среда, 8 июля 2015 г.

uOregon Becomes Second State To Offer Free Tuition To All Graduating High School Studentsr


4 4 4 9
  • Thousands of recent high school graduates in Oregon now have the chance to attend community college without the worry of accumulating loads of debt they may never be able to pay back, as lawmakers in the state recently approved a bill to establish the second program in the country to offer students help in paying for college.

    The Portland Tribune reports that legislators in the state gave the go-ahead to establish a project known as the Oregon Promise aimed at helping students achieve their dreams of higher education while remaining relatively debt-free.

    Modeled after a similar program in Tennessee, the Oregon Promise, which would begin with the 2016-17 academic year, provides tuition waivers to recent high school graduates that meet a set of strict requirements.

    Under the program — which is capped at $10 million for the first two years — students are eligible if they earned at least a 2.5 grade point average and are Oregon residents for at least 12 months, and apply to community college no more than six months after graduation.

    The program works by covering the balance of a student’s tuition after all federal and state financial aid is applied. That means students will still likely graduate with some debt.

    Additionally, prospective participants must pay $50 to the community college per term.

    The bill was introduced by Senator Mark Hass, who said the program could go a long way in helping to cut down on the number of young residents who are unemployed, the Willamette Week reports.

    “A lifetime of food stamps is much more expensive than the annual community college tuition of $3,000,” Hass said during testimony for the bill.

    The program in Tennessee has been fairly successful since implementation last year.

    More than 80% of the students who took part in the program got full or partial grant funding from federal Pell grants, while the state picked up the balance, Willamette Week reports.

    Oregon students get tuition help from ‘promise’ [Portland Tribune]
    Oregon Will Become Second State to Offer Free Community College [Willamette Week]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uAmerican Express Automatically Switched Me To Paperless Statements; Is That Legal?r


4 4 4 9
  • From paying bills online to reading an e-book, advancements in technology have changed just about every aspect of consumers’ lives that used to be printed on paper. But what if you prefer getting your credit card statement in the mail and then find out that you’ve been changed over paperless statements without being asked?

    That was the issue for Consumerist reader B. who tells us he received a nondescript email from American Express notifying him that he would be switched to paperless statements.

    “Essentially, they’re sending a generic looking email where they’re quietly switching everyone over to paperless without an opt-in,” he says.

    The email states:

    American Express is committed to providing our Card Members with the best tools to run their businesses. We see that you have an online account for your Business Card from American Express OPEN and we are going to enroll you in online-only billing statements and account communications.

    As of your September 2015 statement, you will begin receiving your billing statements and most account communications electronically rather than in the mail.

    A spokesperson for AmEx says the notification B. received is the lastest in the company’s migration to paperless statements.

    “The OPEN (small business division of American Express) Card Members who are part of this migration began receiving communications explaining the process on June 24,” AmEx tells Consumerist.

    While B. raised concerns that company doesn’t provide an opt-in option, never actually asking the customer if they want to switch to paperless statements, AmEx assures us the switch is completely optional – but user must opt-out not opt-in.

    “As explained in the communications, these OPEN Card Members may control their delivery preferences by either accelerating their move to paperless statements, or by electing to continue receiving paper statements,” the spokesperson says of the change affecting only customers with active online accounts.

    If you happen to be an OPEN card member and missed the email notification, you can expect to begin receiving paperless statements in September. Customers will receive a monthly email notification telling them their new statement is available.

    Those who take action to continue receiving paper statements can do so with no additional fee, the spokesperson says.

    Notifications such as the one AmEx sent are becoming more common in the financial services arena now that many consumers do their banking online. However, unlike AmEx’s currently stance on not charging a fee for customers who wish to continue with physically mailed statements, many companies require their customers to pay a small fee each month, Pamela Banks, senior policy counsel for Consumers Union, tells Consumerist.

    While B. wasn’t exactly opposed to getting electronic statements, he felt AmEx’s email was a bit “sneaky.” But the company’s methods aren’t running afoul of any law, according to Banks.

    The Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure (CARD) Act [PDF], which, among other things, requires that financial institutions establish fair and transparent practices, does not include any rules governing electronic statements.

