जनता का आदमी

(Scott D. Rogers)

Just in time for the Fourth of July comes some news that might put a damper on your celebrations: A new study says exploding fireworks create toxic air pollution that could be harmful to your health. Happy Independence Day, everyone.

A study by federal scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration published in the journal Atmospheric Environment says the thousands of Fourth of July firework celebrations we set off around the country is contributing to air pollution, releasing tiny particles called particulates into the atmosphere.

Those particulates can affect your health because they travel into your respiratory tract and enter the lungs. Other particulate matter includes dust, dirt, soot smoke and liquid droplets, notes USA Today. They’re measured in micrometers, which is one-millionth of a meter.

In this study, particulates from fireworks were 2.5 micrometers in size. Whether you’re breathing them in often or only in the short-term, the particulates are linked to health effects like coughing, wheezing, shortness of breath, asthma attacks and even heart attack and stroke. It could contribute to premature death in people with heart or lung disease, the study says.

When it comes to the Fourth of July, the air will be at its most particulate-laden between 9 and 10 p.m. — which makes sense as that’s when it gets dark in the summer and many cities around the nation shoot off their fireworks. By noon on July 5, levels drop back down.

“These results will help improve air quality predictions, which currently don’t account for fireworks as a source of air pollution,” said Dian Seidel, NOAA scientist and study lead author. “The study is also another wake up call for those who may be particularly sensitive to the effects of fine particulate matter.”

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(ian.poley)

Can you take a cab on a cross-state ride? Sure. But you better be able to pay for it when you reach your destination, or you could face jail. One New York man found that out the hard way, after police say he didn’t have the money to pay his cab driver after a 700-mile journey.

Police in Pennsylvania say a Brooklyn man and his children took a cab from Philadelphia to Uniontown, reports the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, so he could surprise his fiancée.

Instead, his cab driver called the police to report that his passenger refused to pay after the 304-mile journey. According to police, the passenger said he’d taken the trip to surprise his loved one, but didn’t have the fare when it came time to settle up.

“I asked [the passenger] to pay the driver for the fare, and he stated he did not have the money and that his credit card was maxed out for the day,” the patrolman on duty said in police records.

Because no one else had the money to pay up, the man was taken into custody and charged with theft of services.

Again, if you’re planning on a long trip, make sure you’ve got the money to pay for it or your destination could be a jail cell.

Brooklyn man’s cross-state taxi ride leads straight to jail in Uniontown [Pittsburgh Tribune-Review]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(Earth2Kim)

More than a year after the Federal Trade Commission settled charges with a massive debt collection operation that extorted payments from consumer using false threats, those affected by the deceptive practices are finally seeing a bit of restitution in the form of checks totaling $4 million.

The FTC announced today that it is in the process of returning $4 million to the victims of Asset Capital and Management Group’s illegal debt collection operation.

Last May, Asset Capital and Management Group settled FTC charges that it used a sprawling network of intertwined companies and dozens of fictitious names to illegally extract payments from consumers for credit card debt that it had purchased from creditors.

According to the FTC’s complaint [PDF], the company posed as process servers in calls to consumers and third parties, falsely threatened consumers with lawsuits, wage garnishment, seizure of their property, and arrest, and disclosed debts to consumers’ employers, colleagues, and family members.

In addition to paying $4 million in restitution, the company was banned from the debt collection industry.

People who receive checks from the FTC – through Analytics Consulting LLC – are asked to deposit or cash them within 60 days.

Consumers who receive checks and have questions can contact Analytics at 1-855-312-3324. More information about the FTC’s refund program is available on the FTC’s website.

FTC Returns Almost $4 Million to Consumers in Debt Collection Scam [Federal Trade Commission]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(afagen)

Though Apple’s alleged co-conspirators have long since settled and gone about the process of making good for the price-fixing they did not legally admit to committing, the elecronics company had held out in its fight to clear its name, taking the case to a federal appeals court late last year. It seems the electronics company will have to give up that battle, after the court upheld a 2013 decision that found Apple liable for conspiring with publishers to raise the price of e-books.

Apple is expected to pay more than $450 million — much of that to consumers by way of refunds, with the rest going toward fees and other fines, reports the Wall Street Journal.

Quick background for those unfamiliar: In 2012, the Dept. of Justice sued Apple and many of the nation’s largest book publishing companies for allegedly conspiring to set high prices on the e-book market. Part of Apple’s argument before the federal appeals court in December was that it was just trying to snap the stranglehold Amazon had on the e-book market, but that apparently didn’t convince the court.

In a 2-1 ruling by the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan [PDF], the judges sided with the lower court’s decision to hold Apple to the November agreement with private plaintiffs and 33 states that joined the Justice Department’s 2012 lawsuit.

“We conclude that the district court correctly decided that Apple orchestrated a conspiracy among the publishers to raise e-book prices,” wrote Second Circuit Judge Debra Ann Livingston. The conspiracy “unreasonably restrained trade” in violation of the Sherman Act, the federal antitrust law, the judge wrote.

Prosecutors had argued that Apple and publishers had ganged up to fight Amazon’s aggressive discounts by agreeing to use an agency model of pricing, wherein the publisher sets the price of books and the retailer gets a cut. Under the alleged agreement, if another retailer was selling an e-book for a lower price, the publisher would have to match that price in Apple’s store.

