In the Matter of the Complaint Against CHEMGLO, INCORPORATED P. O. Box 386 at Allendale, NJ 07401-0386 and DAVID GLASSMAN 304 Merrywood Drive at Wyckoff, NJ 07481-1612 P.S. Docket No. 22/59; 05/27/86 Cohen, James A. APPEARANCE FOR COMPLAINANT: H. Richard Hefner, Esq. Walter P. Kenney, Jr., Esq. Consumer Protection Division Law Department United States Postal Service Washington, DC 20260-lll2 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT: Wallace Musoff, Esq. 750 Third Avenue Suite 2400 New York, NY l0017-2703
On May 5, l986, Complainant filed a Petition alleging that Respondents have breached the terms of a Consent Agreement executed on August 15, l985, by David Glassman, individually and as president and a director of Chemglo, Incorporated. In the Petition, Complainant contends that Respondents have breached the terms of the Consent Agreement by resuming the distribution of solicitations in the guise of bills, invoices or statements of account due which falsely represent that the amount of money shown on the solicitation is due and owing to Respondents for merchandise ordered by the addressee. The names and addresses under which Complainant alleges Respondents have resumed the issuance of such solicitations and against which Complainant seeks the issuance of orders are: CHEMGLO, INC., P. O. Box 386, Allendale, NJ 07401-0386 and LITECHEM INC., P. O. Box 404, Ramsey, NJ 07446-0404.
On May 6, l986, an Interim Detention Order as provided in paragraph 5 of the Consent Agreement was issued against Respondents. The Interim Detention Order granted Respondents a period of ten days in which to file a reply to the Petition. On May 15, l986, Respondents filed a reply in which they neither admitted nor denied the allegations of the Petition, but agreed to the issuance of the orders sought in the Petition.
Under the terms of the Consent Agreement, Respondents agreed to permanently discontinue and not resume "directly or indirectly, under any name or names, or through any corporate or other device" the distribution of solicitations in the guise of invoices containing false representations. A Cease and Desist Order was issued pursuant to the terms of the Consent Agreement which directed Respondents to discontinue the issuance of such solicitations. The allegations of the Petition, which are supported by the attachments thereto, make a prima facie showing that Respondents have breached the terms of the Consent Agreement and the Cease and Desist Order in the manner alleged in the Petition. Based on the prima facie showing made in the Petition and Respondents' consent to the issuance of the orders sought in the Petition, such orders are issued with this decision.