FleetCor strongly disagrees with the ruling on liability, which the company believes was reached prematurely, the company said in a statement.  -  Photo: FleetCor

FleetCor strongly disagrees with the ruling on liability, which the company believes was reached prematurely, the company said in a statement.

Photo: FleetCor

Global business payments company FleetCor Technologies announced it plans to appeal the August 9, 2022 decision by the Northern District of Georgia regarding the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) lawsuit involving its fuel card business in the U.S.

In a 2019 lawsuit the FTC alleged that FleetCor, marketed under the “Fuelman” brand name with co-branded cards with businesses around the country, charged customers hundreds of millions of dollars in mystery fees associated with fuel cards. The FTC maintains that FleetCor falsely told its business customers that they would save money, be protected from unauthorized charges, and have no set-up, transaction, or membership fees.

While the court granted the FTC's motion for summary judgment as to liability for the company and its CEO, Ronald Clark — thus avoiding a trial — the court ruled in FleetCor’s favor denying the FTC’s claim for monetary relief.

In a ruling earlier this year, the Supreme Court determined that the FTC was not able to seek redress for consumers under section 13(b) of the FTC Act.

FleetCor strongly disagrees with the ruling on liability, which the company believes was reached prematurely, the company said in a statement.

According to FleetCor, beginning in 2017 it voluntarily cooperated with the FTC and implemented enhanced disclosures addressing the concerns raised by the FTC. The company claims that it has not seen any material business impact or change in customer behavior as a result of these changes.

“FleetCor takes governance and oversight matters seriously and is confident it has acted in accordance with all applicable laws,” said Steven Stull, lead independent director. “The Board fully supports the Company and Ron Clarke in their efforts to overturn this ruling.”

0 Comments