In November 2025, the Office of the Pennsylvania Attorney announced a $750,000 settlement with a collectibles company regarding its “negative option features” and other business practices.
According to an Office of Attorney General investigation that involved more than 200 consumer complaints, it was determined that the company allegedly advertised collectibles and engaged in sales that resulted in consumers not realizing they were enrolled in subscription services — a practice referred to as a negative option feature.
Consumers then had short windows to return goods they were charged for as part of the subscription plan, according to the PA OAG.
Under the settlement terms, the company agreed to pay $750,000 to allegedly harmed consumers, end subscription plans and collections efforts with nearly 200,000 customers, and revise its business and advertising practices.
“Negative option features are a breach of state consumer laws as they are deceptive practices designed to enroll consumers into future purchases,” the Attorney General said. “This settlement will make many consumers whole while requiring the company to change its practices and refrain from negative option features. When buying any products, be sure to read the terms and conditions thoroughly before committing to that purchase.”
The company advertises and sells collectible merchandise, mostly collectible coins, via direct mail, over the phone, through print advertisements, and through the company website.
Initially, it was alleged that the company was in violation of the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. Allegations included the use of a “bait and hook” business strategy where they purportedly lured consumers into believing that they are receiving collectibles for a reduced price or free, when in reality, these consumers were allegedly misled into a subscription plan where they were ultimately charged for the products if the consumers failed to return them withing a specific window of time.
Allegations included the failure to clearly and conspicuously disclose material terms and conditions of the subscription plan, and failing to obtain consumers’ affirmative express and informed consent before signing consumers up for the subscription plan.
Additionally, it was alleged that the company threatened and intimidated consumers with their accounts being sent to collection agencies, implemented difficult cancelation mechanisms, failing to deliver paid for products, and failing to honor opt-our requests.
Settlement terms also include injunctive relief, which provides that the company cannot enroll consumers in subscription plans without express affirmative consent.
The current settlement follows a 2005 Assurance of Voluntary Compliance pursuant to alleged violations of the state UDAP, FTC Mail Order Rule, and Pennsylvania Unsolicited Merchandise violations.
The OAG sued the company in May 2021 alleging the company violated the AVC and applicable legal regulations. It also alleged that the company’s website failed to clearly and conspicuously disclose the material terms of the subscription plan.
The settlement requires the company, without limitation, to:
- Clearly and conspicuously disclose material terms
- Obtain express and informed consent prior to enrolling consumers in a negative option plan,
- Clearly and conspicuously disclose in close proximity to the negative option terms that charges will increase after the offer, applicable costs and how to cancel
- Clearly and conspicuously disclose whether billing charges include postage and handling,
- Adhere to the prior settlement agreement, and
- Pay $750,000 in restitution
Confer with an experienced telemarketing lawyer to discuss the implementation of clear and conspicuous disclosures, as well as compliance with applicable UDAP and other legal regulations in conjunction with automatic renewal and subscription-based business models.
