Menu

Friday, July 17, 2015

10 People Confirmed Sick From Contaminated Stuffed Chicken Breasts

http://ift.tt/1Lckwqv
One example of a frozen chicken breast package that's part of this recall.

One example of a frozen chicken breast package that’s part of this recall.

There are two recalls going on right now for stuffed chicken breasts because of the risk that they might be contaminated with Salmonella Enteritidis, but the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have figured out who is sick from what: seven of the documented infections resulting from these foods so far are only from the Barber Foods recall, and three are from the larger Koch Foods recall.

Experts know this because they’re able to match bacteria found in the chicken dishes to bacteria found in people who are sick. One strain matches to the three people in Minnesota who are known to be sick from the Koch Foods chicken, and the other seven cases in Minnesota and Wisconsin trace back to the Barber Foods strain.

Check your freezer for frozen chicken breasts with USDA establishment numbers:
P-4230A (a similar recall of Omaha Steaks chicken products)
P-1358 (Aspen Foods)
P-276 (Barber Foods)

Food poisoning outbreaks typically make more people sick than companies and the government announce, since samples are taken only from patients who visit a doctor or who are hospitalized. Some people have no symptoms from Salmonella infections. Typically, they have fever and abdominal distress for four to seven days, but children, the elderly, and people with compromised immune systems can become more seriously ill and should seek medical attention.

Multistate Outbreak of Salmonella Enteritidis Infections Linked to Raw, Frozen, Stuffed Chicken Entrees Produced by Barber Foods [CDC] (via Food Safety News)

PREVIOUSLY:
2 Million More Stuffed Chicken Breasts Recalled For Possible Salmonella
1.7 Million Pounds Of Barber Foods Chicken Products Recalled For Possible Salmonella


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

In India And China, You Can Buy Your Next Home Without Leaving Home

http://ift.tt/1OkQkYE Depending on how you feel about the way real estate works now, the idea of sticking a house in your Internet shopping cart and clicking “Buy” may or may not appeal to you. Advances in technology mean that you can buy a new house without even going outside, and get a discount for doing so…in India.

Homebuilders’ websites work like a showroom or a demo unit, with three-dimensional walkthroughs available on the screen. The discounts for doing this can be huge: one builder offers 12% off an apartment that costs about $102,000, for example.

E-commerce company Alibaba also worked with a developer to sell houses on the company’s Taobao marketplace, which is pretty much the equivalent of buying a condo on Amazon. Shoppers in India use sites like Housing.com and even the e-commerce site SnapDeal, where you can also buy clothes, toys, and other regular old merchandise.

One realtor in India told Bloomberg News that it will be impossible for online real estate sales to replace its real-life counterpart, but online sales have been a great way for the housing market in India to deal with some excess housing in new developments that had been delayed.

Indians Are Spending Millions Buying Homes Online [Bloomberg]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Single Ladies In 50s And 60s Prime Targets For Online Romance Scammers

http://ift.tt/1MfFq8m
On the Internet, no one knows you're a grifting cat. (Vincent Verdult

On the Internet, no one knows you’re a grifting cat. (Vincent Verdult

Single ladies in their fifties and sixties are really in demand on dating websites. Unfortunately, they’re not popular in the way they might prefer. They’re prime targets for scammers, and victims typically lose $40,000 to $100,000. Once they realize what happened, they’re often ashamed to tell their families. That means word about this crime doesn’t get out.

The money goes straight into the pockets of scammers, who generally work in sophisticated rings in developing countries. Armed with stolen photos, they find good prospects through dating sites or Facebook, and type sweet nothings at them in chats and e-mails. (It probably helps to have multiple lovers going at once: lots of copy and paste.

The scheme targets people of both sexes and all ages, but older women can be lucrative and less savvy targets. The lover usually says that he (or she) is from an English-speaking country but working abroad for some important reason, sometimes even military deployment. After establishing the relationship, they begin asking for money: it could be for a work crisis, a medical emergency, or simply to travel to meet the target.

The scammer might also ask for a financial favor that turns out to be an advance fee scheme, or use their address to receive stolen goods.

You can get an intimate look at how one of these scams works in an episode of the podcast “Criminal,” where a son has some trepidation about his widowed mother’s new long-distance boyfriend.

Be careful out there. Be sure to warn people you know who don’t read stories online much, even if it might be uncomfortable to talk to your mom about her online dating life. One important step to remember is to perform a reverse image search on any photos you receive to see whether they’re stolen: you can do that at TinEye or Google.

Swindlers Target Older Women on Dating Websites [New York Times]
EPISODE TWENTY: GIL FROM LONDON (5.15.2015) [Criminal]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

“Incorrect Keystroke” Allows Comcast To Withdraw $500 From Non-Customer’s Bank Account

http://ift.tt/1HE9VyA We’ve told you before about Comcast not really paying attention to the payments it receives — like the woman who accidentally sent them her rent check and found that it had been deposited in the cable company’s account — but here’s a story of a man who isn’t even a Comcast customer but found that $500 had been taken out of his bank account anyway.

