damian Kohlfeld from making any further calls in violation of the Do Not Call Registry and other provisions of the Telemarketing Sales Rule and the FTC Act.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed the case on May 14, charging that the defendants were operating a massive telemarketing scheme that used random, pre-recorded phone calls to deceive consumers into thinking that their vehicle’s warranty is about to expire.
“(The) FTC has disconnected the people responsible for so many of these annoying robocalls,” said FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz. “We expect to see a dramatic decrease in deceptive auto warranty calls, but we are still on high alert.” If consumers continue to receive unsolicited robocalls to numbers on the Do Not Call registry, they should report them to DoNotCall.gov.
In a related matter filed by the FTC, Judge Grady yesterday issued a temporary restraining order against automobile warranty sales company Transcontinental Warranty, Inc., and its CEO and president, Christopher Cowart, who are clients of Voice Touch. In both cases, the court found that the FTC established a likelihood of success on the merits.
The court barred deceptive claims about extended warranties, froze the defendants’ assets, and appointed receivers over Transcontinental and Network Foundations to ensure that documents are preserved and assets are not dissipated. The restraining orders are in effect until a preliminary injunction hearing set for May 29, at which time the judge will reassess what type of relief should remain in place until the case proceeds to trial.
More Compliance

Line 1 Is Not a Junk Drawer
Rolling products into the cash price — even if the bank told you to — misrepresents the vehicle’s value and runs afoul of four federal laws.
Read More →
Dueling Banjos in the Car Biz
Reports and accounts at variance show auto dealers’ trust profiles have risen in many consumers’ minds but that there remains a need for greater transparency by some.
Read More →
NADA and the Miracle on 34th Street
Automotive dealers should follow the National Automobile Dealers Association's consumer-friendly guidelines in order to minimize their legal risks.
Read More →
Another Look at a Recent Data Breach
Get caught up on the most pressing legal and regulatory matters facing dealers and F&I professionals, including data security, shotgun purchases, and inconsistent payment quotes.
Read More →

The Best Thing a Dealer Can Do to Avoid Legal Problems
Citing the issue is a strategy borrowed from the legal field itself.
Read More →
Fines of the Times
Civil penalties for noncompliance with federal auto retail and finance rules and regulations can add up quickly. Use this checklist to cover your bases.
Read More →
Goodwill and Car Dealers
A dealer goodwill tale is a cautionary tale worth paying attention to.
Read More →
The Regulatory Empire Is Striking Back
President Trump - entropist and corporate disruptor in consumer law
Read More →