E-mails from Apple executives, including company co-founder Steve Jobs, were used against the iPhone maker in court to demonstrate that the goal of agency pricing was to increase what people paid for e-books.

“Throw in with Apple and see if we can all make a go of this to create a real mainstream e-books market at $12.99 and $14.99,” wrote Jobs in one message to News Corp, the parent company of HarperCollins.

The publishers had the leverage they’d need to fight Amazon with this new model, Justice Department lawyers said, and prices on many e-books increased immediately. Apple’s legal team had said the company didn’t realize it was leading the publishers’ charge against Amazon.

But the Second Circuit majority said evidence showed Apple knew exactly what it was doing.

“Apple understood that its proposed contracts were attractive to the publisher defendants only if they collectively shifted their relationships with Amazon to an agency model — which Apple knew would result in consumers facing higher e-book prices,” Judge Livingston wrote in a decision joined by Judge Raymond J. Lohier Jr.

Apple had no immediate comment to the WSJ. It can now either ask the Second Circuit to hear the case or ask the U.S. Supreme Court to take it up.

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(Dendroica cerulea)

While flying is often the easiest and quickest way for travelers to get from one place to another, the nearly one million residents in Delaware will have to find a different mode of transportation in their home state — unless they want to fly privately. That’s because the state’s lone commercial airline servicer quietly exited the market last week.

Forbes reports that Frontier Airlines flew relatively under the radar last week when it discreetly pulled the plug on its service from Wilmington’s New Castle Airport, citing a lack of profit.

The company – which began service at the airport just two years ago – initially announced in April that it would discontinue flights to and from the airport on a seasonal basis.

The Denver-based airline’s move means that Delaware is the only state in the U.S. that doesn’t have direct commercial airline service.

A number of airlines – including United, Delta and U.S. Airways – have attempted to provide flights at the airport since the 1960s, but all eventually dropped their service.

According to Forbes, New Castle Airport won’t be sitting vacant amidst Frontier’s departure. The airport sees a healthy dose of private air travel.

Of course, residents of Delaware aren’t exactly being shut out of air travel. The city of Wilmington is less than 70 miles away from two major airports: Philadelphia Intentional Airport (28 miles) and Baltimore-Washington International Airport (65 miles).

Additionally, the city is teeming with Amtrak options, as it serves as a thoroughfare between Washington D.C. and New York and other places, Forbes reports.

Delaware, Key To Corporations, Is Now The Only U.S. State Without Air Service [Forbes]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(Eric Norris)

Back in March, federal regulators teamed up with their Canadian counterparts to crack down on auto dealers’ deceptive, fraudulent practices. While that operation culminated in six enforcement actions resulting in more than $2.6 million in judgments and consumer refunds, that wasn’t enough for the Federal Trade Commission, as the agency has now charged two Las Vegas auto dealers with similarly misleading practices.

The FTC announced this week that two auto dealers in Las Vegas have agreed to settle charges they used deceptive ads to promote the sale or leasing of their vehicles, including advertising heavily discounted prices that were not actually available to customers.

According to the complaints against TC Dealership (doing business as Planet Hyundai [PDF]) and JS Auotworld, Inc. (doing business as Planet Nissan [PDF]) the companies regularly ran ads that misrepresented the purchase price or leasing offers of their vehicles and the amount due at signing.

Since about 2014, Planet Hyundai has allegedly misled customers by prominently advertising a vehicle price for “$0 DOWN AVAILABLE.” But that deal wasn’t actually obtainable for many prospective buyers, as the fine print for the ad noted that customers must turn in a vehicle with a trade-in value of at least $2,500.

In another instance, the company promoted offers for vehicles as “50% OFF” in newspaper ads. The FTC charges that the deal wasn’t actually available to consumers unless they met a very specific set of requirements noted in the “minuscule” print at the bottom of the advertisement.

“A consumer can qualify for the advertised prices only if the consumer meets certain qualifications for incentives, rebates, or discounts, such as being a recent college graduate, being a member of the military, owning a currently registered Hyundai, or trading in a qualifying vehicle,” the complaint states.

Additionally, the FTC says the dealership failed to disclose other information in its ads such as whether or not a security deposit was required.

In the case of Planet Nissan, the FTC alleges the dealership prominently showcased ads of “PURCHASE! NOT A LEASE!” when, in fact, the vehicles shown were only available through leases.

Another allegedly deceptive ad includes the “NOW” pricing of vehicles. According to the FTC, the newspaper ads featured images depicting cars available at discounts with a prominent “NOW” price.

For example, one ad for a 2015 Nissan Versa shows the “WAS” price of $12,888 cut to “NOW” $9,977. While that would certainly be a great deal, the FTC says that the fine print in the ad suggests buyers must receive both a military and college discount to get the vehicle for the discounted price.

The owners of both Planet Nissan and Planet Hyundai have agreed to settle the FTC charges of deceptive advertising.

Under proposed consent orders, the dealerships are prohibited from misrepresenting the cost to purchase or lease a vehicle and are required to comply with the Consumer Leasing Act and Regulation M and the Truth in Lending Act and Regulation Z.