The man tells the Cleveland Plain Dealer that not only isn’t he a Comcast subscriber, but the cable giant doesn’t serve his area.

But there it was on his bank statement: $500 paid to Comcast.

His bank, Huntington, didn’t appear to give him too much of a hassle, crediting the money to his account after he filled out the proper documents. But how did this happen?

The bank pinned the blame on an “incorrect keystroke,” but as the Plain Dealer’s Teresa Dixon Murray notes it could also be fraud.

All one needs to process an electronic bank-to-bank check (aka an “Automated Clearing House” or ACH payment) is the bank account number, and the account’s relevant bank routing number. This information is available on your standard printed check, so anyone who gets their hands on an old check has everything they need.

“They don’t need your name or address or ZIP code or anything else,” writes Dixon Murray. “So if someone wants to pay for something online or by phone with an ACH… he or she could pick a bank and find its routing number, which is easy. And then pick an account number with the correct number of digits. Gold!”

ACH transactions are monitored by NACHA — The Electronic Payments Association — but that’s no guarantee that errors and fraud won’t happen.

Someone fraudulently using another person’s account info for ACH transactions will likely be caught in the long, but only if the victim spots the bogus transactions. As the man in this story noted, if he hadn’t caught the questionable statement entries himself, his accountant probably would have assumed it was a legitimate purchases.

“My accountant would have no idea whether Comcast was my internet provider and, if I had not checked, it would have been written off as a business expense,” he explains.

The best you can do is to be careful about not sharing your account info — Dixon Murray even suggests having a smaller, secondary checking account for writing checks to people or businesses you don’t necessarily trust — and to remain vigilant about checking your accounts for signs of potential errors or fraud.


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Shirtless Guy Climbs Two Fences At San Diego Airport, Runs Onto A Runway

http://ift.tt/1REy6XN Though it’s no easy feat to scale a fence (at least, not easy for me), authorities at San Diego International Airport say a man managed to climb not one, but two security fences and ran onto a runway Thursday night.

The man is believed to have been under the influence, though it’s unclear what substance he may have consumed before making his way over an outside perimeter fence with barbed wire on top, and then climbing something called a “blast fence” next to the area where planes prepare for takeoff.

“A maintenance worker saw him right away” and called San Diego Harbor Police, an airport authority spokesman said, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune.

It took about five minutes to take the man into custody, but he was eventually arrested on suspicion of being under the influence of a controlled substance and two trespassing charges, one relating to the airport in general and one for being in a secure airport area.

Though officials didn’t say whether he was injured or not, one might imagine that going shirtless over a barbed wire fence might leave a few scratches.

His shenanigans caused incoming and outgoing flights to be temporarily put on hold for about seven minutes while law enforcement were arresting him. We cant imagine any plane crews making that announcement… “Sorry folks, looks like we’re 14th in line for takeoff, right after this guy without a shirt on.”

From Consumerist’s Very Full Hall Of Airport Fence Climbing Infamy: Failed Stowaway Tries To Hide In Plane’s Wheel Well For Free Ride From Orlando To NYC; Woman Climbs Airport Fence To Try To Stop Her Cheating Husband From Flying Away; Serial Stowaway Arrested After Flying From San Jose To Los Angeles Without A Ticket; Teen Stowaway Somehow Survives 5-Hour Flight Hidden In Wheel Well; Man Throws Himself A Little Pants-Off Dance-Off Party On German Chancellor’s Jet; JFK Airport’s $100 Million Security System Thwarted By Lone Jet Skier Swimming Ashore

Man scales 2 fences, runs onto Lindbergh tarmac [San Diego Union-Tribune]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Comcast Exec: Netflix Thrives Because Cable Is Too Expensive, Is Company’s “Ultimate Frenemy”

http://ift.tt/1uUGamN

This is a weird time to be a cable company. On the one hand, everyone’s watching more content than ever before. And on the other hand, they’re watching cable less than ever before. That’s bad for cable companies, except that cable companies are also broadband companies. The push and pull is a reality almost all of us live in, but it’s something that the cable folks don’t really talk about much. Until they do.

Speaking this week at an industry conference in New England, Multichannel News reports, Comcast’s favorite executive mouthpiece David L. Cohen conceded that the Netflix giveth, and the Netflix taketh away.

Cohen admitted what cable executives basically never say, but consumers know too well: viewers have flocked to Netflix because cable prices are too dang high.

“Netflix is the ultimate frenemy,” Cohen said, adding, “Part of this is a self-inflicted wound. We have made video too expensive.”

Just over the last few years, broadband has gotten fast and reliable enough, and software algorithms good enough, that HD streaming content is now a simple, easy, affordable option — and it’s everywhere. Given the option to cut the cord and walk away from cable, consumers are, leaving cable companies scrambling to follow.

Netflix, now up to 65 million subscribers, is the gorilla in the room when it comes to players on the streaming scene, but traditional broadcast and cable networks like HBO, Showtime, Starz, and CBS are hopping on board too.