    “There is nothing in the CARD Act about electronic statements because such statements were not an issue in 2008-9 when the CARD Act was being put together,” Banks says.

    But just because the statements weren’t widely used six years ago, doesn’t mean everyone has brushed the issue under the table as a “too-late now” issue.

    Banks tells Consumerist that some consumer groups have continued to lobby for requirements related to paper statements, arguing that physical documents are necessary for people who don’t have the access to the internet.

    One group called Consumers For Paper Options has pushed to address the transition to Internet-only resources at the exclusion of millions of citizens who still need paper-based options.

    The group, which mainly focuses on government information such as Social Security annual earning statements and tax forms, points out that the “transition to Internet-only information and services threatens to disenfranchise millions of Americans—from low-income individuals and senior citizens to the 25% of citizens who don’t have internet access, or those who prefer personal transactions to divulging information online.”

    While there should always be options for people to receive account statements and other important information in physical form, Banks says that financial institutions and other businesses will likely continue their move toward paperless communications.

    Banks suggests that consumers who find themselves automatically enrolled in electronic statements contact their bank or credit card company to see what other options are available.



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uRita’s Italian Ice Locations Stop Serving Frozen Custard Amid Egg Shortager


4 4 4 9
  • First it was a grocery store chain asking customers to limit themselves when buying cartons of eggs, and then it was shorter (temporary) breakfast hours. And now, consumers are feeling the repercussions of a national egg shortage in the category of icy treats: Rita’s Italian Ice notified customers that it won’t be serving frozen custard, and will instead be replacing that menu item as it runs out with soft-serve ice cream.

    “Until we are able to acquire eggs we are substituting a premium Rita’s Soft-Serve Ice Cream which is also terrific in all our signature treats,” the company says in a FAQ section on its site.

    Rita’s doesn’t have information on when frozen custard will return to its locations, but says it does intend to restock it when it’s able.

    For those not in the know/not raised on frozen custard in Milwaukee — the frozen custard capital of the world — the dessert differs slightly in ingredients from its soft-serve and ice cream brethren. In addition to milk, cream and sugar, the recipe for frozen custard also calls for pasteurized egg yolks.

    The way each treat is made and served also makes a difference — ice cream is made in a batch freezer with air pumped into it, resulting in a product that could be up to 50% air. Soft serve comes out of the machine with about 80% air, while what’s known as a continuous batch custard machine will produce the denser treat of frozen custard, containing about 15-20% air.



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uChase Credit Card Settlement Halts Collections On 528,000 Accountsr


4 4 4 9
  • Earlier today, we told you of reports that JPMorgan Chase had agreed to pay at least $125 million to close the books on state and federal investigations into its credit card collections practices. Now that the details of the deal have been made public, we know exactly how much the bank will pay and how many credit card accounts are affected.

    According to the consent order [PDF] issued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, between 2009 and 2013, Chase used questionable methods to collect on credit card debt.

    The bank’s practices included using so-called “robosigned” affidavits — documents that were expeditiously signed without proper, if any, review — in lawsuits filed against alleged debtors. The CFPB says that Chase filed more than 528,000 debt collections lawsuits during the years in question.

    Chase also made miscalculations in some of these lawsuits, resulting in debtors facing judgements for the wrong amounts. And even after the bank learned of its mistakes, the CFPB says Chase failed to notify the courts or the affected customers.

    The bank also sold off a lot of its credit card debt to third-party buyers who were then free to try to collect the money. But the CFPB says Chase sold some accounts that were:
    • already been settled by agreement,
    • paid in full,
    • discharged in bankruptcy,
    • identified as fraudulent and not owed by the debtor,
    • subject to an agreed-upon payment plan,
    • no longer owned by Chase,
    • otherwise no longer enforceable.

    Debt buyers were also sold debts with missing or erroneous information. Compounding the problem, when these collectors went to sue the alleged debtors, Chase provided “sworn” statements for these lawsuits that had actually been robosigned. The CFPB says this happened more than 150,000 times.

    Chase put a stop on new lawsuits against credit card debtors in 2011 and stopped selling debt to third-party buyers in 2013, but the CFPB enforcement action puts additional demands on the bank.

