Miami-Dade Legislative Item
File Number: 151222
Printable PDF Format Download Adobe Reader  Clerk's Official Copy   

File Number: 151222 File Type: Ordinance Status: Adopted
Version: 0 Reference: 15-113 Control: Board of County Commissioners
File Name: DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES Introduced: 5/22/2015
Requester: NONE Cost: Final Action: 10/6/2015
Agenda Date: 10/6/2015 Agenda Item Number: 7L
Notes: Title: ORDINANCE RELATING TO UNIFORM TRADE STANDARDS; AMENDING CHAPTER 8A, ARTICLE III OF THE CODE OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR PROHIBITIONS AGAINST ADVERTISING THE USE OR BENEFIT OF GOODS OR SERVICES THAT MISLEAD OR DECEIVE THE PUBLIC; MODIFYING PROVISIONS RELATING TO DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES TO INCLUDE REPRESENTATIONS THAT FAIL TO REVEAL MATERIAL FACTS, AND NON-DELIVERY OR DELIVERY OF MATERIALLY DIFFERENT GOODS OR SERVICES THAN THOSE ORDERED OR SOLD; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE
Indexes: CONSUMER PROTECTION
Sponsors: Jean Monestime, Prime Sponsor
Sunset Provision: No Effective Date: Expiration Date:
Registered Lobbyist: None Listed


Legislative History

Acting Body Date Agenda Item Action Sent To Due Date Returned Pass/Fail

Board of County Commissioners 10/6/2015 7L Adopted P
REPORT: County Attorney Abigail Price-Williams read the foregoing proposed ordinance into the record. Commissioner Moss asked the County Attorney’s Office if this item would cover the advertisement heard on the radio. Assistant County Attorney Joni A. Mosley stated it does not cover the media outlet airing the advertisement, but it would cover the individual selling the product. Hearing no further comments or questions, the Board proceeded to vote on the foregoing proposed ordinance, as presented.

County Attorney 8/31/2015 Assigned Joni A. Mosely

Economic Prosperity Committee 8/27/2015 1G3 Forwarded to BCC with a favorable recommendation P
REPORT: Assistant County Attorney Terrence Smith read the foregoing proposed ordinance into the record. Chairman Suarez opened the public hearing, and upon seeing no one appear, closed the public hearing. Commissioner Moss asked if the foregoing proposed ordinance was applicable to media television. Assistant County Attorney Cynthia Johnson-Stacks requested additional time to research whether the intent of the proposed item was to include television advertisements as well. Commissioner Moss voiced his concerns regarding the rushed communication and sometimes incomprehensible narration of disclaimers on televised commercials. Assistant County Attorney Terrence Smith directed the Committee members attention to Section 1 of the foregoing proposed ordinance, and read Section 8A-108 regarding “Misleading advertisements prohibited” into the record. Assistant County Attorney Cynthia Johnson-Stacks stated that she believed the foregoing item was not applicable to advertisements on television based on an exclusion to the article which read: “This article does not apply to any publisher of a newspaper, magazine or other publications, or the owner or operator of a radio or television station, or any other owner or operator of a media primarily devoted to advertising, who publishes, broadcasts, or otherwise disseminates an advertisement in good faith without knowledge of its false, deceptive or misleading character.” Commissioner Moss inquired about the application, target and consequences of the foregoing proposed ordinance. Assistant County Attorney Terrence Smith explained that the foregoing item would apply to the individual or entity actually placing the advertisement in the newspaper but not the media outlet. Discussion ensued between Commissioner Moss and Mr. Smith regarding which party would be responsible or held accountable for a deceptive advertisement. Commissioner Sosa recognized the good intent of the foregoing proposed ordinance but expressed concerns regarding its implementation and regulation. Chairman Suarez stated that he was willing to withdraw his “second” for the foregoing proposed item and suggested deferring the matter until the prime sponsor; Board of County Commission (BCC) Chairman Monestime was present to address the concerns of the Committee members. Commissioner Sosa commented that while it was not her intent to oppose the proposed ordinance, she would support a deferral to allow staff additional time to develop a more detailed plan specifically related to the retention of experts to determine whether an entity was in violation of the terms of the proposed item. Discussion ensued among the Committee members about what motion was being voted upon. Commissioner Barreiro recommended forwarding the foregoing proposed ordinance to the Board of County Commission (BCC) without a recommendation. Commissioner Sosa argued that there were many unanswered questions and ambiguous areas in the matter. Commissioner Edmonson questioned if there was existing legislation that would permit an entity to be sued for engaging in false advertising. Assistant County Attorney Cynthia Johnson-Stacks noted that there were Federal and County agencies responsible for regulating advertising content but admitted that she was uncertain as to whether there were any provisions in place that would allow an individual to exercise a private right of action against an entity for false claims and damages. Discussion ensued between Commissioner Edmonson and Ms. Johnson-Smith regarding existing regulations. Commissioner Sosa voiced her opposition to, and concerns about, the County assuming responsibility for monitoring and regulating advertisements particularly in light of the fact that there were other entities already doing so. She argued that the County lacked the man power and expertise needed to properly regulate and determine violations. Commissioner Moss asked for clarification regarding whether the foregoing proposed ordinance simply sought to expand and improve existing policy and legislation, specifically articles (E) and (L) of Section 8A-113 “Deceptive trade practices.” Assistant County Attorney Cynthia Johnson-Stacks confirmed that there was legislation currently in place regarding deceptive advertising practices and that the proposed item was intended to expand on these existing laws. Commissioner Sosa read into the record an excerpt from the Federal guidelines about the broadcasters’ responsibility to protect the community and prevent deceptive advertising. Chairman Suarez added that the Lanham Act allowed for private rights of action and restated his earlier recommendation to defer the foregoing proposed ordinance as a courtesy to BCC Chairman Monestime. Following discussion among the Committee members about the voting options available to them,, the Committee proceeded to vote on the foregoing proposed ordinance, as presented. Chairman Suarez noted that he shared many of the concerns expressed by his colleagues about the ordinance but voted in favor of the item as a courtesy to BCC Chairman Monestime.