Pay-TV competition is erupting, but it’s not coming from cable. Instead it’s from the likes of PlayStation and Dish. Everyone is still watching TV in prime-time, but they’re not touching their TV tuner. They’re just streaming it, instead.

This leaves Comcast in a somewhat awkward but ultimately favorable position: because they provide the broadband pipes as well as the cable conduit, they are poised for one half of their business to soar even as the other half deflates. And although the era of over-the-top streaming programming might be creating a robust marketplace for programming access, the broadband market is still starved for competition.

That’s where the “frenemy” aspect comes in.

“Remember, you can’t get Netflix without broadband service. Those are 3 million customers of our broadband service,” Cohen told his audience, referring to the New England market he was speaking in.

Netflix not only keeps Comcast customers forking over cash for broadband connections, but also, Cohen pointed out, benefits the company in another way. Because they also own film and programming content, in the form of NBCUniversal, Netflix adds a revenue stream to Comcast when they sign contracts for the library.

In the meantime, of course, Comcast is not simply going to let other businesses make the money from over-the-top content while their own subscriber numbers dwindle: their first attempt at a streaming service launched at the start of the week.

Cohen: Netflix is ‘Ultimate Frenemy’ [Multichannel News]


by Kate Cox via Consumerist

Win In Publisher’s Clearing House Game Due To ‘Technical Malfunction’

http://ift.tt/1Ss9igs

prize_patrolHave you ever wondered whether anyone really wins the Publisher’s Clearing House sweepstakes? One woman thought she did while playing a game for real money on the company’s website. She won five separate digital slots-style games, racking up a total of $5,00. She was happy to wait for her check…and wait…and she kept waiting.

She contacted PCH to let them know their Prize Patrol was running late, and they had terrible news. She hadn’t won those games after all. The company explained in an email that a technical malfunction made it look like she had won, but there was no real prize. All she had were the photos that she took of her computer screen when the win came up on her screen.

She brought her complaint to CBS Sacramento, and they checked with Publisher’s Clearing House. This sweepstakes player wasn’t alone, it turns out: they said that the technical malfunction continued for a few hours, and “a small percentage of people” experienced it. Whether they meant a small percentage of “people who played during that period” or “people on the planet” isn’t clear, but at least the problem wasn’t unique to her.

However, the prize-givers told the TV station that they didn’t want a player “to walk away unhappy,” so they gave her $1,000: at least that was one of her glitchy prizes.

Call Kurtis: I Won A Publisher’s Clearing House Game, Why Am I Not Getting Paid? [CBS Sacramento]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

CVS Takes CVSPhoto Site Down After Possible Credit Card Data Breach

http://ift.tt/1Ss9iNG
The notice currently on the CVS Photo website.

The notice currently on the CVSPhoto website.

If you’ve used your credit or debit card to purchase photo prints through CVSPhoto, you might want to pay attention. The drugstore chain has taken down CVSPhoto.com while it investigates a possible credit card data breach.

“We have been made aware that customer credit card information collected by the independent vendor who manages and hosts CVSPhoto.com may have been compromised,” reads a statement on the website. “As a precaution, as our investigation is underway we are temporarily shutting down access to online and related mobile photo services. We apologize for the inconvenience.”

The company is asking that anyone who used their card to buy anything on CVSPhoto.com take a look at their card statements and activity to make sure there aren’t any suspicious transactions. If so, they should contact the appropriate bank/card company immediately to report it.

The credentials for the CVS Photo site are kept separate from the other CVS online properties like CVS.com, optical.cvs.com, and cvs.com/MinuteClinic. The company says there is no evidence of a breach on these sites.

Consumers with questions can call the company at 1-800-SHOP-CVS.


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Tesla Announces $10K Acceleration Improvement Upgrade Called “Ludicrous Mode”

http://ift.tt/1fbhR2D

teslaludicrousmodeIf you’ve got an extra $10,000 hanging around and were thinking of buying a new Tesla Model S, you might be interested in an upgrade company CEO Elon Musk just announced: “Ludicrous Mode,” an improved acceleration that brings the dual motor version of the car from zero to 60 mph in just 2.8 seconds.

Musk announced the upgrade option during a call on Friday, which is a 10% acceleration bump from the previous model.

It’s a “pretty awesome improvement,” Musk said, according to Bloomberg, calling the 1.1 g’s of acceleration “faster than falling.”

There’s an option for a $3,000 upgraded battery pack as well, which gives cars 15 more miles of range than before.

Tesla noted that its planned Model X crossover vehicle is on track for deliveries in two months and the Model 3, the planned mass-market car, in a bit more than two years, the company said.

The Model X will also have Ludicrous Mode available. Though its acceleration speed hasn’t been set yet. Musk says it’ll take about three seconds to get from zero to 60mph, according to MarketWatch.

No one was quite sure what Tesla would announce today, after the company sent out emails to alert the press yesterday, though Musk clued in followers that it would pertain to the Model S:

As for Musk’s hopes for additional sales by making these tweaks?

“I have no idea. We are just trying to make awesome cars,” he said during the call.


