Menu

Friday, December 11, 2015

How Fraudsters Can Convert Stolen Goods Into Cash Through Bargain-Hunters

http://ift.tt/1QBKPYr
(arvind grover)
Maybe you’re planning a large purchase or a big shopping trip with a certain retailer, and you seek out gift cards to that store from online gift card marketplaces. Swapping gift cards online is a unique opportunity for savings, but also provides a unique opportunity for fraudsters.

How’s that? The sellers aren’t misrepresenting the amounts on their cards or selling counterfeits. According to a report on Krebs on Security, there’s a problem unique to national retail chains: shoplifters turn ill-gotten merchandise into cash by using gift card exchange sites.

The sites aren’t parties to this scheme, but the existence of sites where people can sell gift cards for prices under retail provides an opportunity for them to convert cards into cash easily before card buyers and marketplaces catch them.

One flag to look out for: the reader who initially submitted this story to Krebs purchased Petco gift cards that turned out to be merchandise return cards, not gift cards as they were advertised. If this happens to you, don’t just shrug and go shopping anyway: notify the gift card marketplace.
The Role of Phony Returns in Gift Card Fraud [Krebs on Security]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Breast Milk Scammer Sends Fake Check In Exchange For Mail-Order Milk

http://ift.tt/1c1jA9o
(bisbeejones)
In this story, a woman and her customer were engaging in a controversial practice: they had arranged online to exchange human milk for money, shipping it across the country. This kind of transaction poses risks of contamination and spoilage, but that isn’t why we’re sharing the story. We’re sharing it because the buyer sent a fake check.

The mother who pumped and shipped her milk says that she sent off her real milk in exchange for a fake check, and she shared her story with CBS Sacramento because she wants to warn others. Her advice really applies to people shopping or selling on any online marketplace: read the rules, make sure to follow any advice that the site gives for avoiding fraud, no matter how trustworthy your potential trading partner might seem.

In this case, a woman in Florida sent a check for $2,000, paying in advance for a total of 750 ounces of pumped milk over the coming months. Yet what the purported seller swore is a real check is a counterfeit, according to her bank.

The site, OnlyTheBreast.com, specifically spells out to sellers that they should only accept PayPal, and that they should never accept payments in the form of a check.

milktips

“Do not under any circumstances accept checks,” they say, just in case it isn’t clear.

Maybe the most important lesson to take home is to always read warning labels. The site whew the transaction took place specifically warns users not to accept checks as payment, but this provider was satisfied that the buyer was a real and trustworthy person.

Grass Valley Woman Selling Breast Milk Online Says She Was Scammed By Bad Check [CBS Sacramento]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Major Package Carriers Want To Help You Not Get Your Deliveries Stolen

http://ift.tt/1mfyRso
(Taro the Shiba Inu)
No one wants to see their packages stolen from their front porch. Not even package thieves want anyone to steal their packages. That’s why, as we shift more of our shopping online, the major delivery services have devised new ways to ensure that our packages end up in our hands.

There are two ways that carriers can bypass leaving things on the porch: by having customers use the Web to schedule delivery windows or re-route packages to a different address as needed, o having carriers deliver our packages somewhere else.

UPS was the first to allow residential package recipients to do this, and now competitors USPS and FedEx have joined the party. All three use the same business model: accounts and some basic services, like notifications of an impending delivery, are free. Customers have to pay for other services, which can include setting a precise delivery time or having a package re-routed to a different residential address.

Delivering packages to a central location is limited only to certain areas. Even Amazon has joined this effort, setting up its own lockers in some areas where people can pick up their package from a secure space. UPS is now experimenting with delivering residential packages to nearby businesses.

How to Avoid Holiday Package Theft at Home [Consumer Reports]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Report: Cord Found Wrapped Around Accelerator Of Runaway Boston Train

http://ift.tt/1NTi8kI
(JuliusSeizure)
We knew it: the Boston commuter train that left the station with a driver yesterday didn’t suddenly become self-aware and decide to drive off all on its own. Instead, investigators reportedly found a cord wrapped around the train’s accelerator.

On Thursday morning, a Red Line train rolled away from the station with 50 passengers aboard and made it through four stations before humans were able to stop it.

After the incident, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority said it seemed likely that someone had deliberately messed with the train, and a new report indicates that’s the case: WBZ-TV cites sources familiar with the investigation that a rubber telephone cord was used to inhibit the normal movement of the train.

It was reportedly wrapped around a control called the Cineston valve, which acts as either an accelerator or a brake control. It requires constant pressure to set the train in forward motion.

The train’s operator stepped outside to set a bypass switch because of a signal problem, but the cord hadn’t been removed, which made it keep going without him, the sources say.

Transportation Secretary Stephanie Pollack would not confirm the cause Friday to WBZ-TV, citing the ongoing investigation.

The conductor involved was brushed by the train and suffered a minor leg injury. He’s now been placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation.

The MBTA says going forward, it will require the presence of a second technician during a bypass procedure, instead of relying on a single operator to man the train.

Cord Reportedly Found Wrapped Around Accelerator Of Runaway Red Line Train [CBS Boston/WBZ-TV]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Disney Decides To Be Evil Again, Re-Sends Copyright Takedown For Star Wars Figure Pic

http://ift.tt/1RehGUR
This post on the SWAN Facebook page was hit with a copyright claim by Disney. The claim was initially retracted, but then re-sent by Disney only hours later, resulting in the removal of the entire post.
This morning, it seemed like Disney had realized that sending copyright takedown notices for legally obtained and posted photos of Star Wars action figures was maybe not a good idea. But the Dark Side apparently has Mickey in its grips, as Disney continues to send takedown notices for copyright claims the company had already retracted.

Ars Technica reports that the folks at Star Wars Action Network — who dared to break absolutely no law by posting a photo of a new Star Wars action figure, legally purchased at a Walmart store, on their Facebook page — are the victims of Disney’s utter incompetence when it comes to dealing with copyright matters.