    • Cease collecting on 528,000 accounts: The bank will halt collection actions, including pending legal actions, or the sale or transfer of debt, on 528,000 credit card accounts sent to collections litigation between January 1, 2009 to June 30, 2014.

    In cases where the bank has already received a judgement in its favor, it must notify the consumer that it will no longer try to collect, enforce, or sell that judgment. Chase must also contact the three major credit reporting agencies — Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax — to request that these judgments not be reported against consumers.

    • Pay at least $50 million in cash redress to consumers: The bank must pay cash refunds to alleged debtors against whom collections litigation was pending between January 1, 2009 and June 30, 2014, for amounts paid above what the consumer owed when the debt was referred for litigation, plus 25% of the excess amount paid.

    • Prohibit debt buyers from reselling accounts: Any debt buyers who purchased credit card debt from Chase must be told they cannot resell that debt, unless it’s resold back to the bank.

    • Notify consumers that their debt has been sold and make their account information available to them:
    Chase must notify consumers when their account is sold and reveal who purchased the account, the amount owed at the time of sale, and that consumers can request further information about their accounts at no charge.

    • Not sell “zombie” debts: Chase may not sell debts that do not have the required documentation, have been charged off for over three years or where the consumer has not paid for three years, are in litigation, are owed by a servicemember, are owed by someone who is deceased, or where the debtor has a payment plan.

    Of the total $136 million settlement, $106 million will go to the 47 states, and the District of Columbia, that took part in the deal.



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist


uBarnes & Noble Shuts Down Third-Party Marketplace For Over A Week, Shrugsr


4 4 4 9
  • BNbacksoonTwenty years ago, you would not have been allowed to set up your own little kiosk in the accessories department at Walmart selling the same sunglasses at slightly lower prices. Yet that’s exactly what e-commerce sites let third-party sellers do, and it usually works smoothly for everyone. Unless you’re a seller on Barnes & Noble’s Marketplace site, which shut down with no warning more than a week ago. Sellers are still locked out.

    At the end of June, Barnes & Noble divided itself into two separate companies: its semi-troubled dead-tree book and e-reader business and its money-printing college bookstore division. The split divides the company into one very profitable business, and one that will no longer make the quarterly reports of its former parent company look better than they really are.

    The CEO of all of Barnes & Noble, Michael Huseby, is following the textbook division out the door, taking over in September after the new school year starts. His replacement will be the current CEO of Sears Canada.

    Now, the Amazon Marketplace is the best-known program like this, but Barnes & Noble has a marketplace too. As long as sellers are reliable, this can be a great transaction for everyone: the sellers’ businesses are visible, and the site is able to expand its inventory without building new warehouses, profiting from the sale through fees.

    At the end of June, Barnes & Noble revamped its e-commerce website, and there have been some problems. One of those problems is that sellers in the Marketplace, which the company says lists tens of millions of items, are locked out of their accounts and have been since the end of June. Some features for Nook purchases also aren’t working, but the Marketplace sellers are understandably unhappy about this.

    It’s one thing to be unable to read a book on your web browser: it’s another to make your living online and have orders and money locked up in a system that doesn’t work, with no estimate for when it will be fixed. Sellers told eCommerceBytes that they’re unable to even look at the inventory they have listed on BN.com, and one says that he has outstanding orders that he can’t process.

    Yesterday, a Barnes & Noble spokesperson told eCommerceBytes that the company planned to have the Marketplace up and running today (Wednesday) and that the retailer “launched our bn.com website without Marketplace going live.”

    Barnes and Noble Leaves Sellers in the Lurch [eCommerceBytes]



ribbi
  • by Laura Northrup
  • via Consumerist


uLawsuit Accuses Actor Tom Selleck Of Stealing Water From A Public Fire Hydrant During California Droughtr


4 4 4 9
  • Foreshadowing the controversy? (Three Men and a Baby)

    Tom Selleck and his mustache ponder another kind of liquid in Three Men and a Baby.

    While Tom Selleck has a starring role in many fans’ mustache-tic fantasies, the Three Men and a Baby actor is being cast in an entirely different light in a new lawsuit: The Calleguas Municipal Water District claims in a recent complaint that Selleck has been playing a water thief, allegedly pilfering precious water from a public fire hydrant and having it hauled it back to his 60-acre ranch in another water district.