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Court Sides With JetBlue Employee Who Reported Passenger For Saying The Word “Bomb”

http://ift.tt/1FIAt1N If you’re in a bad mood at the airport and feel tempted to haphazardly include the word “bomb” in any sentence, you probably want to refrain from doing so. A federal appeals court recently sided with JetBlue employees who reported a passenger for making an offhand gripe that was misinterpreted as a bomb threat, and which got her arrested by the FBI.

The matter goes back to 2008, when the passenger was scheduled to fly from JFK International in New York City to Austin. Though she arrived at the airport hours ahead of departure, the woman did not make it to the gate until after the crew had closed the plane’s door.

When told she wouldn’t be able to board, the traveler was not pleased, especially since her checked baggage was making the trip to Austin without her.

“Isn’t it a security risk to let a bag go on a plane without a passenger, what if there was a bomb in the bag?” She asked, according to court documents.

A JetBlue employee responded that “TSA agents would know if there was a bomb in the bag.”

The traveler then says she fired back, “TSA‐‐my ass” and walked away. An FBI report on the interaction claims she stated, “TSA does not know how to do their f***ing job because if it did TSA would not catch it and let it go through!”

This is where things get into she-said/company-said.

The JetBlue employee claims she did not personally regard the passenger as a security risk, and only told her supervisor that the woman had implied she had a bomb with the “What if there was a bomb in the bag?” question.

The passenger alleged that the employee deliberately misrepresented the conversation by telling her supervisor that the woman claimed there was indeed a bomb in the bag.

Regardless oh which one is more accurate, security and the FBI were notified, the plane was re-routed, the traveler detained and eventually charged with making a false bomb threat. That charge was subsequently dropped, but the passenger did plead guilty to misdemeanor drug charges after a small amount of marijuana was found in her bag.

She later violated her probation and was sentenced to 30 days in jail. The passenger was also charged around $13,000 for the cost of re-routing the Austin-bound flight to Richmond, where her bag was searched and no bomb was found.

The woman sued JetBlue over the incident, alleging defamation, but in 2014 a U.S. District Court in Brooklyn side granted summary judgment [PDF] to the airline saying that the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) immunizes airlines and employees who make a “voluntary disclosure of any suspicious transaction relevant to a possible violation of law or regulation, relating to air piracy, a threat to aircraft or passenger safety, or terrorism.”

The traveler appealed that ruling, claiming that the lower court erred in granting summary judgement. She argued that you can’t decide whether the ATSA immunity applies until you decide which version of events is the more accurate.

But a three-judge Second Circuit Court of Appeals panel held that either version of the incident in this matter still result in the same conclusion: That the ATSA applied and JetBlue and the employee are immune.

“[The passenger] raised questions about a bomb and disparaged the effectiveness of the TSA. Had JetBlue reacted otherwise, it might have been in violation of its obligation to report potential threats, and could have been subject to civil penalties,” reads the opinion [PDF] “Because it is undisputed that [the gate agent] and JetBlue were aware of ominous (even if ambiguous) references to a bomb on a flight, no reasonable jury could find that differences in wording between [the passenger’s] account and [the employee’s] constituted materially false statements made to law enforcement.”

The woman’s attorney tells the AP his client will likely appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Police Arrest Man On Suspicion Of Knocking Over Girls’ Lemonade Stand, Stealing $30

http://ift.tt/1DldUy0 As any ambitious kid (or former kid) who’s tried to bring in a big haul from running a sidewalk lemonade stand knows, it isn’t easy to make a lot of money from selling drinks for a nickel (or $1, whatever a cup of lemonade goes for these days). Two young entrepreneurial spirits faced an even tougher situation for their fledgling business, after police say a guy overturned their lemonade stand and made off with all their profits.

An 18-year-old California man was arrested on suspicion of knocking over two teens’ lemonade stand, both literally and figuratively, reports the L.A. Times.

The man walked up to the stand on Wednesday afternoon and even though he said he didn’t have any money, the two 13-year-olds girls gave him some lemonade, the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department says.

Authorities said he walked away for a moment before coming back and overturning the stand, grabbing the cash box filled with about $30 and running off with it. One of the girls’ brothers took off after him and confronted him, but returned with only the empty money box.

A sheriff’s deputy caught up with him about 10 minutes later and arrested him on suspicion of strong-arm robbery, officials said.

Man accused of toppling girls’ lemonade stand and fleeing with $30 [Los Angeles Times]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Retailers Turn To Electronic Price Tags To Combat Amazon

http://ift.tt/1GqI4A2
An example of electronic labels made by Stockholm-based tech company Pricer.

An example of electronic labels made by Stockholm-based tech company Pricer.

On Amazon, not only can the price of a product change from minute to minute, but you often have multiple sellers offering the same product at different products. How is a bricks-and-mortar retailer supposed to compete with that level of flexibility and agility? Not having to print out new price tags every time you tweak a price might be a start.

Bloomberg reports on the growing trend of electronic price tags, which have already been deployed at Kohl’s and Nebraska Furniture Mart, a small chain of massive home furnishing warehouse stores.

The tags not only allow for making a quick price change, but could let a retailer make price changes across multiple outlets simultaneously.

So, in theory, if Amazon or some other competitor drops their price, a retailer with one of these price tags could respond accordingly. The hope is that this could help to cut down on “showrooming,” the practice of using physical retail stores to get eyes/hands-on with a product and then going online to get it for less.

“If we have a TV for $1,200 and Amazon has it for $900, customers are going to say, what the heck, your prices are not the lowest,” David Bash, chief information officer at Nebraska Furniture Mart, tells Bloomberg, though he notes that the store limits price changes to once a day to minimize confusion for customers.

Stores could also take advantage of smartphone-based functionalities with these electronic tags, helping customers navigate rows or find items on shelves by causing tags of sought-after products to blink when the shopper approaches.

As you’d expect, it’s not cheap to change over an entire store from traditional paper/plastic shelf labels to the new-fangled electronic ones. A large retailer can end up spending in the six figures to update a single location.

“This is not an inexpensive solution,” admits a rep for Swedish company Pricer, a manufacturer of this tag technology. “It’s starting to gain a lot more interest. Over the next year or two, you’ll see a lot more retailers rolling them out.”

For stores that are frequently modifying prices or rearranging shelves, electronic tags could save labor costs in the long-run, allowing stores to cut prices to compete with online sellers. Stores could also take those employees who would have been spending their time redoing price labels and put them to work serving customers.


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Famous People Pressuring Costco To Stop Selling Eggs From Caged Hens

http://ift.tt/1HDEfte In an effort to get Costco to jump on the cage-free bandwagon, famous faces have been coming out against the practice of keeping hens confined, urging bulk retailer Costco to change its ways. Brad Pitt, Ryan Gosling and Bill Maher have all recently brought the issue to the attention of the public.

Last week, Maher penned a New York Times editorial titled “Free the Hens, Costco!”, in which he pointed out that the company had vowed in 2007 that it would change how it treats egg-producing hens… and it hasn’t.

“Multiple investigations into battery cages document animals with deteriorated spinal cords, some who have become paralyzed and then mummified in their cages,” Maher claims in the article. “Imagine cramming five cats or dogs into tiny cages, hundreds of thousands in each shed, for their entire lives. That would warrant cruelty charges, of course. But when the egg industry does it to hens, it’s considered business as usual.”

Meanwhile, Gosling and Pitt have been writing letters to the company, telling it that it’s time to change its ways. Last month Gosling sent a letter to Craig Jelinek, the chief executive officer of Costco Wholesale Corporation, which was posted by the Humane Society of the United States.

After describing video footage from the Humane Society’s undercover investigation that he says revealed the cruel conditions caged hens live in, Gosling accused Costco of deceiving its customers.

“Furthermore, it is appalling that Costco has been selling these eggs with deceptive labeling on cartons featuring graphics of birds living out in a green pasture,” he wrote. “You’re already eliminating cages for veal calves and pigs – don’t you feel that chickens also deserve the same mercy?”

Pitt was also in the mood to write, adding his voice to the hue and cry yesterday with a letter he wrote to Jelinek on behalf of Farm Sanctuary (an organization that advocates against the mistreatment of animals and factory farming, a group Maher also supported in his letter). He wrote about caged birds suffering atrophy of their muscles and bones from years of immobility.

“As you know, these birds producing eggs for your shelves are crammed five or more into cages that are not large enough for even one hen to spread her wings,” Pitt writes, according to the Associated Press.

Pitt and Maher both commended Costco for its other animal-welfare efforts, urging it to fulfill its pledge to uncage egg-producing hens.

“Nearly a decade ago, Costco indicated that its next step on this issue would be creating a timeline for getting those cages out of your egg supply, and yet today, you appear to have made no progress at all — even as you have set timelines for getting pigs and calves out of cages,” Pitt wrote, asking the company to set a timeline for ending its sale of the offending eggs.

In June, Costco noted that there are “vigorous debates about animal welfare and laying hens.”

“Some, such as the Humane Society, advocate that hens be ‘cage free,’ and not confined in cages. Some advocate that cages are safer for hens,” a statement read, acknowledging that it’s seen a bump in sales for organic/cage-free eggs in the last nine years.

The company has yet to specifically address any of the celebrities’ complaints directly, saying it is “committed to the ethical treatment of animals” and its code of ethics is part of the company mission statement.

Other food companies have been moving in the cage-free direction, with General Mills announcing recently that it will eventually only use eggs from cage-free hens in U.S. operations, and Dunkin’ Donuts said it’s considering a similar move. Back in 2012, Burger King promised it would stop using suppliers that caged pigs and hens.


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Lawsuit Accuses Comcast Of Making 9 Months Of Robocalls To Collect On Paid Bill

http://ift.tt/1DBPEee A Philadelphia woman is suing Comcast, alleging that the hometown cable company not only spent nine months hassling her with debt collection calls but that the bill in question had already been paid.