Earlier today, Disney had retracted its demand to have SWAN remove the images. But Ars notes that, almost immediately after everyone rejoiced, a second copyright Death Star was built.

“For reasons we can’t understand—Disney has now RESUBMITTED the claim, again removing the pictures (that they restored this morning),” wrote Marjorie Carvalho of SWAN.

Making matters even more confusing, Facebook demanded that the entire post — not just the photos — be taken down.

So instead of the post seen in the above screengrab, visitors to that link now only see this:
nocontent

And just to rub in how horribly, horribly stupid and bad Disney is, the SWAN staffer who posted the photo is now under a three-day ban from posting to Facebook.

As Ars notes, it’s highly possible this is all the result of a dumb copyright bot. But it also flies in the face of the Digital Millennium [Falcon] Copyright Act, which says it’s against the law for anyone to knowingly file a false copyright takedown notice. Since Disney had previously retracted this notice, it would seem to follow that the company should have know that the initial claim was bogus.


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Not So Fast, New York: DraftKings Says It’s Still Able To Operate In New York State

http://ift.tt/1Z71pDz

draftkingsEarlier this morning, a New York Supreme Court judge granted the state’s temporary injunction against DraftKings and FanDuel, blocking the daily fantasy sports (DFS) sites from doing business in the state, pending the outcome of the state’s lawsuit against them. However, DraftKings says it was able to hold off this injunction, allowing the site to remain in operation in the Empire State for the time being.

According to David Boies, DraftKing’s legal eagle, the site filed a notice of appeal immediately after the injunction was granted. DraftKings also filed an expedited motion to stay the Court’s decision, pending that appeal.

“This immediate stay was granted, so we will remain fully operational in New York,” says Boies in a statement. “We look forward to a full and fair hearing and are confident we will demonstrate clearly to the Court why we should be able to continue to offer our DFS games in New York permanently.”

Boies says the company has been talking to state legislators in New York about a potential resolution that would allow DFS sites to continue doing business with New York residents.

We’ve reached out to the office of New York state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman for comment, but have not yet heard back. We also do not yet know if FanDuel is likewise shielded from the injunction by this stay, or how long the stay might remain in effect.

If we receive any more information, we will update.


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Family Suing Burger King After Woman Suffers Seizure While Trapped In Burger King Bathroom, Later Dies

http://ift.tt/16Zor85
(Mike Mozart)
The family of a New York City woman who died after being trapped in a Burger King bathroom is now suing the fast food chain, claiming that her death could’ve been prevented if restaurant employees had had a way to circumvent the door’s lock.

CBS New York reports that a Queens woman wasn’t feeling so well on Sept. 27 at her local Burger King, so she went to the single-stall restroom and locked the door. Soon after, she suffered a seizure and fell on floor. She couldn’t reach the handle, so her family says she started screaming for help.

“I pulled the handle,” the woman’s boyfriend told the news station. “The handle broke off in my hand.”

He says the lock could only be accessed from inside the restroom, and that while he did everything he could to pry the door open from the outside, it didn’t work. Firefighters arrived on the scene and used an axe to smash open the door.

The woman was taken to the hospital, and later died. Her family says doctors told them she had brain damage from a prolonged lack of oxygen. They believe if they could’ve gotten the door open when she screamed for help, she’d still be alive.

The family’s attorney filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against Burger King on their behalf on Thursday, claiming that the lock on the door — now replaced — was antiquated.

“What happens if there’s a fire; if someone’s giving birth — they can’t get to that lock?” he asked. “To me, it’s stupid.”

However, there’s nothing in NYC’s building code that prohibits locks of the sort the Burger King in question had in place, CBS notes.

When Consumerist contacted Burger King about the lawsuit, a spokesperson said the company can’t comment.

“We extend our sincere condolences to the family of [the woman] for their loss. As a matter of policy, the BURGER KING® brand does not comment on any claims involving franchised BURGER KING® restaurants, which are independently owned and operated by BURGER KING® franchisees.”

Family Sues After Woman Gets Trapped In Queens Burger King Restroom, Dies [CBS New York]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

L.A. Boutique Kitson Closing All 17 Stores

http://ift.tt/1J0zZVw

Screen Shot 2015-12-11 at 2.43.26 PMOne of L.A.’s most well-known boutique chains — a relic of the “glory days” of reality TV —  is no longer peddling pricey blouses, pants, and accessories to the semi-famous, with Kitson shutting down all 17 of its stores, and its online business.

The company, which made a name for itself as a retail hot-spot, catering to celebrities like Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton in the early aughts, announced Thursday that it would shut all of its doors after 15 years of business, the Los Angeles Times reports.

Stores in Nevada, California, and Oregon will shutter, while the company’s online business will also call it quits.

A going-out-of-business sale at both the physical stores and online kicked off on Thursday and will be handled by liquidators Gordon Brothers Group and Hilco Merchant Resources.

This isn’t the first time the boutique brand has encountered financial issues, the L.A. Times reports that in 2013, the company had to obtain a $15 million line of credit to stay afloat.

Kitson, boutique for young starlets, is closing all 17 stores [Los Angeles Times]


by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Apple Reminds Users That Their 2-Year-Old iPhones Are Totally Ancient

http://ift.tt/1OWIKq4
(Ninja M.)
Sure, when we buy electronics, we acknowledge that they could become obsolete mere minutes after purchase. However, some iPhone fans who are committing acts of consumer endurance by using a mobile device released more than two years ago aren’t pleased with a reminder that Apple added to the App Store that’s nagging them to get a new phone already.

The ad appears when the user visits Apple’s App Store to download updates to the program on their phones. Users noticed it after a recent operating system update, and it appears to only be affecting users who have 2013’s iPhone 5S or older models.

Most Americans are used to a 2-year upgrade cycle for their phones, and people in countries without carrier subsidy are on similar cycles, so the promotion makes sense.

