Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 1997 / Notices 5417

caused to be disseminated,

advertisements that state conflicting

monthly payment amounts for the same

transaction, thereby failing to disclose

accurately the terms of repayment, in

violation of the TILA and § 226.24(c) of

Regulation Z, and have also engaged in

an unfair or deceptive act or practice, in

violation of section 5(a) of the FTC Act.

The complaint also alleges that

respondents Huling Bros. Chevrolet,

Huling Buick, and Huling Bros.

Chrysler/Plymouth have disseminated,

or caused to be disseminated,

advertisements that state terms of

repayment (such as monthly payment

amounts) or annual percentage rates that

are not actually arranged or offered by

respondents, in violation of the TILA

and § 226.24(a) of Regulation Z, and

have also engaged in an unfair or

deceptive act or practice, in violation of

section 5(a) of the FTC Act.

The complaint also alleges that the

respondents have disseminated, or

caused to be disseminated,

advertisements offering new motor

vehicles that state monthly payment

amounts, sale prices, and rebates, and

which represent that ‘‘College

Graduate’’ or ‘‘1st Time Buyer’’ rebates

are available in conjunction with a

payment plan in which monthly

payments are at one amount for the first

12 months and are approximately

double that amount thereafter (‘‘Half

Payment Program’). According to the

complaint, College Graduate and 1st

Time Buyer rebates are not available to

purchasers who choose the Half

Payment Program, and the respondents

have therefore engaged in an unfair or

deceptive act or practice, in violation of

section 5(a) of the FTC Act.

The complaint also alleges that

respondent Huling Buick has

disseminated, or caused to be

disseminated, advertisements that state

a rate of a finance charge without stating

that rate as an ‘‘annual percentage rate,’’

using that term or the abbreviation

‘‘APR,’’ in violation of the TILA and

§ 226.24(b) of Regulation Z.

The proposed order prohibits

respondents Huling Bros. Chevrolet,

Huling Buick, and Huling Bros.

Chrysler/Plymouth, in any

advertisement to promote any extension

of consumer credit, from

misrepresenting in any manner, directly

or by implication, the terms of financing

the purchase of a vehicle, including but

not limited to the annual percentage

rate, the amount of any periodic

payment amount, or the availability of

any advertised credit term; the sale

price; or the availability of any

advertised rebate.

The proposed order also prohibits the

respondents, in any advertisement to

promote any extension of consumer

credit, from stating a rate of finance

charge without stating the rate as an

‘‘annual percentage rate,’’ using that

term or the abbreviation ‘‘APR,’’ and

from failing to calculate the rate in

accordance with Regulation Z.

The proposed order also requires the

respondents, in any advertisement to

promote any extension of consumer

credit, whenever the amount or

percentage of any downpayment, the

number of payments or period of

repayment, the amount of any payment,

or the amount of any finance charge is

stated, to accurately, clearly and

conspicuously, state all of the terms

required by Regulation Z, as follows:

The amount or percentage of the

downpayment, the terms of repayment,

and the annual percentage rate. The

proposed order also requires the

respondents to state only those terms

that actually are or will be arranged or

offered by the creditor, in any credit

advertisement.

The proposed order also requires the

respondents, in any advertisement to

promote any extension of consumer

credit, to comply in every other respect

with the TILA, as amended, and with

Regulation Z, as amended.

The purpose of this analysis is to

facilitate public comment on the

proposed order. It is not intended to

constitute an official interpretation of

the agreement and proposed order or to

modify in any way their terms.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–2806 Filed 2–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P

[File No. 952–3041]

Nationwide Syndications, Inc.; Thomas

W. Karon; Analysis to Aid Public

Comment

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Proposed consent agreement.

SUMMARY: In settlement of alleged

violations of federal law prohibiting

unfair or deceptive acts or practices and

unfair methods of competition, this

consent agreement, accepted subject to

final Commission approval, would

prohibit, among other things, the

Barrington, Illinois-based company and

its president from misrepresenting that

its NightSafe Glasses make driving at

night safer, and from using the name

‘‘NightSafe,’’ or any other name that

would imply that such a product makes

night driving safe or safer. Nationwide

and Karon also agreed to pay $125,000

in consumer redress, and to provide the

Commission with the names of

consumers who purchased NightSafe

glasses, so the Commission may provide

them with a notice that wearing

NightSafe glasses while driving at night

may, in fact, be unsafe. The complaint

accompanying the consent agreement

alleges that Nationwide and Karon made

false and unsubstantiated claims

regarding the benefits of NightSafe

Glasses, which purportedly make night

driving safer by improving night vision.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before April 7, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary,

Room 159, 6th St. and Pa. Ave., NW.,

Washington, DC 20580.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: C.

Steven Baker, Federal Trade

Commission, Chicago Regional Office,

55 East Monroe St., Suite 1860, Chicago,

IL 60603. (312) 353–8156. Karen D.

Dodge, Federal Trade Commission,

Chicago Regional Office, 55 East Monroe

St., Suite 1860, Chicago, IL 60603. (312)

353–8156.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade

Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.

46, and § 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 sixty (60) days. The following

Analysis to Aid Public Comment

describes the terms of the consent

agreement, and the allegations in the

accompanying complaint. An electronic

copy of the full text of the consent

agreement package can be obtained from

the Commission Actions section of the

FTC Home Page (for January 24, 1997),

on the World Wide Web, at ‘‘http://

www.ftc.gov/os/actions/htm.’’ A paper

copy can be obtained from the FTC

Public Reference Room, Room H–130,

Sixth Street and Pennsylvania Avenue,

NW., Washington, DC 20580, either in

person or by calling (202) 326–3627.

Public comment is invited. Such

comments or views will be considered

by the Commission and will be available

for inspection and copying at its

principal office in accordance with

§ 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of the Commission’s rules

of practice (16 CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)).

Analysis of the Proposed Consent Order

to Aid Public Comment

The Federal Trade Commission has

accepted an agreement to a proposed
5418 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 1997 / Notices

consent order from Nationwide

Syndications, Inc., a corporation, and

Thomas W. Karon, individually and as

an officer of Nationwide Syndications,

Inc.

The proposed consent order has been

placed on the public record for sixty

(60) days for receipt of comments by

interested persons. Comments received

during this period will become part of

the public record. After sixty (60) days,

the Commission will again review the

agreement and the comments received

and will decide whether it should

withdraw from the agreement and take

other appropriate action, or make final

the proposed order contained in the

agreement.

This matter concerns the proposed

respondents’ advertisements for

NightSafe Glasses. The Commission’s

proposed complaint alleges that the

advertisements expressly or impliedly

claim that NightSafe Glasses will make

night driving safer, improve night

vision, and that laboratory tests prove

that NightSafe Glasses improve night

vision. These claims are alleged to

violate section 5 of the Federal Trade

Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 45, because

they are false and the proposed

respondents did not possess adequate

substantiation for the claims at the time

they were made.

Part I of the proposed consent order

prohibits the proposed respondents

from representing, directly or by

implication, that NightSafe Glasses or

any substantially similar product, makes

night driving safe or safer or improves

night vision. Part II of the proposed

order prohibits proposed respondents

from representing, directly or by

implication, the efficacy, performance,

safety, or benefits of NightSafe Glasses

or any substantially similar product,

unless such representation is true and,

at the time of making such

representation, respondents possess and

rely upon competent and reliable

scientific evidence. Part III of the

proposed order prohibits the proposed

respondents from representing, directly

or by implication, the existence,

contents, validity, results, conclusions,

or interpretations of any test or study.

Part IV of the proposed order prohibits

the proposed respondents from using

the name ‘‘NightSafe,’’ or any other

name, in a manner that represents,

directly or by implication, that such

product makes night driving safe or

safer. Part V of the proposed order

requires the proposed respondents to

pay $125,000 for consumer redress. Part

VI of the proposed order requires the

respondents to provide to the

Commission the names and addresses of

all of the purchasers of NightSafe

Glasses whose names and addresses are

in the possession of or can reasonably

be obtained from the agents involved in

fulfilling orders on behalf of Nationwide

Syndications, Inc., and permits the

Commission to provide the purchasers

of NightSafe Glasses with safety

information contained in an appendix to

the proposed order.

The remaining parts of the consent

order require proposed respondents to

maintain all materials relied upon in

disseminating any representation

covered by the proposed consent order,

to deliver a copy of the proposed order

to all current and future officers, agents,

representatives, and employees who are

engaged in the preparation or placement

of advertisements, promotional

materials, product labels or other such

sales materials covered by the proposed

consent order, to notify the Commission

of any changes in the structure of the

proposed corporate respondents or the

employment of the proposed individual

respondent, for each proposed

respondent to file a written report with

the Commission setting forth in detail

how it complied with the order, and for

the order to terminate twenty years from

the date of its issuance, absent the filing

of a complaint or consent decree

alleging that the order has been violated.

The purpose of this analysis is to

facilitate public comment of the

proposed order. It is not intended to

constitute an official interpretation of

the agreement and proposed order or to

modify in any way their terms.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–2811 Filed 2–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P

[File No. 971–0024]

Tenet Healthcare Corp.; Analysis to

Aid Public Comment

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Proposed consent agreement.

SUMMARY: In settlement of alleged

violations of federal law prohibiting

unfair or deceptive acts or practices and

unfair methods of competition, this

consent agreement, accepted subject to

final Commission approval, would

require, among other things, the forprofit general acute care hospital chain

to divest a hospital, and related assets,

in San Luis Obispo County, California

that it will acquire as part of its

proposed acquisition of OrNda

Healthcorp. The complaint

accompanying the consent agreement

alleges that Tenet’s acquisition of OrNda

would deny the benefits of free and

open competition—lower prices and

better quality of service—to patients,

physicians, third-party payers, and

other consumers of inpatient acute care

hospital services in that county.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before April 7, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary,

Room 159, 6th St. and Pa. Ave., NW,

Washington, DC 20580.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William J. Baer, Federal Trade

Commission, H–374, 6th and

Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington, DC

20580. (202) 326–2932. Mark Whitener,

Federal Trade Commission, H–374, 6th

and Pennsylvania Ave, NW,

Washington, DC 20580. (202) 326–2845.

Robert Leibenluft, Federal Trade

Commission, S–3115, 6th and

Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington, DC

20580. (202) 326–3688.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade

Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.

46, and § 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 sixty (60) days. The following

Analysis to Aid Public Comment

describes the terms of the consent

agreement, and the allegations in the

accompanying complaint. An electronic

copy of the full text of the consent

agreement package can be obtained from

the Commission Actions section of the

FTC Home Page (for January 29, 1997),

on the World Wide Web, at ‘‘http://

www.ftc.gov/os/actions/htm.’’ A paper

copy can be obtained from the FTC

Public Reference Room, Room H–130,

Sixth Street and Pennsylvania Avenue,

NW, Washington, DC 20580, either in

person or by calling (202) 326–3627.

Public comment is invited. Such

comments or views will be considered

by the Commission and will be available

for inspection and copying at its

principal office in accordance with

§ 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, subject to final approval, a

proposed consent order from Tenet

Healthcare Corp. (‘‘Tenet’’), to resolve

antitrust concerns raised by Tenet’s

proposed acquisition of OrNda

Healthcorp (‘‘OrNda’’). Tenet would be

required to divest, among other things,