    In a complaint filed today in Ventura County Superior Court, Calleguas says it obtained proof of the former Magnum P.I. star’s thievery by hiring a real personal investigator, reports the Los Angeles Times, spending nearly $22,000 to document the alleged theft.

    The lawsuit says Selleck had huge amounts of water from the hydrant delivered to his ranch by way of a white truck that filled up at a Thousand Oaks hydrant more than a dozen times since 2013.

    Calleguas says in the complaint that Selleck and his wife — who is also named in the court documents — have been barred from using water from the hydrant in its district, because their ranch is located in an entirely different water district, Hidden Valley Municipal Water District.

    The district notes in court documents that officials tried to get the illegal water deliveries to stop by sending cease-and-desist letters in November 2013 to Selleck’s home and another address linked to the properties.

    But as recently as March 2015, Calleguas says, the white water truck was seen filling up at the hydrant in question and toting it over to the Selleck manor on four separate dates, the complaint alleges. Along with barring Selleck and his wife from taking water from the hydrant, it’s seeking a preliminary and permanent injunction barring Selleck and his contractors or employees from taking water from the Calleguas district.

    Selleck’s people have yet to comment on the lawsuit.

    The complaint comes at a particularly thirsty time for California, which is in the midst of a historic drought that has residents trying to cut water use by 25%.

    Did ‘Magnum P.I’ star Tom Selleck steal truckloads of hydrant water? A real P.I was on case [Los Angeles]



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uPerdue Says Half Its Chickens Now Raised Without Any Antibiotics At Allr


4 4 4 9
  • Almost a year ago, Perdue — one of the biggest names in chicken — announced its hatcheries would cease using antibiotics that were medically important to human beings, and today the company said that it has reached a milestone in the move to curb the dangerous overuse of these vital drugs, claiming that more than half of its birds are now being raised without the use of any sort of antibiotics at all.

    Antibiotics sold for use in animal feed accounts for more than three quarters of all antibiotics currently sold in the U.S., with most of those drugs being used primarily because they are believed to result in bigger cows, pigs, and chickens.

    “We believe consumers are concerned about the use of all antibiotics, not just some. Through our No Antibiotics Ever chickens, we want to give them a choice that carries transparency and confidence,” said company Chairman Jim Perdue about today’s announcement.

    The drugs are often put into the animals’ feed and water, providing the creatures with a steady, sub-therapeutic dose of the antibiotics. It’s this regular, low-dose use that scientists say most contributes to the development of drug-resistant pathogens that sicken more than 2 million Americans every year, killing around 20,000.

    In late 2013, after decades of ignoring the issue, the FDA asked the drug companies that sell these antibiotics to cease marketing them for non-medical purposes, but since almost all of the affected drugs were approved for both therapeutic and growth-promotion uses, this allowed farmers to simply change the reason they were using the drugs without changing how much they were giving their animals.

    Perdue says its new “more than 50% drug-free” figure includes antibiotics that are not deemed medically important to humans. While the focus of the fight against antibiotic abuse has focused on drugs used on both humans and farm animals, it’s also important to remember that the overuse of any antibiotic is only going to encourage the spread of drug-resistant bacteria.

    “We’re going to continue to reduce our use of animal-only antibiotics,” said Bruce Stewart Brown, DVM, Perdue’s senior vice president of food safety, quality and live production, in a statement, “so that we’re raising as many chickens as we can with no antibiotics of any kind – and offering that choice to consumers.”

    The Natural Resources Defense Council’s Jonathan Kaplan points out that going completely drug-free is a very smart marketing move for Perdue.

    “By eliminating the animal-only drugs… the company can put ‘no antibiotics ever’ labels on its products, and likely get some consumer recognition for its antibiotic stewardship efforts,” writes Kaplan. “That’s good for Perdue, good for consumers, and will likely help grow consumer awareness and expectation for meat and poultry produced without reliance on these drugs.”

    At the same time as he applauds the company’s announcement, Kaplan calls for increased transparency and third-party verification of these sorts of claims, as this sort of independent vetting would only give consumers more confidence that they aren’t possibly being misled.



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist