News media have suggested that Lear Gold coin advertisements are misleading and fail to candidly reveal substantial commissions charged by the company.

Claims have involved misleading sales methods, overcharging even for bullion coins, and their  high commission fees.  Additionally there are allegation of:
*False or misleading claims about the appreciation of coins,
* Claims about misstatement of value, grading, and certification.

IF YOU BELIEVE YOU HAVE BEEN DECEIVED IN A GOLD COIN TRANSACTION, CALL 973 479 5515 FOR A FREE CONSULTATION

New Jersey Bait and Switch Claims 

Legal Definitions 
Section 13:45A-26A.4 – Bait and switch
(a) The following motor vehicle advertising practices constitute “bait and switch” and are prohibited and unlawful:
1. The advertisement of a motor vehicle as part of a plan or scheme not to sell or lease it or not to sell or lease it at the advertised price.
2. Without limiting other means of proof, the following shall be prima facie evidence of a plan or scheme not to sell or lease a motor vehicle as advertised or not to sell or lease it at the advertised price:
i. Refusal to show, display, sell, or lease the advertised motor vehicle in accordance with the terms of the advertisement, unless the vehicle has been actually sold or leased during the period of publication; in that case, the advertiser shall retain records of that sale or lease for 180 days following the date of the transaction, and shall make them available for inspection by the Division of Consumer Affairs.
ii. Accepting a deposit for an advertised motor vehicle, then switching the purchaser to a higher-priced motor vehicle, except when the purchaser has initiated the switch as evidenced by a writing to that effect signed by the purchaser.
iii. The failure to make delivery of an advertised motor vehicle, then switching the purchaser to a higher-priced motor vehicle; except when the purchaser has initiated the switch as evidenced by a writing to that effect signed by the purchaser.

Sources and Related Pages 

FTC administrative decisions establishing penalty offenses concerning bait and switch sales practices:

• Steven Rizzi, 85 F.T.C. 274 (1975).
• Wilbanks Carpet Specialists, Inc., 84 F.T.C. 510 (1974).
• S. States Distrib. Co., 83 F.T.C. 1126 (1973).
• Seekonk Freezer Meats, Inc., 82 F.T.C. 1025 (1973).
• Leon A. Tashof, 74 F.T.C. 1361 (1968), aff’d, 437 F.2d 707 (D.C. Cir. 1970).
• Holiday Carpets, Inc., 76 F.T.C. 673 (1969).
• Lawrence TV Corp., 73 F.T.C. 687 (1968).
• Consumers Prods. of Am., Inc., 72 F.T.C. 533 (1967), aff’d, 400 F.2d 930 (3d Cir. 1968).
• Royal Constr. Co., 71 F.T.C. 762 (1967).
• James R. Boarman, 70 F.T.C. 1463 (1966).
• Aluminum Indus., Inc., 67 F.T.C. 1 (1965).
• Lifetime, Inc., 59 F.T.C. 1231 (1961).
• Better Living, Inc., 54 F.T.C. 648 (1957), aff’d, 259 F.2d 271 (3d Cir. 1958).

• Barbara E. Martin, 52 F.T.C. 250, 264 (1955).

Call for a Free Consultation on Your Bait and Switch Claim