These cases are part of the Commission’s continuing efforts to protect consumers in the auto marketplace. The FTC provides a variety of resources for consumers buying or leasing a vehicle, including Are Car Ads Taking You For A Ride?

Two Las Vegas Auto Dealers Settle FTC Charges They Deceptively Advertised the Cost of Their Cars [Federal Trade Commission]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

The thing about bacon is, once you’ve put it on one thing, everyone expects you to dump it all over everything else. Which is just fine with Wendy’s, as the chain is extending the Baconator brand from its burgers to its new bacon-and-cheese fries.

The menu item is a limited time offer, but in the short time it’ll be available, the $1.99 Baconator Fries don’t skimp on toppings: Wendy’s natural-cut fries are drizzled with warm cheddar sauce and topped with bacon, before shredded cheddar is added as the cheesy cherry on top.

Wendy’s knows that people like bacon, simply put, citing bacon sales at an all-time high and the 50 or so bacon festivals planned for 2015 in its announcement. But Wendy’s wants customers to know its bacon is different from all the other bacon out there, noting that the chain cooks its bacon fresh in restaurants every day.

“Others use factory cooked bacon and reheat it in a microwave because it’s easier, but that just isn’t the Wendy’s way,” said Kurt Kane, Wendy’s chief concept officer in a press release. “When you walk into a Wendy’s and smell the bacon cooking, then you know we treat it with the respect that bacon lovers deserve.”

Or just the respect bacon deserves in general. Because mmm, bacon.

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(The Joy Of The Mundane)

When I first started driving, I remember being told to change my car’s oil every 3,000 miles. More than a dozen years later – and after several advancements in vehicle production – most cars can go 5,000 miles to 10,000 miles before they need a fresh dose of oil. But according to a new analysis from Consumer Reports, those mileage markers may be a bit too optimistic, as many new cars actually require additional oil between changes – and that’s not really acceptable.

According to a new in-depth analysis from our colleagues at Consumer Reports – which appears in the August issue of the magazine – several automakers have built engines that excessively burn oil between changes, requiring the owners of nearly 1.5 million vehicles to add a quart of oil to their engines as often as every month.

The CR “Thirsty 30″ list of oil-guzzling models is based on 498,900 vehicles from the 2010 to 2014 model years, many of which are still under their powertrain warranty.

Topping the list are several Audi, BMW and Subaru models including the Audi A3, A4, A5, A6, and Q5; BMW 5, 6, and 7 Series, and X5; and Subaru Forester, Impreza, Legacy, and Outback.

“While it’s normal for cars to burn a little oil as they age toward 100,000 miles and beyond, we believe that for a late-model car to burn a quart or more of oil between changes is unacceptable,” Mark Rechtin, Consumer Reports’ Cars Content Development Team Leader said. “It’s also our strong opinion that any engine that burns oil between changes should be repaired under the powertrain warranty.”

The analysis found that in the worst case scenario, owners of the BMW 5 Series with V8 engines were 27 times more likely to suffer excessive oil consumption as owners of an average vehicle.

When asked about the oil-guzzling nature of some of their vehicles Audi, BMW and Subaru said it was a natural part of a car’s operation.

In fact, Subaru considers a quart burned every 1,000 to 1,200 miles to be acceptable, while BMW and Audi consider one quart every 600 to 700 miles to be reasonable.

According to CR, if a driver has to add a quart of oil every month, that could add up to seven to nine quarts of oil between changes. And all that oil, well, it costs a pretty penny.

While such excessive oil consumption is worrying and taxing on an owner’s wallet, CR didn’t find there to be any directly correlated engine problems with the guzzling.

Still, according to the data, if a car burns oil early in its use, it will burn even more as it ages.

Of course, not all cars suffer from exorbitant oil use. CR’s analysis found that 98% of 2010-2014 cars don’t require extra engine oil between changes.

Consumer Reports Reveals: ‘Thirsty 30′ List of Oil-Guzzling Late-Model Cars [Consumer Reports]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

Six months after direct-sales jewelry company Lia Sophia said it was shutting down, one of its former sales representatives has been joined by a customer in a lawsuit against the company, claiming it refuses to honor its lifetime guarantee on purchases, even while it’s continued to stay alive through online sales.

Until the company’s announcement in December 2014 that it was closing up shop, the business worked much like Avon or Tupperware: Sales representatives known as “advisers” would peddle jewelry directly to customers at parties and gatherings.

Those customers were given a lifetime replacement guarantee on purchases that allowed them to exchange their jewelry if it ever broke, or provide a certificate redeemable for comparable value. That perk had allowed Lia Sophia to sell its wares for more than the market would usually demand, the lawsuit says.

But in a lawsuit seeking class-action status filed this month in Chicago’s federal district court, one of its former advisers and a customer claim that Lia Sophia refuses to honor that lifetime guarantee on purchases, even while it has continued to sell jewelry online, reports the Chicago Tribune.

Initially, Lia Sophia had said it would keep the online store open through February to clear out remaining merchandise, but it’s June and the “outlet” site still features jewelry for sale.

The company said in December after announcing it was closing up shop that all replacement certificates would expire Dec. 28, 2014. But when customers complained on Facebook, Lia Sophia said those guarantees were no longer valid, according to the suit.