According to the suit [PDF] filed earlier this month in a federal court, Comcast began calling the woman’s cellphone number starting in Sept. 2014. She claims the calls were made by an automated dialing system that greeted her with the pre-recorded “We’re calling from Comcast…” message before transferring to a live caller.

The plaintiff alleges that on the first call, she told the Comcast rep that the supposed $527 debt had already been paid four years earlier and asked that she no longer be contacted on her cellphone number.

She says that even though the rep acknowledged her request, Comcast continued to make these auto-dialed calls, up to twice a day, through mid-June 2015.

The lawsuit contends that because she had not given express prior consent for Comcast to contact her on her cellphone — and had explicitly made this known to a Comcast employee — and because these automated calls were not of an emergency nature, that the nation’s largest cable provider was acting in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act [TCPA], which regulates when and how autodialed, pre-recorded calls can be made to consumers.

Violations of the TCPA can result in fines of $500 for each offending call, but if it’s shown that the caller knowingly violated the law, they penalty can be tripled. Thus, the plaintiff in this case is seeking damages of $1,500 per call.

A court in Texas recently hit Time Warner Cable with that $1,500/call penalty after finding that the cable company illegally made more than 150 robocalls to a wrong person. TWC’s total bill for that goof was $229,500.

A rep for Comcast tells Consumerist that the company is not commenting on the lawsuit at this time.

Businesses, especially the banking industry, that make a lot of robocalls have been pushing for rule changes that would allow them to avoid penalties for so-called “wrong number” robocalls. That’s when the robocaller autodials a number it believes it has permission to call, but which now belongs to someone else.

“As reassigned number litigation escalates, unreasonably affected parties and overburdened courts now need guidance to identify which party can properly provide prior express consent,” wrote the Consumer Bankers Association in a 2014 petition to the FCC.

But a response from consumer advocates, including our colleagues at Consumers Union, countered that “Companies take for granted that they should be able to call consumers using an autodialer or artificial/prerecorded voice technology, whether their customers or other consumers actually want the calls or not.”

[via Ars Technica]


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Apple Wants To Pre-Check Your Spending Power Before Advertising To You

http://ift.tt/1LAp8G1

Apple products are popular, but they’re not cheap. There’s a certain cachet that goes with them, a projection of status and class. And Apple’s newest patent isn’t for another high-cost, high-popularity product… it’s for tech that will only advertise stuff to you that they think you can afford.

Mashable points to the patent application, which would target ads to specific customers based on their bank account status and credit card limits.

Specifically, the application says it’s for technology that would target a select group of users more likely to respond to the advertisements, which is basically what all marketing is. But in this case, “The common profile of users may be based on the amount of pre-paid credit available to each user.”

“An advantage of such targeted advertising is that only advertisements for goods and services which particular users can afford, are delivered to these users,” says the application.

In short: if you have financial resources, Apple will advertise their products to you. If you don’t, they won’t.

Customizing ads based on your supposed demographic profile is nothing new. Back in 2012, for example, Orbitz decided to prioritize more expensive hotel listings in results for Mac users, on the theory that users of that brand would be willing and able to pay for a premium experience rather than hoping to find the best deal. And there is now an entire industry based on mining and aggregating and sorting out every detail about every digital profile in order to target advertising in just that way.

But available credit, of course, does not necessarily correlate to “has the money available to spend.” Having a $0 balance on your credit card is not a sign that you should immediately charge a $1300 MacBook to that credit card, nor is a steady income an indicator that you should replace your $500 iPhone with a $600 iPhone as soon as possible.

Similarly, a lack of available credit does not correlate to “cannot be a customer.” Plenty of the under-18 set (who theoretically have no credit) get their families to buy them gifts of Apple products, and adults are capable of saving and managing budgets, and also of receiving gifts or irregular, but significant, income streams.

This is just a patent application, not a finished product, so it’s far too early to get worked up about Apple using your bank account balance as a marketing factor just yet. It may never happen at all. But the fact that companies can now plan to target or ignore consumers not just at such a granular level, but also at such a personal one, seems to be where the future is heading.

Apple may check your credit card balance to show you products you can afford [Mashable]


by Kate Cox via Consumerist

Suspected Shoplifter Runs From Security, Dies After Jumping Off Ledge

http://ift.tt/1fQkTuf A woman at a mall in Providence, RI was suspected of shoplifting, and she ran away from security guards who were pursuing her. She might have thought she was escaping through the parking garage, jumping over a railing to escape the building. What she didn’t know is that the first level of the parking garage isn’t on the ground.

This happened last night around 7:30 PM, at Providence Place Mall on Rhode Island. Security began following the woman around in Nordstrom, and the department store confirmed that one of their employees was involved.

Police say that she ran after being accused of shoplifting, and attempted to leave the mall through the first floor of the parking garage. Instead, she fell and was seriously injured, and died at a nearby hospital.

A strangely similar case happened just over a year ago in Maryland, where a man accused of shoplifting ran from security staff and tried to escape by running into a pond that he probably didn’t realize was up to 20 feet deep and filled with silt and plants. Emergency personnel, including police, tried to save him but were unable before he drowned.