Isn’t the devices’ longevity a selling point, too, though? Boosting sales during the holiday season is rarely ever a bad idea, but this ad came with backlash from users.

iphone6

Apple now displays popup ads for their products inside their own apps. [Reddit]


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Macy’s Makes It Difficult For Me To Give Them Money Because My Last Name Is Slutsky

http://ift.tt/1wlfGf3
(The Caldor Rainbow)
Meet Leonard Slutsky. He’s a Consumerist reader who had one desire: to give Macy’s money. But Macy’s wouldn’t accept his online order, simply because his last name is Slutsky.

Last week, Leonard tried to give Macys.com $23.84 for something he wanted to order and pick up later, but he ran into trouble when he entered his last name in the required field for shipping.

“I’m offended that @Macys thinks my last name is invalid,” Leonard Tweeted recently, including Consumerist in his message.

leonard

Though a Macy’s social media rep apologized and asked him to send his email address via direct message, Leonard tells Consumerist that no one followed up with him to explain what had happened.

Instead, with the system rejecting his surname, Leonard took matters into his own hands and reached out to a live chat rep who completed the order for him.

“Because of the delay completing the order online, my item was no longer available for pickup in store,” Leonard told Consumerist. “However, upon request, they expedited shipping to my house.”

Which is great for this one purchase, but that’s not something a person wants to do every time they’re ordering something online. So Leonard tried to contact Macy’s again, but had trouble reaching the company by phone, he says.

Eventually, a supervisor took a report about his name-related problem, and told him he’d hear back in one to two months, “because of the technical nature of this issue.” Not exactly speedy customer service.

When we reached out to Macy’s, a company spokesman said it was hard to know what triggered the “invalid” message in this case, suggesting that something about the combination of “t” and “s” in Leonard’s last name made the computer believe it was a typographical error that should be “st.”

But if that were true, wouldn’t a whole lot of people with last names ending in “tsky” also be barred from ordering things from Macys.com?

The Macy’s rep told Consumerist that he reached out to his company’s systems people, but that they are “crazy-busy right now” due to the holiday rush, and would let us know if and when he hears back from them.

When Consumerist asked if the company had a profanity filter that might have flagged the name “Slutsky,” the rep didn’t reply.

Leonard tells Consumerist that he gets it, these things happen, but beyond some trouble signing up for an email account, he generally doesn’t have any trouble.

Has your name ever been rejected by a retailer or other online business without any apparent reason? Let us know, email us at tips@consumerist.com with the subject line, “I’M LIKE LEONARD” and tell us your story.


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Kickstarter, Tumblr, Etsy, Others Ask Lawmakers To Not Use Budget To Ruin Net Neutrality

http://ift.tt/18q2ctw
(Steve)
While the telecom industry is fighting the bad fight against net neutrality through the legal system — the way such matters are supposed to be handled — some in Congress want to ruin the FCC’s Open Internet Order by using good ol’ fashioned pork-barrel politics, slapping riders that will undercut the pro-consumer regulation onto the omnibus budget bill now being compiled on Capitol Hill.

This week, a number of high-profile Internet and tech companies — including Kickstarter, Tumblr, Etsy, Vimeo, Twilio, Dwolla, and bandwidth providers like Level 3 and Cogent — sent a letter [PDF] to the leadership of the House and Senate, asking them to refrain from using the budget to kill neutrality.

The biggest names in online tech — like Facebook, Amazon, Google, Yahoo, Netflix, eBay, and Samsung — signed the letter indirectly through their membership in signees like the Internet Freedom Business Alliance, and Incompas (which you might know by its former name, Comptel).

These companies have been successful in defeating some anti-neutrality riders that were attached to earlier drafts of the spending bill, including one that would have enforced a “legislative stay” on the Open Internet Order by withholding funding for its implementation until all current court challenges against net neutrality had been decided. Note that it took about four years for the 2010 version of the neutrality rules to eventually be gutted by a federal appeals court. Had the FCC chosen to appeal to the Supreme Court (instead of drafting new rules), that legal dispute would have gone on even longer.

There are now provisions attached by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations that would prevent the FCC from regulating rates on broadband — in spite of the fact that the FCC has forborne from the very practices these riders are seeking to prohibit. What the FCC will allow is for consumers to challenge, on a case-by-case basis, allegedly unfair or unreasonable rates.

The signees of the letters — some of whom would benefit from a lack of rate regulation — point out that they agree with the idea of preventing retail rate­setting, but caution that the “rate regulation riders that passed the committee process are drafted in a broad manner that could create unintended consequences for telecommunications policy by eliminating FCC safeguards for broadband markets, Internet entrepreneurs, app makers, and Internet users alike.”

The companies say that it’s better for this issue to be resolved within the proper, existing regulatory framework, “rather than in the often chaotic appropriations process.”


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Yum CEO Would Rather Pizza Hut Be More Convenient Than Have A Better Product

http://ift.tt/1vUvXge
(Adam A. Koch)
Pizza Hut has been fighting for a slice of the marketplace pie with a weapon that’s turning out to be rather ineffective namely, a complete menu revamp that added a bunch of new crusts, drizzles, toppings and doodads to their regular slate of pizzas. That whole idea of trying to compete with a better product is not the way to go, Yum Brands CEO Greg Creeds says. Instead, Pizza Hut should focus on being more convenient than its rivals.

We sampled 21 of those new menu additions ahead of their release earlier this year, and we weren’t exactly blown away. We weren’t the only ones underwhelmed by the changes: back in April, the country’s largest Pizza Hut franchisee said that the “new ‘Flavors of Now’ positioning did not deliver the sales momentum that we had anticipated.”

During a presentation for the Yum’s investor day, Creed noted that the days of trying to beat out competition with a better product are gone, and that convenience trumps quality. Going forward, Yum brands, especially Pizza Hut, should now focus on being more like Uber (welcome to 2015, Greg), instead of trying to create a superior product. He’s all about “easy” beats “better.”

“If you think about the Uber experience, it’s easy to use, it’s easy to pay, it’s very easy to track,” Creed said in a phone interview with the Associated Press.

Putting convenience first could mean cutting down wait times at the drive-thru, or adding catering, delivery and mobile ordering services. Pizza Hut can benefit a lot from making life easier for customers, Creed says, instead of giving them a better product, because people who prefer the chain’s pizza will only wait about two minutes more for it. However, Pizza Hut takes more than two minutes longer to deliver than its competitors.

Pizza Hut’s sales fell 3% at established locations last year, which stands in stark comparison to rival Domino’s which, saw in increase of 7.5% in sales last year. Domino’s attributes that achievement to the convenience of its online ordering and mobile app.

Creed says he put Pizza Hut’s management team get in a room about a month ago to come up with a “clear brand identity,” and told them not to come out again until they did.

“One of the joys of being the boss, you can lock other people away,” said Creed. Nine hours later, he says Pizza Hut’s chief brand officer Jeff Fox asked for permission to leave the room, after coming up with “easy” beats “better.”

The plan seems to have begun already, because nothing says “easy” like a dresser full of pizzas.

Yum CEO says Pizza Hut needs to be more like Uber [Associated Press]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Legislation Would Require Liquid Nicotine Come In Child-Proof Packages

http://ift.tt/1H43Cop

ecigLegislation to ensure children aren’t able to get their little hands on tasty-looking – but poisonous – liquid nicotine has made it past one hurdle: the Senate unanimously passed the measure yesterday, indicating widespread support for the Child Nicotine Poisoning Prevention Act of 2015. 

The Act [PDF], introduced by Florida Senator Bill Nelson, aims to treat the packaging of liquid nicotine the same as household substances under the Poison Prevention Packaging Act of 1970: requiring the use of child-proof bottles and containers.

Liquid nicotine, used to refill e-cigarettes, has been a point of concern for consumer advocates, health officials and lawmakers in recent years, with reports indicating that children, who may be drawn to the product’s bright color packaging and flavors, are at a higher risk of death from coming into contact with the toxin.

According to the poison control data, the substance is highly toxic if ingested or absorbed through the skin, as little as half a teaspoon can be fatal if ingested by an average-sized toddler. In 2014, poison control centers received more than 3,000 calls related to e-cigarette and liquid nicotine exposure, and one toddler died, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) reports.

At issue in the bill is the packaging of the products. Currently, manufacturers aren’t required to use child-resistant containers.

That would change under the Child Nicotine Poisoning Prevention Act of 2015, which now makes its way to the U.S. House of Representatives for final passage.

Under the Act, manufacturers of liquid nicotine would be required to sell products in child-resistant packaging consistent with U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) standards within six months of the bill’s passage.

The packaging must be difficult for children under five years of age to open or to obtain harmful contents from.

Additionally, the bill would preserve the Food and Drug Administration’s authority to regulate the packaging of tobacco products.

AAP, which backed the measure, applauded legislators’ unanimous vote on the Act, noting that it marks an important step in the process of protecting children.

“Every child deserves a safe home environment, and the Child Nicotine Poisoning Prevention Act of 2015 helps to provide just that,” AAP President Sandra G. Hassink, said in a statement. “With e-cigarettes becoming more and more common in households across the country, we cannot afford to wait another day to protect children from poisonous liquid nicotine.”


by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Court Temporarily Blocks DraftKings, FanDuel From Doing Business In New York State

http://ift.tt/1Z71pDz

draftkingsLast month, New York state investigators came to the conclusion that daily fantasy sites DraftKings and FanDuel are, under state law, illegal gambling operations. The state then sued the companies, seeking to stop the high-profile operations from doing business in New York, and today a court issued a temporary injunction that bars them from doing just that.

At issue in New York is whether or not daily fantasy sports (DFS) are “contests of chance,” which are generally illegal in New York state, or a game of skill that merely charges an entry fee.

In arguing against the injunction, lawyers for the DFS sites pointed to federal court precedent that held paying an entry fee is not the same as placing a wager or a bet.

But in today’s order [PDF] granting the injunction, New York State Supreme Court Judge Manuel Mendez notes that contrary to that case, which involved paying a non-refundable, one-time entry fee to play in the contest, DFS participants “pay a fee every time they play, potentially multiple times daily instead of one seasonal entry fee, with a percentage of the fee being paid to Fanduel, Inc., and DraftKings, Inc.”

The judge also pointed out that the New York law does not make any mention of wagering or betting, but rather states that in a contest of chance, a person “risks something of value.”

“The payment of an ‘entry fee’ as high as $10,600 on one or more contests daily could certainly be deemed risking ‘something of value,’” writes the judge.

The DFS sites also contended that New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman had overstepped his authority because, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), which effectively outlaws most online games of chance, includes a carve-out specifically for fantasy sports.

But the judge countered that the very definition of “unlawful Internet gambling” in that law is the placing, receiving, or otherwise knowingly transmitting a bet or wager “by any means which involves the use, at least in part, of the Internet where such bet or wager is unlawful under any applicable Federal or State law in the State or Tribal lands in which the bet or wager is initiated, received, or otherwise made.”

Thus, because New York state believes these sites to be illegal gambling, the judge says the UIGEA carve-out does not apply. A number of states — Arizona, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana, and Washington — have laws on the books that prevent residents from playing on DraftKings and FanDuel, and neither site accepts fees from users in these states. Nevada was also added to that list after it too came to the conclusion that DFS sites constituted unlicensed gambling in the state.

“We are pleased with the decision, consistent with our view that DraftKings and FanDuel are operating illegal gambling operations in clear violation of New York law,” reads a statement from AG Schneiderman. “I have said from the beginning that my job is to enforce the law, and that is what happened today.”

The folks at DraftKings are, as you’d expect, not pleased with the injunction.

“We are disappointed with the Court’s decision, and will immediately file an emergency notice of appeal in order to preserve the status quo,” says David Boies, counsel to DraftKings. “Daily Fantasy Sports contests have been played legally by New Yorkers for the past seven years and we believe this status quo should be maintained while the litigation plays out.”

Between the two sites, they stand to lose access to more than 1 million paying users in New York state while the injunction is in place.


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Chipotle Has Been Making Customers Sick Since The Summer, Company Says “There Really Wasn’t A Pattern”

http://ift.tt/1NmYqye
(JeepersMedia)
Although Chipotle CEO and co-founder Steve Ells apologized yesterday to customers who have gotten sick from eating at the chain recently — whether from E. Coli or norovirus — it’s worth remembering that there are some folks who’ve had to wait a bit longer for that mea culpa.

There’s no question that Chipotle is having a bad year, after temporarily closing 43 restaurants in the Pacific Northwest amid an E. coli outbreak that resulted in 52 sick customers in nine states. Heck, just this week, the chain announced that a Boston Chipotle had to be shuttered after being linked to around 80 illnesses, and a Seattle location is closing its doors for repeated violations.

But there were other incidents, as far back as July this year, when five people in Seattle contracted E. coli after eating at a local Chipotle, according to the county public health department. Chipotle didn’t tell the public about that one until November, however.

A string of outbreaks followed elsewhere in the U.S., which didn’t get as much attention as the more recent strings of illnesses: at the end of August, more than 100 customers in Simi Valley, CA came down with norovirus after eating at a local Chipotle and a salmonella outbreak in mid-September in Minnesota was eventually linked to tomatoes served at 22 locations that resulted in a reported 64 illnesses.

Chipotle called the summer and early fall outbreaks “a small number of isolated and unrelated incidents — in terms of geography and incident,” in an email to The New York Post from spokesman Chris Arnold.

“There really wasn’t a pattern,” he added. “Since all of this began, we have completed a comprehensive reassessment of all of our food safety and handling practices … and we have begun implementing that program.”

After offering up his apology for those customers who’ve been taken down by a Chipotle-related illness, CEO Ells said that the company would be beefing up its food safety procedures, vowing that the company is “going to be the safest place to eat.”


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

7 Things We Learned About Federal Student Loans & The Companies That Profit From Them

http://ift.tt/1IP5PcS
(Tracy O)

Fifty years ago, Congress created the federal loan program as a way to help Americans realize their dreams of a better life through higher education. While millions of students have no doubt benefited from the program, millions of others have found themselves burdened by mountains of debts, fielding calls from debt collectors and loan servicers, and watching as their paychecks are whittled down by garnishments. Today, seven million former college students are in default with a record $115 billion in federal loans. While those figures may be oppressing borrowers, it’s providing a stream of income – and profit – for companies contracted by the government to collect payments from debtors. 

A new report from Bloomberg highlights just how profitable the federal student loan industry can be for debt collectors, refinancers and for-profit colleges.

While the report is full of surprising numbers and consumer stories of the gigantic industry, it also provides insight into a system some say is failing students, despite its original intention of making life better for them.

Student loans, both private and federal, combine to create a trillion-dollar business — that’s 12 zeros — and that money is going somewhere, often to companies that use illegal, hurtful tactics to collect their share of the bill.

Here are seven things we learned from Bloomberg’s report on who’s profiting from $1.2 trillion of federal student loans:

1. The federal student loan program is big business: the government has distributed about $100 billion in education loans each year since 2009.

And the tab is only expected to increase – nearly doubling to $200 billion issued annually in the next decade.

2. It’s not just students who benefit from the federal loan program. Companies that make money off the loans run the gamut from debt servicers like Affiliated Computer Services Inc. – part of Xerox Corp., which is currently under federal investigation for inaccuracies and overcharges – to for-profit colleges like Education Management Corporation, which just agreed to pay $95.5 million to settle fraud and recruitment violations, and Apollo Education Group – the operator of the embattled University of Phoenix.

3. Not all loans are issued by the government, but they all have ties to the feds. Private lenders also issue billions of dollars in loans each year, most backed by the government.

During the recession, the federal government purchased $112 billion in existing debt. Bloomberg reports that Sallie Mae recorded a gross revenue over two years of more than $600 million from selling debt.

4. Student loan borrowers generally aren’t aware of what’s going on behind the scenes with their loan originator. Instead, their point of contact is typically a loan servicer, which processes monthly payments.

These companies are contracted by the federal government to collect payments from borrowers in default, and these agreements can be lucrative.

According to Bloomberg, Education Department awarded servicing companies $576 million in fees in the most recent fiscal year.

Under the contracts, firms typically earn monthly fees by loan status: $2.85 for those in repayment, $1.05 when borrowers are in school and $0.45 when they’re delinquent 361 days or more, data from the Federal Procurement Data System shows.

5. Some of these servicing companies are under investigation by federal regulators for illegal collection practices.

Navient Corp, which spun off from Sallie Mae in 2014, announced in August that it could face a lawsuit from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau over allegedly unfair practices like overcharging and imposing excessive fees on consumers’ loans.

A spokesperson for the Dept. of Education tells Bloomberg that the agency will review performance standards for loan servicers before rebidding contracts next year.

6. Servicers aren’t the only companies that receive an influx of cash from the feds when it comes to student loans. Debt collection firms are also contracted by the Dept. of Education to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.

FMS Investment Corp., a collection company, was paid $227 million by the Dept. of Education from October 2011 to Sept. 2015. But that company is just a small cog in a bigger machine.

It’s a unit of Ceannate Corp., one of two dozen collection firms that were paid $936 million in the last fiscal year by the Dept. of Education.

Those figures are only expected to grow, Bloomberg reports, as the Dept. of Education is bidding a new contract, its largest ever.

Despite the mounting contract costs, using collection agencies – even to the detriment of borrowers – has created results for the government.

According to the Government Accountability Office, collection companies helped recover about $9 billion on more than 1.5 million loans from 2011 to 2013.

7. When attempts by servers and collection agencies fail, the government doesn’t simply give up on its owed debt. Instead, the Treasury Department turns to garnishments of Social Security, tax refunds or wages, Bloomberg reports.

Treasury said it had net offsets of $2.27 billion for education debts in fiscal 2015.