It also told customers that the online store still remained because demand was so strong, that it was trying to figure out other ways to sell its jewelry, the lawsuit says.

The lawsuit alleges breach of contract, violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act, fraud and unjust enrichment. The fact that it’s still peddling products online contradicts “repeated statements and promises” Lia Sophia made to its sales advisers that it wouldn’t ever cut them out of the deal and sell straight to customers, the lawsuit says, alleging that Lia Sophia’s owners knew for months before the announcement in December that they were going to cease operations.

“Yet, Lia Sophia induced its sales advisors to continue to sell and recruit, and to purchase additional products and supplies from Lia Sophia, despite knowing that Lia Sophia would not be around for its sales advisors to ever recover on those purchases and recruitments,” the complaint says. “Similarly, Lia Sophia continued to sell jewelry to customers with its lifetime guarantee, all the while knowing it was going to close its business and attempt to extinguish the guarantee.”

Lia Sophia responded to the lawsuit in a statement, saying: “We feel confident that this complaint is without merit. Beyond that, we are not commenting further.”

Lawsuit against Lia Sophia alleges broken promises [Chicago Tribune]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(Felicia Violi)

If today feels like a really long day, that’s because it is. There’s going to be a leap second this evening, making Tuesday 24 hours and one second long. The last time this happened, in 2012, a lot of computers took issue with time going all wonky and systems worldwide crashed as a result. This time around, the big businesses promise they’ve learned their lesson, and we should be able to look forward to business as normal.

The leap second is basically like a micro version of the leap year: the actual rotation of the Earth slows down in tiny increments over time. Therefore, time is not quite synced up with the way in which we mortals measure it, and so every so often we have to fudge the numbers a tiny fraction of a bit to catch up. Thus, the leap second.

However, the extra second isn’t as predictable as the clockwork arrival of February 29, and so computer systems — new and old — are not necessarily designed with it in mind. The last time a leap second arrived, in 2012, the resulting mess temporarily took down a number of sites and services, including Reddit, Amazon’s (massive, widely-used) web hosting services, and Qantas Airways. There were also ripples in the Australian financial markets, which were open at the time.

Google avoided trouble in 2012 by forcing their systems to add a tiny, tiny fraction of extra time onto every other second in the day. This year, Amazon is basically taking the same tactic.

Many of the concerns this time around have to do with computer-driven stock-trading markets. The 2012 leap second was over a weekend, but today’s is the middle of a bustling work-week. As Bloomberg points out, trading basically never stops and markets worldwide will be active — the major cities of the Asia-Pacific region are all supposed to come online right when the leap second happens.

To make sure nothing gets lost in the shuffle, many trading firms and markets are either shutting down five minutes early, or putting a +/- 5 minute “pause” around the key hour. And in Japan, South Korea, and Australia, trading will begin after the leap second.

So is everyone prepared this time around? Given the way the world works, probably not. A representative for the U.S. Naval Observatory told Bloomberg that probably about 10% of large-scale computer systems will experience a hiccup of some kind.

In the U.S., the leap second will take place around 8:00 p.m. on the East Coast (5:00 p.m. Pacific).

We Should Drop The Leap Second Before it Causes Real Damage [Wired]
With 61 Seconds in a Minute, Markets Brace for Trouble [Bloomberg]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(Steve)

Craving a little flavor with your morning cup of hot java? If your breakfast joint of choice is McDonald’s, then you likely know that just isn’t an option. Until now – but only in one select area.

The Christian Science Monitor reports that McDonald’s is now offering caramel, hazelnut and French vanilla McCafé hot coffees in at least one market.

While a spokesperson for the company confirms that the piping hot coffees are being promoted as a local menu item in at least one area of the country, she didn’t specify which area or whether the drinks would be expanded nationally.

McDonald’s has served flavored ice McCafé coffees since 2007, but this is the first time a hot option has ever appeared on the menu. Additionally, the company sells bags of French vanilla and Hazelnut coffee at local retailers.

McDonald’s to expand flavored coffee sales to restaurants, but not nationwide (yet) [The Christian Science Monitor]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(Boss Meg)

Say goodbye to that free checked bag when flying on JetBlue: The company announced last November that it was going to start charging passengers who fly with checked bags at some point, and that point is today.

Customers buying tickets on the airline’s lowest tier of fares will have to pay $20 during online check-in or $25 at the ticket counter — one way. If you want to bring that bag home, it’ll be another fee.

The move leaves Southwest Airlines as the sole remaining carrier that lets all travelers check a bag for free.

If you don’t want to pay a bag fee, customers can upgrade from the lowest “Blue” fare bucket to a “Blue Plus” level that will usually cost about $15 more than the base ticket price.

Investors have been all about this change, though many consumers are less than pleased to see the airline give sway to the siren song of cold, green cash. But JetBlue says many travelers don’t check bags as often as they did in the past anyway.

“Half of the customers don’t even check bags,” Marty St. George, JetBlue’s executive vice president for commercial and planning told Reuters. “In effect what’s happening is, the customers who aren’t checking bags are paying for the customers who do.”

He says this new approach allows customers to pay only for what they need, pointing to the “Blue Flex” fare level as an example: it’s about $100 more than the one-way base fare and gives customers two free checked bags and no fees for changes or cancellations.

And besides, this is all about the customer anyway, St. George tells the Associated Press. JetBlue is doing this for you! Which means the airline says it’s investing in new seats and TVs with some of the money it’ll get from the bag fees.

“Some of these changes are going to help pay for what’s the biggest product upgrade JetBlue has had in the history of the company,” he told the AP.

If you’ve already booked a JetBlue flight before today, these changes won’t apply to you, only to new reservations.

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

By now we’re well aware that McDonald’s has struggled to attract and keep new customers in recent years, leading to an all-out overhaul of the fast-food powerhouse. The Golden Arches’ trouble is perhaps most evident this week, as the company clocked in dead last among competition in the American Customer Satisfaction Index, yet again.

The ACSI recently unveiled its annual Full-Service Limited-Service Restaurant ratings [PDF], which compares a dozen name-brand burger, sandwich, pizza, and coffee chains, as well as sit-down dining establishments.

For the sixth year in a row, and the 19th time in 20 surveys, the iconic fast food restaurant brought up the rear with a score of 67 — three points below its score last year, and 19 points below new leader Chick-fil-A.

Speaking of Chick-fil-A, the company had a strong showing in its debut in the ACSI ratings, tallying a rating of 86,  the highest ever score by a company in the quick-service category.

The restaurant wasn’t the only first-timer to the report to have an impressive showing: Chipotle ranked second with a score of 83, while Panera came in third with a score of 80.

“The fast casual segment of quick service restaurants is nicely situated for the confluence of changing consumer tastes and a rebounding economy,” ACSI Director David VanAmburg said in a statement. “Consumers have a bit more money in their pockets, but are still pressed for time. Fast casual outlets offer higher-quality ingredients, freshness and fast service – all at a reasonable price.”

Other newbies, Arby’s and Jack In The Box, didn’t benefit quite as well as their fellow rookies, scoring 74 and 72, respectively.

Last year’s leaders, Papa John’s and Pizza Hut, both shed several points this year, each scoring 78 points.

In fact, nearly all of the restaurants named in the survey saw a drop from their previous rating, with Little Caeser’s 7% drop from 80 to 74 being the worst. Domino’s, Wendy’s, Burger King and McDonald’s each faced a significant drop of at least 5%.

The only establishment to improve in rankings this year was Dunkin’ Donuts, with an increase of 4% from 75 to 78.

Full-service restaurants tended to fare better in the ACSI rankings, with the lowest score — belonging to Ruby Tuesdays — coming in at just 73 points.

Once again, a new entrant took top billing, with Texas Roadhouse rating an 83. Rounding out the top 5 (which included one tie) is LongHorn Steakhouse (81), Cracker Barrel (80), Olive Garden (79) and Outback Steakhouse and Applebee’s (78).

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(kenfagerdotcom)

Sure, sometimes breaking up might be hard to do, but it always helps when you’ve got another suitor lined up to take your former flame’s place. Such is the arrangement for the National Football League, which announced today that it’s ending its relationship with General Motors and hooking up with Hyundai.

Hyundai will take GM’s place as the NFL’s official automotive sponsor, reports the Chicago Tribune, in a deal that will let the Korean automaker use the league’s trademarks in marketing. It’ll also get access to the NFL’s biggest events like the Super Bowl and annual draft proceedings.

Though Hyundai isn’t saying how much it shelled out to get this special status, it’s likely that it would be in the neighborhood of what GM had paid, somewhere around $25 million per year.

“There is no better venue to reach consumers,” Hyundai Motor America CEO Dave Zuchowski said in a statement.

Hyundai will launch its sponsorship during the NFL’s season kickoff activities on Sept. 10.

Meanwhile, it sounds like GM isn’t locked in its room crying over a box of paraphernalia that reminds it of its ex.

“We value our relationship with the NFL and its fans, but have decided to focus our sponsorship resources in other areas in the future,” GM said in a statement.

Elsewhere in professional sports, the National Basketball Association also had a major sponsorship change this year, choosing to break up with Coca-Cola for its biggest rival, PepsiCo, in April.

Hyundai replaces General Motors as NFL auto sponsor [Chicago Tribune]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(Adam Fagen)

Employees at Victoria’s Secret will no longer have to call in to find out if they’ll be hawking lotions, perfumes, bras, underwear and other products on any given day, as the company plans to end its use of on-call scheduling.

BuzzFeed News, citing several current and former staff members, reports that the retailer decided to reverse its use of so-called “on-call shifts,” in which employees are given little notice on whether they are required to show up for work or stay at home without pay.

While on-call scheduling allows retailers to be more flexible with hours and save on payroll expenses by only having workers report for work if the store is busy, the system can make it difficult for employees to predict when they’ll work and their pay.

In most cases, employees who are scheduled on-call must phone, email or text managers shortly before their shift begins.

According to the retailer’s staff, in addition to ending on-call scheduling, the company will now notify employees in advance if upcoming shifts may involve “extensions,” in which workers are required to stay past their scheduled end time.

Employees will also be able to sign up for extra hours if they so desire.

Representatives for L Brands, the owner of Victoria’s Secret and several other companies, declined to provide comment to BuzzFeed.

Over the past several years, Victoria’s Secret and other retailers have come under scrutiny for their use of on-call scheduling.

Back in April, the office of New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sent letters warning 13 major retail companies including Target, Sears, Gap, and Victoria’s Secret that some stores may be violating state law by using on-call scheduling systems.

According to the letter, the practice leaves “too little time to make arrangements for family needs, let alone to find an alternative source of income to compensate for the lost pay.”

Before that, in 2013, Victoria’s Secret faced a lawsuit over the system in California that claimed employees may be scheduled for more than 30 hours of work across five days in a week, but only actually worked about 10 hours.

The suit centered around whether or not being available for on-call shifts constituted reporting to work – thereby, requiring compensation even if the shift were canceled.

According to BuzzFeed, the judge in that case dismissed the call-in reporting time claim.

Victoria’s Secret Is Getting Rid Of On-Call Scheduling In Stores [BuzzFeed News]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(imgur)

Are you in the market for a new pet, one that doesn’t require much maintenance or care? Or perhaps, one that requires absolutely nothing from you? You’re in luck: One Petco appears to have a long tailed grass lizard skeleton available in its store tank, for the low price of just $9.99.

Consumerist reader Holly pointed us to a recent Reddit post titled, “We clean our cages regularly,” with a link to a series of photos apparently snapped at a Texas Petco.

If you’re not looking closely enough, you might just think it’s an empty tank, devoid of any pets. That can surely happen when someone buys a pet and the store hasn’t moved a new inmate in yet.

But further inspection reveals the skeleton of a small lizard, ostensibly the Long Tailed Grass Lizard on the tank’s sign. That same sign includes helpful instructions that might’ve helped the store’s animal handlers, things like feeding the lizard and making sure it has enough water. The sign also promises a pet that is “quick and active,” which we’re sure these lizards are… when they’re alive.

One commenter who claims to have worked for the company in another location in Texas points out that this particular store has a bad reputation, and that this kind of thing “is NOT standard” for other stores in the area.

We’ve reached out to Petco corporate to ask how this kind of thing could happen, if it’s investigating this particular incident (as this could all be part of an elaborate hoax), and what company policy is on displaying animals for sale that have clearly been dead long enough to decompose to a skeletal state. We’ll let you know when and if we receive a reply.

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

The FTC and New Jersey AG’s office allege that the makers of the Prized app used the program to infect customers’ phones with malware for their own use.

Some reward programs aren’t really rewarding. In fact, some are downright harmful to consumers. That was apparently the case with an Ohio-based smartphone app developer that recently agreed to settle charges that it hijacked consumers’ phones through a seemingly innocuous gaming app.

Smartphone app developer Equiliv Investments advertised its Prized app as a way for users to earn points for clothing, gift cards and other prizes by downloading affiliated apps, playing video games embedded with advertisements, or taking online surveys.

But the Federal Trade Commission and New Jersey Attorney General’s office say the app was actually used as an entryway to mine virtual currency like Litecoin, Dogecoin, and Quarkcoin.

According to a complaint [PDF] filed by the FTC and AG’s office, Equiliv and director Ryan Ramminger began marketing the Prized app in February 2014 through the Google Play Store, Amazon App Store and other third-party sites.

The company promised users that the downloaded app would be free from malicious software and viruses.

However, shortly after users download the app, it took control of the device’s computing resource to mine for virtual currencies.

The complaint alleges that the app developers then used consumers’ devices to attempt to solve equations that create virtual currencies, thus lining their own virtual wallets.

As a result of this mining, the infected devices quickly burnt through their monthly data plans, lost battery power rapidly and recharged more slowly.

“Consumers downloaded this app thinking that at the very worst it would not be as useful or entertaining as advertised,” said Acting New Jersey Attorney General John J. Hoffman. “Instead, the app allegedly turned out to be a Trojan horse for intrusive, invasive malware that was potentially damaging to expensive smartphones and other mobile devices.”

In all, the complaint alleges that Equiliv and Ramminger violated the FTC Act and the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.

To resolve the allegations, the company has agreed to a proposed settlement banning it from creating and distributing malicious software.

Additionally, the company is required to pay a suspended monetary judgement of $50,000 to the state of New Jersey.

The case is part of the FTC’s ongoing work to protect consumers taking advantage of new and emerging financial technology, also known as FinTech. As technological advances expand the ways consumers can store, share, and spend money, the FTC is working to keep consumers protected while encouraging innovation for consumers’ benefit.

App Developer Settles FTC and New Jersey Charges It Hijacked Consumers’ Phones to Mine Cryptocurrency [Federal Trade Commission]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(pwrplantgirl)

If you’re the kind of person who needs to know everything about a city before you visit, your list of requirements might include pinning down where you can get a cheap beer. So before you hit the road or book that flight, you might want to check out a recent list of which cities around the globe have the priciest pours.

A company called GoEuro collected data on the price of beer at both supermarkets as well as bars in cities and then took that average to create the Beer Price Index. The results may factor in when you’re planning a trip, depending on how much you can handle paying for a beer.

Traveling to Switzerland? Better save your change for a cold one: Geneva’s beers will hit your pockets the hardest, according to a beer price index compiled by GoEuro: The average price of a brew there is $6.32 ($1.87 in stores and $10.77 at bars).

On the cheap end of things, Krakow, Poland and Kiev, Ukraine were tied for the least expensive beers, with an average price of $1.66 each.

In the United States, New Yorkers won’t be surprised to find their favorite beverage comes at a higher average price ($5.20) than its fellow notoriously expensive city on the West Coast, San Francisco ($3.97).

The Wall Street Journal took GoEuro’s data and turned it into a searchable database, for those who don’t feel like scanning the entire list.

And you should always remember, temperature is also key when choosing your brew. So sayeth Strong Bad:

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(bluwmongoose)

About 65 Jeep and Dodge SUV owners can expect to receive a phone call from Fiat Chrysler telling them to stop driving their vehicles.

The car maker announced over the weekend that it will recall about 7,690 model year 2015 Dodge Durangos and Jeep Grand Cherokee vehicles that have a suspension component that could fail.

While a majority of the affected SUVs have not been sold, the automaker has taken an unusual step for those that are currently in the possession of consumers by urging them to immediately stop driving the vehicles, according to the Detroit Free Press.

While more than 7,000 SUVs remain on dealer lots or in transit to dealers, Fiat Chrysler plans to personally call the owners of the 65 vehicles currently on the road.

The company says that some of the suspension components installed in the cars were not correctly treated by a supplier for high temperatures. Because of this, the component could break leading to rear-end instability and/or reduced braking power.

The suspension issue was discovered by the supplier during an internal quality review. Fiat Chrysler then investigated the issue and halted vehicle shipments from its assembly plant.

Fiat Chrysler says it is unaware of any accidents or injuries related to the issue.

Affected vehicles will be inspected and if they contain the compromised parts, they will be shipped to a dealership for repairs.

 

 

FCA makes unusual move amid SUV recall [The Detroit Free Press]
Statement: Suspension-component Inspection/Replacement [Fiat Chrysler]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(frankieleon)

Due to an uptick recently in accidents at railroad crossings, the Federal Railroad Administration is stepping up efforts to keep drivers aware when their route intersects with the path of trains. The agency just announced a new partnership with Google Maps, that will provide the locations of all grade crossings in the country.

Accidents at rail crossings spiked by 9% last year, reports the New York Times, resulting in 270 deaths and 843 injured people.

Those numbers have prompted the government to work with Google: The technology company has agreed to include information from the United States Department of Transportation’s database to nail down every rail crossing in the country, and will also add audio and visual alerts to the app for drivers using the turn-by-turn navigation feature.

Google likely won’t be the only company that adds railroad crossing information to its maps — the agency says it also reached out to Apple, MapQuest, TomTom and Garmin.

Though many crossings have flashing, blinking lights and gates that come down to keep inattentive drivers alert, there are others that only have a crossing sign or a crossbuck, which is a white “X” marked with the words “railroad crossing” on the road.

It’s unclear exactly why such accidents rose last year, but it could be partly to due a growing economy and increased freight train traffic. Or maybe people are just distracted behind the wheel.

“The vast majority of these accidents and deaths are preventable,” Sarah Feinberg, the Federal Railroad Administration’s acting administrator told the NYT. “In some cases, maybe a driver intends to beat the train, thinks they are familiar with the route or still have time to cross. But there are many cases where drivers lack situational awareness, because it may be dark or the route is unfamiliar.”

There’s no date set yet for when crossing information will be included on Google Maps, but DOT officials said the company has made this project a priority.

“We’re happy to help the Federal Railroad Administration as we’re always looking for new ways to make maps useful to our users,” a Google spokeswoman told the NYT.

The DOT does have its own app that provides a catalog of all crossing locations, called the Rail Crossing Location Mobile Application. But it doesn’t alert drivers when they’re about to cross tracks, and isn’t used much. Still, if that’s something you’re worried about, it could be useful when plotting your next trip.

Agency Taps Mapping Technology to Curb Rail Crossing Accidents [New York Times]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(André-Pierre du Plessis)

PayPal’s new user agreement — the one that gives the company even more latitude to make obnoxious prerecorded marketing calls to “any telephone number that you have provided us or that we have otherwise obtained” — is set to kick in this week, but following an FCC warning that this policy might be in violation of federal law, and a letter from multiple senators asking PayPal to rethink its new terms, the company has agreed to make changes that “clear up any confusion.”

In a new blog post, PayPal’s general counsel acknowledges that company “used language that did not clearly communicate how we intend to contact them. Unfortunately, this language caused confusion and concern with some of our customers.”

The company says its intention in granting itself the ability to call or text any number it might be able to locate for you (an apparent violation of federal rules that say robocalls can only be made to specific numbers that a customer has agreed to receive them on), was to better reach users in case of emergency — and of course to collect a debt.

PayPal says the newly revised terms will clarify that customers do not have to consent to robocalls as a condition of continuing to be a customer of the payment platform. Forcing a consumer to accept prerecorded messages is also a violation of the law.

“We respect our customers’ communications preferences and recognize that their consent is required for certain autodialed and prerecorded calls and texts,” reads the blog post. “Customers may revoke consent to receive these communications by contacting PayPal customer support and informing us of their preferences.”

PayPal customers should be on the lookout for an e-mail explaining these changes.

In a statement to Consumerist, FCC Enforcement Bureau Chief Travis LeBlanc, who sent the warning letter to PayPal, commends the company for making these tweaks.

“The changes to PayPal’s user agreement recognize that its customers are not required to consent to unwanted robocalls or robotexts,” says LeBlanc. “It clarifies, rightly, that its customers must provide prior express written consent before the company can call or text them with marketing, and that these customers have a right to revoke their consent to receive robocalls or robotexts at any time. These changes, along with PayPal’s commitments to improve its disclosures and make it easier for consumers to express their calling preferences, are significant and welcome improvements.”

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

(frankieleon)

Nowadays, airlines charge a fee for just about everything – even when it comes to travelers trying to ensure they’re seated next to their children. But that extra cost could be a thing of the past if one legislator has anything to do about it.

In a letter to Federal Aviation Administration administrator Michael Huerta, Sen. Bob Casey urged the agency to step in and require airlines drop seat change fees for parents traveling with their children, The Hill reports.

The Pennsylvania senator expressed concern over what he believes is a lack of policies that would ensure airlines are taking “appropriate steps to guarantee that young children can sit with their parents during a flight without paying extra fees.”

While reassigning seats may be inconvenient, Casey says there is no reason to separate a child from a parent during a flight.

“In recent years, consumers have grown increasingly frustrated by the growing use of varying fees associated with air travel,” Casey wrote. “For a family that has already paid full fare to have to pay an additional fee so that parents and children can sit together is financially burdensome and stressful to families.”

Casey contends that airline policies that allow parents to be charged for changing seats to be near their children even when an open seat is available are unfair.

“Making those with children pay an extra fee to sit next to their children puts a burden on parents and guardians and disadvantages middle class families that may struggle just to afford the basic fare and for whom an additional fee would be a significant hardship,” Casey continued. “Prior to boarding the flight, reservation agents should make every effort to secure appropriate seating for young children and their guardian without additional fees.”

Some airlines have taken steps to alleviate inconvenience when it comes to seating parents and children together. Earlier this month, Southwest – which doesn’t offer assigned seats – announced it would revamp its boarding process to cut back on the time passengers spend moving back and forth between seats to accommodate traveling families on crowded flights.

Southwest’s current process allow families to board together after the “A” group as long as the children in their party are four years old or younger. Additionally, families can pay extra to board earlier. Now on select flights the airline is expanding the ages of those covered by the early boarding process to include children up to 6, 8 or 11 years of age.

Dem senator to airlines: Drop seat change fees for parents [The Hill]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

Hey kids, isn’t vertical integration awesome? Thanks to Comcast’s acquisition of NBC/Universal, the cable giant can now use its latest high-tech remote control to advertise its feature films directly to your living room! Let’s all cheer for cross-promotional, cross-platform, market-targeted, gibberish-spouting synergy!!

Last week, Comcast boasted on its corporate blog that users of its new voice-enabled remote controls could speak “Minionese,” the hilariously family friendly and profitable language spoken by the Minions in the upcoming film release The Minions, distributed by Universal.

Say something in Minionese into the remote and it speaks back to you in Minionese, along with taking you to various pieces of content curated by Comcast to promote The Minions, opening July 10 in a theater full of kids you’ll want to avoid if you enjoy your sanity.

The idea of turning your remote control — for which Comcast customers pay a pretty penny each month — into a de facto toy that is then being used to advertise a movie with a kid-centric audience didn’t exactly win over Josh Golin, Associate Director at the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood.

“It’s extremely disappointing that Comcast is already using its voice-enabled remotes to manipulate kids,” Golin tells Consumerist. “Young children, the film’s target audience, won’t understand that this is just a ploy to get them to want to see the movie and buy Minions merchandise. It’s bad enough to target young children with clearly delineated commercials, but to use technology to wow kids and mask the fact that you are, in fact, advertising is deceptive, unfair, and unethical.”

[via IBtimes.com]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist

जनता का आदमी

Most of the time when we hear about bugs and food, it’s an unfortunate and unintended event that leads to disgust, repulsion and often, an apology from any business involved. This time it’s different: a burger chain is putting insects on the menu on purpose, after an April Fool’s joke proved to be popular with customers.

It’s not like the little critters will be staring back at you when you go to take a sip, however: Wayback Burgers is introducing an Oreo mud pie cricket protein milkshake made with Peruvian chocolate-flavored cricket powder on July 1 for a limited time, reports CNBC.

The bug shake was just a prank Wayback pulled on customers to get them talking about the chain, but because the response was so positive during a brief test of the item on Long Island, the company decided to go forward and make the insect treat an official menu item.

“We had it for two hours. There were people lined up to try it,” John Eucalitto, president at Wayback Burgers said.

The chain tested somewhere between 20 and 30 different variations on the recipe, trying five flavors of cricket powder before coming up with its final product. As for the taste, Eucalitto said the cricket powder isn’t strong, and that he thinks the shake tastes “great.”

Right now the shakes are slated to stay on menus from July through the end of September, if they prove successful enough they may get a permanent slot. If, of course, customers can stomach the idea.

“People think maybe we’re grinding up crickets in the back room,” which isn’t the case, Eucalitto said, noting that the insects are all farm-raised domestically.

Burger chain adds bugs to the menu…on purpose [CNBC]

by prakash chandra via Consumerist