The verdict in the Pivotal Payments Telemarketing Calls lawsuit is in and we have a class action lawsuit going up against Global Resorts International, Inc. and its president, George Lambros. George Lambros is a former franchisor of GRI, now called Global Resorts International (GRI). He is also a large time donor to many PACS/SIPC organizations.
Well, perhaps you might qualify for a possible settlement from the proposed class action lawsuit brought forth by the Phone Consumer Protection Act lawsuit! To avoid the risk and expense of prolonged litigation, Pivotal Payments hereby admits guilt but will not deny the PIPCA class action lawsuit. Therefore the judgment in the telemarketing lawsuit will be facilitated. We are also pleased that the government has stepped in and has threatened to file criminal charges against GRI and that threat has now been dropped.
We would like to bring to your attention another aspect of this lawsuit, which we believe is of vital importance. That aspect is the media strategy deployed by Global Resorts International, Inc. (GRI). This specific aspect is the reason that the PIPA class action lawsuit was greenlit by the Federal Trade Commission and brought to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. We are certain that if this case had not been filed in this district it is very likely that the entire concept of the PIPA might not have been approved. We believe that this is the crux of this entire controversy; had the FTC not brought the suit at all, the telemarketers would have continued their illegal practices and this would have resulted in the cancellation of countless legitimate marketing campaigns.
While it is irrelevant what exact words were used in the marketing communications that went to the consumer, or which advertising agency produced the communication, one can be rest assured that one or more of the words utilized were used in an inappropriate way. For example, if a telemarketer called you and described their services in a way that made it sound as though they were speaking directly to you, that was probably considered a personal phone call rather than a business phone call. You would likely be shocked at the number of telemarketers who continue to use such language and do so without any apparent repercussions. In other words, even when they have received one complaint, they simply keep going with their illegal behavior. As long as the telemarketer is selling products to the person they called, there is every reason why they should be held legally accountable for their illegal activities.
The second aspect of this lawsuit which should interest consumers is the contention that the FTC has no power to penalize telemarketers. That assertion is false. The Federal Trade Commission is specifically empowered to instruct telephone companies to not make personal calls to consumers, nor use deceptive and unfair advertising. Such limitations were imposed by the FTC in Order to protect consumers from telemarketing calls and those who receive them. This includes anyone who receives unsolicited faxed materials or emails from telemarketers, anyone who receives unsolicited phone calls from telemarketers, and anyone who is solicited by a telemarketer on the phone or Internet.
It is important for consumers to understand that when they are being harassed by telemarketers on the phone, they have every right to take legal action to fight back. They have a right to bring a lawsuit against the company that is violating the Federal Trade Commission’s order and they have the legal right to demand that the offending party to correct the problem and stop the illegal and unethical behavior. Furthermore, they have a right to record the phone number and hold the responsible party liable for monetary damages that are caused by the telemarketing calls and for other violations of the Telephone Consumer Credit Act.
