Business ProfileforMylife.com, Inc.

The following describes a government action that has been resolved by either a settlement or a decision by a court or administrative agency. If the matter is being appealed, it will be noted below.

MyLife.com, Inc. and its CEO, Jeffrey Tinsley, have been banned from engaging in deceptive negative option marketing and will pay $21 million following allegations that they tricked consumers with "teaser background reports" and trapped them in difficult-to-cancel subscription programs. According to a complaint filed in July 2020 by the Department of Justice on behalf of the Federal Trade Commission, MyLife.com and Jeffrey Tinsley claimed that the company's background reports on particular individuals may contain arrest, criminal, and sexual offender records--even when they did not include such information--to try to trick consumers into signing up for auto-renewing, premium subscriptions.

The complaint alleged that, in many instances, consumers who searched the MyLife.com website for an individual's background report were shown search results that imply, often falsely, that the subject of a search may have records of criminal or sexual offenses--records that can be viewed only by purchasing a MyLife subscription. The complaint alleged that MyLife's misleading statements led some consumers to believe they or other individuals had arrest or criminal records when they did not, or when they only had minor traffic citations.

The complaint alleged that MyLife operated as a consumer reporting agency and violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by, among other things, failing to maintain reasonable procedures to verify how its reports would be used, to ensure the information was accurate, and to make sure that the information it sold would be used only for legally permissible purposes. The complaint also alleged that MyLife's misleading billing practices violated the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act by, for example, failing to clearly disclose upfront charges, or that consumers' subscription would automatically renew. MyLife also violated the Telemarketing Sales Rule by misrepresenting its refund and cancellation policies, the complaint alleged.

"MyLife lured consumers into hard-to-cancel negative option subscriptions by preying on fears that MyLife's reports would harm their reputations or ability to find jobs or housing," said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. "These extortionary tactics broke the law, and MyLife and its CEO have been banned from negative option marketing and ordered to clean up their practices."

"The Department of Justice and the FTC work hard to protect consumers from deceptive sales practices like those at issue here," said Acting Assistant Attorney General Brian M. Boynton of the Justice Department's Civil Division. "This is a win for consumers, who should not be subjected to misleading statements and marketing tactics."

As part of the settlement, Tinsley and MyLife agreed to separate judgments totaling $33.9 million. Tinsley will pay a total of $5 million and MyLife will pay a partially suspended judgment of $16 million due to the company's inability to pay the full amount. The money will be used to provide refunds to consumers. MyLife will be required to pay the full remaining amount of the judgment if the company is found to have misrepresented its finances.

Importantly, Tinsley and MyLife are also permanently banned from offering any product with a negative option feature and engaging in the types of deceptive conduct outlined in the complaint including implying that someone who has received a traffic violation has a criminal record. In addition, MyLife also is required to implement a monitoring program to ensure the company is complying with the FCRA.

To access the full Federal Trade Commission press release, please visit: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2021/12/ftc-doj-obtain-ban-negative-option-marketing-21-million-consumers

The following describes a pending government action that has been formally brought by a government agency but has not yet been resolved. We are providing a summary of the government's allegations, which have not yet been proven.

July 27, 2020 The following describes a complaint that has been formally brought by a government agency. The Federal Trade Commission, alleges and charges as follows:

The Department of Justice on behalf of the Federal Trade Commission sued a California-based purveyor of background reports, alleging that the company has deceived consumers with "teaser background reports" that often falsely claimed to include information about arrest, criminal, and sex offender records, and also engaged in misleading billing and marketing practices.

According to a complaint filed by the Department of Justice on behalf of the FTC, MyLife.com, Inc., and its CEO Jeffrey Tinsley have stated through their website that the company's background reports on particular individuals may contain arrest, criminal, and sexual offender records--even when they did not include such information--to try to persuade consumers to sign up for auto-renewing premium subscriptions.

The complaint alleges that, in many instances, consumers searching the MyLife.com website for an individual's background report are shown search results that imply, often falsely, that the subject of a search may have records of criminal or sexual offenses--records that can be viewed only by buying a MyLife subscription. The complaint alleges that MyLife's misleading statements led some consumers to believe they or other individuals had arrest or criminal records when they did not, or if they only had minor traffic citations.

The complaint maintains that MyLife is a consumer reporting agency (CRA), assembling and selling consumer reports that include information such as court or arrest records and sex offender records. MyLife has touted in testimonials that its reports were useful to those making housing, lending, and employment eligibility decisions.

CRAs must comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which requires them to take steps to ensure that they only provide consumer report information to those with a "permissible purpose" for receiving it; that they ensure the maximum possible accuracy of the information; and that they allow consumers to dispute and correct information in their consumer reports.

The complaint alleges that MyLife has violated the FCRA by, among other things, failing to maintain reasonable procedures to verify how its reports would be used, to ensure the information was accurate, and to make sure that the information it sold would be used only for legally permissible purposes.

Many consumers have purchased premium memberships because of the misleading information about criminal or arrest records in the "teaser background reports."

The complaint alleges that MyLife's misleading billing practices violated the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act. For example, MyLife did not clearly disclose upfront charges, or that consumers' subscription would automatically renew, and the company made it difficult for consumers to cancel their subscriptions or obtain a refund. In addition, the complaint alleges that the company misrepresented its refund and cancellation policies in violation of the Telemarketing Sales Rule.

The Commission vote to refer the complaint seeking civil penalties to the Department of Justice for filing was 5-0. The Department of Justice filed the complaint on behalf of the Commission in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

NOTE: The Commission refers a complaint for civil penalties to the DOJ for filing when it has "reason to believe" that the named defendants are violating or are about to violate the law and that a proceeding is in the public interest. The case will be decided by the court.

To access the full Federal Trade Commission press release, please visit: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2020/07/ftc-alleges-california-purveyor-background-reports-misled