Economic Prosperity Committee 7/9/2015 1G2 Carried over due to lack of a quorum
REPORT: The foregoing proposed ordinance was carried over due to the loss of a quorum by the Economic Prosperity Committee.

Board of County Commissioners 6/2/2015 Tentatively scheduled for a public hearing Economic Prosperity Committee 7/9/2015

Board of County Commissioners 6/2/2015 4D Adopted on first reading 7/9/2015 P
REPORT: The foregoing proposed ordinance was adopted on first reading and scheduled for a public hearing before the Economic Prosperity Committee on July 9, 2015.

County Attorney 5/22/2015 Referred Economic Prosperity Committee 7/9/2015

County Attorney 5/22/2015 Assigned Gerald K. Sanchez 5/22/2015

Legislative Text


TITLE
ORDINANCE RELATING TO UNIFORM TRADE STANDARDS; AMENDING CHAPTER 8A, ARTICLE III OF THE CODE OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR PROHIBITIONS AGAINST ADVERTISING THE USE OR BENEFIT OF GOODS OR SERVICES THAT MISLEAD OR DECEIVE THE PUBLIC; MODIFYING PROVISIONS RELATING TO DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES TO INCLUDE REPRESENTATIONS THAT FAIL TO REVEAL MATERIAL FACTS, AND NON-DELIVERY OR DELIVERY OF MATERIALLY DIFFERENT GOODS OR SERVICES THAN THOSE ORDERED OR SOLD; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE

BODY
WHEREAS, unfair and deceptive trade practices are generally targeted to disadvantaged or vulnerable populations, within industries that have little or ineffective oversight; and
WHEREAS, the decision to purchase expensive goods and/or services can be a confusing and complicated event with life-long ramifications; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds that promoting a thorough understanding of the benefits, uses and limitations of these types of goods and services through fair and honest disclosures results in transparency, sound decision making and fairness in the marketplace; and
WHEREAS, Miami-Dade County has a long history of ensuring the protection of its residents against dishonest, deceptive and predatory practices in the County by adopting uniform trade standards as far back as 1968; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners desires to provide for the public health, safety and welfare of the people of Miami-Dade County by providing enhanced protections to prevent unfair and deceptive trade practices,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Chapter 8A, Article III of the Code of Miami-Dade County, Florida, is hereby amended to read as follows:1
Chapter 8A. BUSINESS REGULATIONS
* * *
ARTICLE III. UNIFORM TRADE STANDARDS
* * *
Sec. 8A-108. Misleading advertisements prohibited.