While the way in which the federal student loan program operates likely won’t change overnight, advocates say it’s something that prospective borrowers should keep in mind when looking at their college financing options.

“This is not some small cottage industry,” Rohit Chopra, the former student-loan ombudsman for the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which oversees loan servicers, debt collectors and private student lenders, tells Bloomberg. “There is a large student-loan industrial complex. Rising costs of college and flat family incomes have created enormous business opportunity for every step of the loan process.”

Who’s Profiting From $1.2 Trillion of Federal Student Loans? [Bloomberg]


by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Men’s Wearhouse CEO Says He Knows How To Fix Jos. A. Bank

http://ift.tt/21UUcYG
No more three-for-one deals, but BOGO is alive and well on Jos. A. Bank's homepage.
Men’s Wearhouse is about a year and a half into its ownership of Jos. A. Bank, and it’s safe to say things aren’t going so well: after layoffs in March 2015, and ending three-for-one suit deals, sales are down, way down. But Men’s Wearhouse says it’s got a plan to turn things around, and isn’t giving up on the suit-slingers at Jos. A. Bank just yet.

Men’s Wearhouse executives said on a Thursday morning conference call reported by MarketWatch that they didn’t realize how “toxic” some of Jos. A Bank’s promotions would be before they decided to buy the company for $1.8 billion in November 2014.

It seemed like a good challenge, said Chief Executive Doug Ewert, as Men’s Wearhouse had a history of taking on struggling brands and turning them around. The company saw an opportunity to grab a nice chunk of the market, and it went for it.

But customers didn’t react well when the retailer ended the three-for-one suit deal, with Jos. A. Bank reporting in November that comparable-store sales dropped 14.6% at Bank stores, while the same figure increased slightly at parent brand Men’s Wearhouse. At that time, it was expected that sales would fall 20%-25% in the next quarter.

As it stands now, five weeks into the current quarter, same-store sales at Jos. A. Bank are down 35%. That’s in comparison to an average growth of 5% at Men’s Wearhouse and its other brands.

“What we did not know then but do now was just how toxic some of the promotions were, and how deep and far-reaching the transformation required would be, and how significantly near-term performance would suffer as we began to execute painful but necessary steps to restore the long-term sustainable profit model and reshape the business towards a healthy and growing Jos. A. Bank,” Ewert said.

He’s not about to shutter the brand, however, and has a plan to fix things. Thus far that’s meant integrating the brands, upgrading the e-commerce system and other areas and now, doing away with “unsustainable promotions.”

“During the second quarters and third quarters this year, the effectiveness of the promotional model deteriorated more quickly than we’d anticipated,” Ewert said.

The next step is to analyze company data and take customer feedback into account to figure out what promotional strategy will yield the most profitable results. Also included in the turnaround plan: tweaking merchandise, refreshing its marketing strategy and of course, looking at cost-cutting opportunities. Taking all that into account, Ewert said the company is “not anywhere near” a decision to close Jos. A. Bank stores or sell the company.

Men’s Wearhouse ends ‘buy-one-get-three-free’ promotions to turn around Jos. A. Bank [MarketWatch]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

eBay Wants To Help You Cash In Your Christmas Gifts

http://ift.tt/eA8V8J

eBay used to be a site where individual users listed items for auction. Now the company no longer wants to be known as an “auction” site, and instead wants to be a site where large chain retailers like Toys ‘R’ Us sell their wares, and where individual users pay “valets” to list items for them. To promote the latter, eBay is offering free valet service, including real-life sales stations, after Christmas to help people sell unwanted gifts for cash.

Valet users usually gt 60 to 80% of the item’s selling price, but the service accepts a limited selection of goods. To be sold through Valet, your stuff has to be in good condition, an easy qualification for a new item that you received as a gift. It can’t be breakable or heavy, or so valuable that it needs to be authenticated.

Items that sell best are the exact kind of things you might receive as a holiday gift: clothing and electronics. eBay wants to turn ditching your stuff into an annual tradition, and will have temporary in-person valet stations at three Westfield-owned malls in San Francisco, Chicago, and Paramus, NJ. People in other cities will have to delay gratification, and have to make do with drop boxes in some other Westfield-owned malls, or mail their items in. These have the very inaccurate name of “regifting stations.”

eBay found a brilliant way to profit from the holiday gifts you don’t want [Business Insider] (via eCommerceBytes)


by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Disney Forces Takedown Of Star Wars Figure Photos; Realizes Maybe That’s Not A Good Idea

http://ift.tt/1RehGUR
This post on the SWAN Facebook page was hit with a copyright claim by Disney.
We understand the desire for Disney to protect its huge investment in the Star Wars franchise — who knows, maybe the new sequel will only clear a couple billion dollars at the box office. Disney also has a long, long history of being overly protective of its copyright — to the point where no new copyrighted works of any sort will reach the public domain in the U.S. until at least 2019. But to tick off your biggest fans by forcing them to remove legally obtained photos of Star Wars action figures? That’s just plain stupid.

The House that Mickey Built is learning that this week, after it sent takedown notices to Facebook and Twitter over photos posted by fans on social media of new official action figures from the upcoming Force Awakens movie.

The problem, it seems, involves the fact that the even bigger idiots at Walmart started putting out the new action figures early. Thus, when Disney’s copyright bots spotted the images, they freaked out and labeled them as screen shots of “an unreleased figurine for Star Wars: Force Awakens,” according to a DMCA takedown notice posted on StarWarsUnity.net.

Legitimate Twitter posts were deleted because of these takedown demands, and the folks at Star Wars Action News had to remove a completely legal image from their Facebook page.

“A friend texted my husband saying, hey, are you getting sued?” Marjorie Carvalho of SWAN tells Ars Technica about learning of the widespread takedown demands. “We looked and noticed we’d gotten a notice from Facebook saying our image violated copyright. It was confusing because our staff member, Justin, he took the photo.”

And so, even though this was Walmart’s error and Disney has, at best, an arguable copyright claim over someone sharing their photo of a legally purchased action figure online, the company chose to aggravate the franchise’s fan base rather than brush up on fair use law.

“Yes there’s a copyright, but I don’t think that entitles Disney and Lucasfilm to try to make that image disappear from the Internet,” Mitch Stolz of the Electronic Frontier Foundation explains to Ars. “Someone may have screwed up, and violated an agreement as to when the toys would hit the shelves. But that doesn’t make a photo of a toy forbidden information.”

Someone at the Magic Kingdom must have come to this same conclusion, because the DMCA demand for the photo posted on the SWAN Facebook page has been retracted.

“When we received the notice from Facebook, we e-mailed the Disney e-mail that was included. We received zero response from Disney however sometime overnight the picture was restored to our page,” Carvalho tells Business Insider. “We received an email from Facebook that ‘The reporting party, The Walt Disney Company, has retracted their report.'”


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

Millions In Campaign Contributions Enable The Title Loan Cycle Of Debt

http://ift.tt/1HYzzUV
(Ben Schumin)

Each year, thousands of consumers lose their vehicles – often their largest asset – after taking out small-dollar, high-interest auto title loans to cover expenses. Despite hundreds of attempts by lawmakers to rein in the often predatory auto title market, generous campaign donations from the industry’s leaders have created a cycle in which consumers are plunged deeper into debt, while title lenders continue lining their pocketbooks. 

A new report from the Center for Public Integrity highlights the struggle lawmakers and regulators encounter in their attempts to reform the often predatory title lending industry.

Title lending, legal in nearly half of U.S. states, allows consumers to put up their car title as collateral for a short-term, small-dollar loan. Like payday loans, borrowers are required to repay their debt – which increases dramatically thanks to three-digit interest rates – in just a few weeks.

When borrowers repay the loans they are often persuaded to simply take out a second. In some instances when they can’t repay their loans, they can elect to roll over the debt for a fee.

Although lenders claim their loans provide a needed financial service, borrowers who can’t repay their obligations often lose more than just a few thousand dollars; they lose their means to obtain financial independence — their vehicles.

While officials with title loan companies assure Public Integrity that repossessing vehicles is a “last resort,” records show that in New Mexico, Missouri, Virginia, and Tennessee, lenders reported a total of 50,055 repossession in 2013. The following year, 42,905 repossessions occurred, but that figure doesn’t include Tennessee seizures, as the state won’t release those numbers until next year.

Lawmakers, regulators, and consumer advocates have worked to protect consumers from losing their vehicles by fighting for reform in the title loan industry. However, most of those attempts have been rebuffed, according to the Center for Public Integrity.

That’s because the title lending industry has strong roots with both state and national lawmakers. In fact, since 2011, about 150 bills to cap interest rates – essentially putting an end to title loans as they operate now – died in 20 state legislatures thanks to millions of dollars in campaign contributions.

According to the Center for Public Integrity, three title lenders combined to provide $9.1 million in campaign contributions during the past decade.

Of those companies, the biggest donor – providing $4 million – was the operator of stores like LoanMax, Midwest Title Loans and others. TitleMax was the second largest contributor providing $3.8 million in donations, followed by Community Loans of America – the operator of Fast Auto Loans – with $1.3 million in donations.

In Virginia, the three title lending companies issued $1.5 million in campaign contributions in the past decade. In just the last year, five bills to reform the industry have failed.

Similar contributions and failed bills have occurred in other states including Tennessee where more than two dozen pieces of legislation never saw the light of day.

In New Mexico, Senator William P. Soules introduced a measure in 2014 that would cap title loan interest rates at 36%.

The effort quickly lost steam, in part, he says because of the intense industry lobbying in the state.

“There’s big money being made off the very poorest and most vulnerable people in our state,” he tells the Center for Public Integrity.

Because such contributions generally keep legislation that could protect consumers from passing, the only option states have to rein in predatory title lending is through regulators related to consumer lending laws.

And while regulators have gone after title loan companies with fines and penalties for their unscrupulous behavior, the action does little to change the lending landscape.

For example, in Illinois, regulators issued 230 fines totaling $1.1 million between January 2014 and August 2014.

According to the Center for Public Integrity, in at least 46 states, title lenders were cited for making a loan with a “scheduled monthly payment exceeding 50% of the obligor’s gross monthly income.”

When fines don’t work, states have turned to the courts, but that option often drags on, leaving consumers struggling.

For example, a suit against Wisconsin Auto Title Loans lasted for nearly a decade before being settled in September 2013 with the company declining to admit fault and paying $2.27 million in restitution and fines.

The same situation occurred in 2011 in West Virginia, where the attorney general’s office investigated Fast Auto Loans’ debt collection tactics – repossessing more than 200 cars from West Virginia residents who had crossed into Virginia to get a loan, the Center for Public Integrity reports. That case dragged on for three years before being settled for $1.2 million.

Despite the long, drawn-out lawsuits many states file against title lenders for a slew of unscrupulous tactics, the real change won’t come until legislation is passed in states, many advocates say.

But that likely won’t happen with massive campaign contributions, not that some legislators have given up trying.

“It’s disgusting,” Tracy Creery, a Missouri Representative, who introduced a bill this year to limit interest rates on auto title loans to 36%, tells the Center for Public Integrity. “The vast majority of the legislature is willing to look the other way on the need for reform.”

Lawmakers protect title loan firms while borrowers pay sky-high interest rates [The Center for Public Integrity]


by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Chipotle’s Bad Year Continues With Closure Of Seattle Restaurant For Repeated Violations

http://ift.tt/1OX6ecJ
(image via Google Maps)
Not even two months after Chipotle temporarily closed 43 restaurants in the Pacific Northwest amid an E. coli outbreak that resulted in 52 sick customers in nine states — and the same week that a Boston Chipotle had to be shuttered after being linked to around 80 illnesses — the burrito chain has had to shutter a Seattle eatery after being repeatedly flagged for serious health violations.