Police: Suspected shoplifter dies after parking garage jump [AP]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Survey Says: Uber Overtakes Taxis As The Most Popular Ride For Business Travel

http://ift.tt/1HzXJU4
(afagen)

(afagen)

The scene opens on a very busy businessperson wearing a business suit and carrying a business briefcase on a mission to do some serious business. Time is of the essence — but how to get there? Though in the past we might’ve seen such a character emitting a sharp whistle to bring a cab to a screeching halt, nowadays that person is likely going to pick up their smartphone and hail a ride with Uber, according to a new report.

A survey from an expense management system provider called Certify says that in the three months that ended in June, Uber surpassed taxis as the most expensed form of ground transportation, reports the Associated Press.

Uber rides made up 55% of ground transportation receipts, with taxis falling behind at only 43%. While you might think this has been the norm for awhile, as ride-hailing services such as Uber and Lyft have gained popularity in the general public over the last few years, the numbers are a big jump from the first quarter of this year, when Uber accounted for 46% of ground transportation for business travel and taxis had a 53% share, again, according to Certify’s receipt tracking.

This means one thing for taxis, Certify says — change, or lose business.

“Established travel providers will need to adapt quickly or face further market share erosion to the sharing economy,” Certify CEO Robert Neveu said in a statement.

Some cities are more Uber-driven than others, including its home of San Francisco, where it nabbed 79% of business traveler receipts, and Dallas, where it was responsible for 60% of receipts.

It’s worth noting that Certify’s numbers are based on 28 million trip receipts its clients in North America submit every year, but doesn’t include receipts from travelers whose companies use their own services to track expenses.

And of course, there are those cities where Uber might not be an option, depending on that area’s rules and regulations regarding ride-hailing services.

Uber tops taxi use for business travelers, new report shows [Associated Press]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

T-Mobile On The Hook For $17.5M After Nationwide 9-1-1 Outage

http://ift.tt/1DF8CTo How important is it that telephone companies provide constant access to 9-1-1 service? Americans make an average of more than 27,000 of these emergency calls an hour, so when a nationwide wireless provider is unable to connect its users to 9-1-1 for even a few hours, they can be on the hook for millions of dollars.

The Federal Communication Commission has announced a $17.5 million settlement with T-Mobile following an investigation into a pair of nationwide 9-1-1 service outages on the wireless network.

Both outages occurred on the same day, Aug. 8, 2014, and left T-Mobile users unable to connect to 9-1-1 calls for a total of around three hours.

The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau claims that T-Mobile failed to provide the required timely notification of the outages to all affected 9-1-1 call centers. Additionally, the Commission alleged that the wireless company could have prevented the outage if it had implemented appropriate safeguards in its 9-1-1 network architecture.

In addition to the $17.5 million fine, T-Mobile has agreed to implement a compliance program to identify risks to its 9-1-1 system and protect against these risks.

This is the FCC’s largest fine assessed to a carrier in connection with a 9-1-1 outage and it is the fourth major enforcement action involving 9-1-1 outages this year.

The three other settlements all involved a April 2014 multi-state, multi-provider outage that left around 11 million people without access to 9-1-1.

First, Verizon agreed to pay $3.4 million for its part in failing to prevent that outage. Then in April, the FCC reached a $16 million settlement with CenturyLink and a $1.4 million settlement with Intrado Communications to close the book on this outage.

“The Commission has no higher priority than ensuring the reliability and resilience of our nation’s communications networks so that consumers can reach public safety in their time of need,” said FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler in a statement. “Communications providers that do not take necessary steps to ensure that Americans can call 9-1-1 will be held to account.”


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Hulu May Finally Offer Ad-Free Subscription Option, But It Won’t Be Cheap

http://ift.tt/1IyFs9S

hulugrabbbAfter years of hoping that consumers would eventually come around to the idea of paying for streaming video content that is still interrupted by obnoxious, repetitive commercials, the folks at Hulu may finally be willing to give folks the option of paying for an ad-free version of the service.

Hulu is jointly owned by the parent companies of NBC, ABC, and FOX. The hope had long been that merely offering online access to recently aired, current-season episodes of shows from these networks (and others) would be enough to differentiate it from Netflix and Amazon Prime. Those services don’t run ads during shows or movies, but most of their TV content is at least a season old.

Another repeated justification for the ads on Hulu is the $7.99/month price point. That’s the same price as Netflix’s lowest level of service, but Netflix only offers standard-definition streams for users on that tier.

In spite of the slightly lower price point and the less-stale TV content, Hulu still only has a fraction of Netflix’s user base. The service has around 9 million paying subscribers, compared to more than 65 million worldwide for Netflix (more than 40 million in the U.S. alone).

According to the Wall Street Journal, Hulu is finally bending on its insistence on running ads and is working on a project with the code name “NOAH” (for “NO Ads Hulu”).

But if the Journal’s sources are correct, Hulu is considering charging between $12-$14/month. That means the lowest level of NOAH service would be the same price as the highest current tier of Netflix service. For $12/month, Netflix offers up to four simultaneous streams and access to titles in Ultra HD.