(a) It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation or association, or any employee thereof with intent directly or indirectly to dispose of real or personal property or to perform services, professional or otherwise, or any thing of any nature whatsoever, or to induce the public to enter into any obligation relating thereto, to make or disseminate or cause to be made or disseminated before the public in this County, in any newspaper or other publication, or any advertising device, or by public outcry or proclamation, or by any other manner or means whatever, any assertion, representation or statement of fact, concerning such real or personal property or services, professional or otherwise, or concerning any circumstances or matter of fact connected with the proposed performance or disposition thereof, which is untrue or misleading and which is known, or which by the exercise of reasonable care should be known, to be untrue or misleading.
(b) It shall be unlawful by means of exaggerated variations in the comparative size, location or position of letters, figures or other markings or characters on any price tag, sign, posters, notice, display or advertisement or other public representation of any nature whatsoever, to mislead or deceive, or to attempt to mislead or deceive the public, as to the true nature, price, quantity, quality, brand, >>use, benefit<< or character of any goods, wares, merchandise, services, facilities, or accommodations, or as to the nature of, or the reason, if any is offered, for the sale or offering for sale, so being made to the public.

* * *

Sec. 8A-113. Deceptive trade practices.

A person engages in a deceptive trade practice when, in the course of his >>or her<< business, vocation, or occupation, he >>or she<<:

(a) Passes off goods or services as those of another;

(b) Causes likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding as to the source, sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods or services;

(c) Causes likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding as to affiliation, connection, or association with, or certification by another;

(d) Uses deceptive representations or designations of geographic origin in connection with goods or services;


(e) >>Makes<<[[Represents]]>>representations<< that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities >>:(1)<< that they do not have [[or]] >>; (2) that fail to reveal material facts in light of such representations; or (3)<< that a person has a sponsorship, approval, status, affiliation, or connection that he >>or she<< does not have;

(f) Represents that goods are original or new if they are deteriorated, altered, reconditioned, reclaimed, used of secondhand;

(g) Represents that goods or services are of a particular standard, quality, or grade, or that goods are of a particular style or model, if they are of another;

(h) Disparages the goods, services or business of another by false or misleading representation of fact;

(i) Advertises goods or services with intent not to sell them as advertised;

(j) Advertises goods or services with intent not to supply reasonably expectable public demand, unless the advertisement discloses a limitation of quantity;

(k) Makes false or misleading statements of fact concerning the reasons for, existence of or amounts of price reductions[[.]]>>;<<

>>(l) Takes consideration for goods or services without delivering such goods or performing such services, or delivers goods or provides services materially different from those ordered or sold;<<

[[(l)]]>>(m)<< Sells, causes to have sold, or promotes the sale of any residential or commercial habitable structure, located in the incorporated or unincorporated areas of Miami-Dade County, the permit for which was applied for after August 24, 1992 and prior to September 1, 1994, without including in the contract for such sale, or in a rider to such contract, and in all pamphlets, fliers, and marketing brochures used to promote the sale of such structures, the following disclosure in not less than ten-point bold-face type:


* * *

Section 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or provision of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall not be affected by such invalidity.
Section 3. It is the intention of the Board of County Commissioners, and it is hereby ordained that the provisions of this ordinance, including any sunset provision, shall become and be made a part of the Code of Miami-Dade County, Florida. The sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such intention, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or other appropriate word.
Section 4. This ordinance shall become effective ten (10) days after the date of enactment unless vetoed by the Mayor, and if vetoed, shall become effective only upon an override by this Board.

1 Words stricken through and/or [[double bracketed]] shall be deleted. Words underscored and/or >>double arrowed<< constitute the amendment proposed. Remaining provisions are now in effect and remain unchanged.



Home  |   Agendas  |   Minutes  |   Legislative Search  |   Lobbyist Registration  |   Legislative Reports
2024 BCC Meeting Calendar  |   Miami-Dade County Code of Ordinances   |   ADA Notice  |  

Home  |  Using Our Site  |  About Phone Directory  |  Privacy  |  Disclaimer

E-mail your comments, questions and suggestions to Webmaster  

Web Site � 2024 Miami-Dade County.
All rights reserved.