According to the official blog for the Public Health department of Seattle and King County, a Chipotle in the city’s South Lake Union neighborhood had been flagged for so-called “red” violations on three consecutive inspections.

A red violation involves the sort of behavior that inspectors believes is most likely to contribute to the spread of food-borne illnesses, like contaminated food or poor temperature control. When these violations are found, the restaurant is made to remedy the situation immediately.

Officials explain that none of the three red violations at this Chipotle were serious enough to shutter the restaurant on their own.

“However, because this location showed repeated violations, the health department closed the restaurant,” reads the blog post. “Public Health food program staff are working with Chipotle to correct these problems, and the restaurant will be allowed to re-open pending an inspection.”

The department says it has one, unconfirmed report of a person who may have become ill from eating at this particular location, but no connection has been proven at this point.

In the weeks since the E. coli outbreak, inspectors have ramped up their efforts to monitor Chipotle stores. Since then, a total of nine locations have been flagged for red violations, but only the one restaurant has been flagged so frequently that it merited being closed.

Yesterday, Chipotle founder and co-CEO Steve Ells apologized for all the illnesses linked to his restaurants.

“I have to say I’m sorry for the people that got sick. They’re having a tough time,” said Ells. “I feel terrible about that, and we’re doing a lot to rectify this and make sure it doesn’t happen again.”


by Chris Morran via Consumerist

UPS Having Trouble Handling Holiday Avalanche Of Online Orders

http://ift.tt/1ATvAAL
(Misfit Photographer)
We already know UPS is renting additional vehicles to help with the onslaught of holiday deliveries, but it seems that’s not enough to help the company stay ahead of the avalanche of online orders this time of year.

United Parcel Service is facing more holiday volume than it was expecting because everyone likes shopping online for the holidays, reports The Wall Street Journal, which could have a big impact on the season: according to an analysis of millions of packages by software developer ShipMatrix Inc, on-time delivery rates for UPS ground packages based on their usual shipping transit times last week fell to 91%, compared to an on-time rate of 97% during the same week last year.

(UPS isn’t alone in slowing down, however, as FedEx’s early numbers were lower than usual at around 95% on-time rate, the WSJ points out).

Some sources in the know tell the WSJ that UPS is being dragged under the waves by unexpectedly high volumes, high pickups and just not enough people and equipment to get the job done in some locations.

“Volumes are coming in much higher than planned,” John Haber, CEO of Spend Management Experts, which advises retailers on shipping matters told the WSJ. “You can only process so much volume so quickly.”

To try to combat the slowdown, UPS dispatched managers from its corporate headquarters in Atlanta and other locations to work at delivery centers in areas that need help handling the additional packages.

A UPS spokesman acknowledged that the company “did experience some high impact areas” driven by volume in some places that came in at “levels greater than the original peak plan for those locations.” That’s typical, he says, as retailers often might have more volume than expected and UPS usually sends management teams every year to sites that are affected.

The reason UPS often gets singled out in these shipping situations is simply because it does more residential deliveries than FedEx. But combined, UPS, FedEx and the U.S. Postal Service are expecting to ship more than 1.5 billion packages over the holidays, which is a boost of 10% over last year.

Everyone is just trying to keep the past from repeating itself, namely, the 2013 holiday season when UPS and FedEx were so overwhelmed at the last minute that many customers saw their packages arriving after the holidays. No one wants an empty scene under that tree.

UPS Struggles to Keep Up With Surge in Web Orders [The Wall Street Journal]


by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Dow And DuPont Merging To Create Massive Chemical Voltron In $130B Deal

http://ift.tt/1Y21kTA

dowdupontlogos
It may sound like the perfect marriage of the cold war era, but it’s 21st century business all over: Dow and DuPont, the two oldest, biggest chemical companies in the country, today announced their plans to merge in a whopping $130 billion deal.

As Reuters reports, the deal is being arranged with an eye toward shifting away from the all-encompassing conglomerate model of the 20th century, and pulling the platforms apart into discrete business units.

Eventually, the companies say, the post-merger plan is to take what was once two companies, make it one, and then split it up again into three separate, publicly-traded entities. One DowDuPont business would focus entirely on agriculture, another on materials science (which includes infrastructure, consumer goods, and inventing stuff like Teflon), and the last (and smallest) on “specialty products,” which is basically everything that doesn’t fit in one of the other two.

Although neither business distributes goods directly to consumers under their main brand names, between them the two have their hands in, well, pretty much everything. In short, these are the companies that make all the things that make all the other things possible.

Dow, for example, makes plastics of every type, both for industrial use (as in car factories) and for retail products (as in diapers or water bottles). They also make a wide range of chemicals, used for everything from pesticides to paint.

DuPont, probably best known to consumers for inventing materials like Tyvek, Teflon, Lycra, and Kevlar, has in recent years done some consolidation and reorganization to focus most heavily on agriculture, including genetically modified crops; biofuels and increased-efficiency products; and continuing their “advanced materials” research.

The TL;DR of the deal is that some kind of chemical or polymer made by one or the other of these two companies is involved with basically everything we do or buy, from the processed food we eat, to the plastic it’s wrapped in, to the truck that delivers it to the store, to the factory that made that truck.

Though Dow and DuPont spin the significant overlap in their business, particularly in the agricultural sphere, as “synergy,” regulators are more likely to think of that duplication as “competition,” and keep an eye on it during what will be months of review. Officials at the FTC and the Department of Justice can add it to their already-lengthy list of mergers to plow through in 2016.


by Kate Cox via Consumerist

Consumerist Friday Flickr Finds

http://ift.tt/1OWYZ4F

Due to a combination of holidays and my being out, it’s been three weeks since our last installment of Flickr Finds. Let’s see what treasures have been submitted to the Consumerist Flickr pool in that period, picked for usability in a Consumerist post or for just plain neatness.

(Eric BEAUME)
(Debbie Mercer)
(Plump Panda Photography)
(Eric BEAUME)
(JoelZimmer)
(Freaktography)

Want to see your pictures on our site? Our Flickr pool is the lace 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