It’s possible that Hulu’s broadcaster ownership is putting such a high price tag on NOAH in order to minimize the number of users who would choose to migrate to this tier. The networks would still rather have the dual revenue streams of subscription fees and ad buys rather than relying purely on subscribers, so the pricey ad-free tier seems targeted at those consumers who would never sign up for Hulu’s ad-supported service.

Hulu’s paying subscriber base is now around nine million, up from six million last year, although it remains tiny compared with Netflix, which on Wednesday reported that it has 65 million world-wide subscribers.

Hulu is on track to bring in about $1.5 billion to $1.7 billion in revenue this year, the people said. Netflix revenue in 2014 totaled $5.5 billion.


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Police Asking People To Please Give Back Cash That Fell Out Of Armored Truck

http://ift.tt/1DmYpIV

It sounds like a dream come true: the doors of an armored truck fly open, and cash comes flying out, all over the road, just begging to be scooped up by passers-by. But even when dreams become reality, that doesn’t mean loose money is free money, which is why police in Baltimore are asking the public to return cash that spilled from an armored vehicle earlier this week.

On Wednesday night, a Brinks armored truck was traveling through Baltimore’s Harbor Tunnel when the vehicle’s back door apparently suffered a malfunction and sprung open, sending paper currency spewing onto the roadway, reports the Baltimore Sun.

And because people are people, many drivers stopped to get out of their cars and pick up the money floating around like a cash piñata had just been busted open and it was natural to collect it.

The tunnel was subsequently closed for eight hours on Wednesday night and Thursday morning, Maryland Transportation Authority said, while the cash was cleaned up.

It’s unclear how much money ended up falling out or how much people took, as police wouldn’t confirm amounts “due to the ongoing investigation.” Some people on the scene did cooperate and handed over money, but investigators think there’s still missing moolah.

Because there’s no finders-keepers rule that says cash is public property if it happens to hit the street, city prosecutors are giving folks who collected money a deadline of 5 p.m. on Saturday to return the dough, or potentially face theft charges.

Police: If you took spilled cash from armored truck in tunnel, you have 2 days to return it [Baltimore Sun]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Google’s Self-Driving Car Involved In Collision Resulting In Injuries For First Time

http://ift.tt/1RDEFtp

Google’s self-driving prototypes have been tooling around on real roads for some time now, and like cars that are driven by people, they’ve had a few bumps and traffic incidents, but no one has gotten hurt. That’s all changed now, as the company reports one of its driverless vehicles has been involved in an accident that involved injuries for the first time.

The collision happened near Google’s home in Mountain View, CA, where 20 of its self-driving prototypes have been cruising around recently. In this case, the company’s Lexus SUV bearing sensors and cameras was hit from the back, Chris Urmson, head of Google’s self-driving car program, wrote in a blog post on Thursday, and three Google employees riding inside to monitor the test car complained of minor whiplash as a result.

They were checked out at a hospital and later cleared to go back to work after the July 1 collision, Google says, while the driver of the other car also complained of neck and back pain.

Because these cars are just prototypes and can’t drive around without a human behind the wheel just yet, a Google employee is required to be behind the wheel. Then there’s usually someone in the front passenger seat to take notes and in this case, there was another Googler in the back seat along for the ride.

According to an accident report that Google filed with the California Department of Motor Vehicles about the July 1 crash, the driverless SUV was going about 15 mph in self-driving mode behind two other cars, as they all approached an intersection with a green light. When the first car slowed to a stop so it wouldn’t block the intersection, the other car and Google’s vehicle also stopped.

About a second later, a fourth vehicle hit Google’s car from the back at about 17 mph, with the driverless car’s on-board sensors showing the other car did not brake.

Though police responded, they didn’t file an accident report. This is a good thing, says Google’s Urmson.

“We’re seeing first-hand the true measure of how distraction is impacting driving,” he told USA Today. “None of our accidents rise to the level of police reports. So what we are experiencing is what the road is really like.”

The company started issuing monthly reports about the collisions and accidents in June (including a list of all the accidents before then), noting that the company’s cars hadn’t been the cause of any of the previous collisions.

Out of a total of 14 accidents in the last six years and 1.9 million miles of testing, the company says 11 of those involved Google cars getting rear-ended.

Urmson adds in his post that the SUVs “are being hit surprisingly often” by distracted drivers, who could be looking at their phones.

“The clear theme is human error and inattention,” Urmson wrote. “We’ll take all this as a signal that we’re starting to compare favorably with human drivers.”


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Consumerist Friday Flickr Finds

http://ift.tt/1LexeFl

Here are seven of the best photos that readers added to the Consumerist Flickr Pool in the last week, picked for usability in a Consumerist post or for just plain neatness.

(Will)

(Will)

Want to see your pictures on our site? Our Flickr pool is the place where Consumerist readers upload photos for possible use in future Consumerist posts. Just be a registered Flickr user, go here, and click “Join Group?” up on the top right. Choose your best photos, then click “send to group” on the individual images you want to add to the pool.


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist