пятница, 31 июля 2015 г.

uI Can’t Buy A Car Because Lexus Thinks I’m Deadr


4 4 4 9
  • Dead people do not need cars, and they also have trouble making the payments. That’s probably why one woman’s credit score plummeted to zero when a lender accidentally put her down as dead. It was due to human error, but she’ll need to wait 30 days to move on with her new car purchase because someone at Lexus Financial Services picked the wrong thing in a drop-down menu.

    Yes, that is literally what happened. Unfortunately, it just takes one creditor accidentally telling the bureaus that you’re deceased to send your credit score plummeting to zero and to make it impossible to sign up for new lines of credit.

    What can you do about it? You can’t prevent people from clicking on the wrong thing at your lender, unfortunately, but the best thing to do is check your credit periodically for errors like this. Use AnnualCreditReport.com at least 30 days before you plan to start shopping for a new home, car, or other thing that requires credit bureaus to believe that you’re alive.

    It takes about 30 days to clear an error for the system, but this 100% alive aspiring car owner was lucky: she had contacted CBS Sacramento about her plight, and their calls to Experian and Equifax prompted the credit bureaus to correct Acura’s error a few weeks earlier than they normally would have, and she got to zoom off in her new car.

    Call Kurtis: I Can’t Buy a Car Because Lender Declared Me Dead [CBS Sacramento]



ribbi
  • by Laura Northrup
  • via Consumerist


uPrisoners Will Soon Be Eligible For Pell Grants To Finance Educationr


4 4 4 9
  • Twenty years after passing a law that banned prisoners from financing higher education with federal grants while incarcerated, the government is ready to begin investing in the education of inmates.

    The Washington Post reports that the government announced plans today that it will initiate an experiment — called the Second Chance Pell Pilot Program — to offer a limited number of prisoners Pell grants to finance their education from a select number of colleges starting as soon as next year.

    The move, which is being made under the Obama administration’s authority for limited financial aid experiments, doesn’t immediately change the status of the ban put in place in 1994. At the time, Congress decided it was unfair for prisoners to claim a share of federal financial aid dollars that were in limited supply at the time — $5 billion, compared to the $29 billion available today.

    The Second Chance program aims to help prisoners who are eligible for release within five years work toward an associate’s or a bachelor’s degree while incarcerated. The schools partnering with the program have yet to be announced.

    “America is a nation of second chances,” Education Secretary Arne Duncan said in a statement. “Giving people who have made mistakes in their lives a chance to get back on track and become contributing members of society is fundamental to who we are – it can also be a cost-saver for taxpayers.”

    Duncan maintains that the new experiment will not take money away from the nearly eight million students who are expected to receive Pell grants in 2016, saying that the cost of the program will be very modest.

    Although the experiment isn’t a reversal of the 1994 ban, it could eventually lead there. At the time that ban was enacted, the government estimated that more than 25,000 inmates received $35 million in Pell Grants for the first nine months of the 1993-1994 school year.

    For two decades, critics of the ban have argued that Congress was shortsighted in taking away funding for prisoners’ schooling. They contend that investing in education for inmates could reduce the likelihood they will commit another crime when released, the Post reports.

    Despite the long-running rule, many schools have continued to operate their own inmate education programs. One such program is Goucher College in Maryland, which enrolls 60 to 100 prisoners at a time.

    “There’s a long waiting list,” Goucher President Jose Antonio Bowen, tells the Post. “Anything that helps bring more education to the incarcerated is something we would support.”

    Feds announce new experiment: Pell grants for prisoners [The Washington Post]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uAmerican Airlines Plane Evacuated With Emergency Slides, Three Passengers Burnedr


4 4 4 9
  • An American Airlines flight pulling away from the gate at the Dallas Fort Worth International Airport on Thursday was evacuated with the use of emergency slides, resulting in minor injuries for three passengers.

    NBC-DFW reports that the flight – carrying 141 passengers and five crew members – was readying for travel to Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport when smoke was reported in the cabin.

    Five emergency exits, including two over the wings and one through the plane’s tail, were opened during the incident. Two inflatable slides were utilized at the passenger access door and a rear service door, American said.

    During the evacuation three passengers were injured, suffering from minor burns.

    “Our fleet service team was still on the ramp and assisted passengers and crew with a successful evacuation of the aircraft,” a spokesperson for the airline said.

    The airline said that passengers were being put on other flights to Chicago Thursday afternoon.

    Emergency Slides Used to Evacuate American Airlines Plane at D/FW Airport [NBC-DFW]



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uCable Companies Refuse To Reveal How Much They Make Off Of Set-Top Boxesr


4 4 4 9
  • Sen. Ed Markey of Massachussetts and Sen. Dick Blumenthal of Connecticut recently posed a handful of questions to the nation’s cable and satellite providers about their set-top boxes — Are they required? How many customers have them? Is there an option for customers to purchase their own? etc. While some providers were more transparent in their responses than others, but one thing they all agreed on: We’re not telling you how much we make from leasing these devices.

    For example, even though Comcast [PDF] says that virtually all 22 million pay-TV customers have set-top boxes, with a total of 59 million devices currently being used, and that the monthly lease per box ranges from $1-$2.50/month, it balks — citing “competitive sensitivity” — at providing the senators either the average per-customer revenue from these leases or the total revenue.

    AT&T, which filed the response [PDF] before its merger with DirecTV was approved, likewise acknowledged that its entire U-Verse install base has a set-top box. While the company says the first device is provided at no charge, AT&T didn’t provide any information about the average number of devices per household or the total number of devices currently in use, so we don’t know how many U-Verse subscribers are paying $8/month for their additional set-top boxes. AT&T claimed it can’t share any more detailed information because it’s “commercially sensitive.”

    Speaking of DirecTV, the country’s largest satellite service (and second-largest pay-TV provider) provides so little information it’s bordering on the deceptive. The only useful data in DirecTV’s response [PDF] is that customers lease “roughly 2.5 boxes per household” and that it charges $6/box, but it glosses over the all the related fees it charges for things like Whole-Home DVR service.

    Verizon [PDF] is much more willing to break down the pricing of its boxes, DVR services, and number of TV sets involved, showing how FiOS can run you anywhere from $11.99/month for a single TV up to $85.99 for eight TVs with “Quantum Premium Service.” But once again, in spite of this info dump on Verizon’s part, the company joins the chorus of cablers refusing to say the average per-customer revenue or total annual revenue from leased devices.

    The most amusing response comes from Time Warner Cable [PDF], who justified its refusal to answer virtually every question by stating that “TWC operates in a highly competitive market and does not make this information publicly available in the ordinary course of business.” [bolded for emphasis].

    That’s right, Time Warner Cable, whose $45 million merger with Comcast failed because of an obvious lack of competition in the cable marketplace, is apparently hoping that if it repeatedly states that it “operates in a highly competitive market,” it might come true.

    After looking at these responses — and others from Cox, Cablevision, Charter, Brighthouse, Cox, and Dish — Sens. Markey and Blumenthal did their best to estimate how much these companies are making based on what little information they provided.

    By their math, the average pay-TV customer will spend around $89/year for a single set-top box. And since the average household with pay-TV service has approximately 2.6 boxes, the senators estimate the average yearly cost of having these cable boxes is around $232.

    Figuring that, between all these companies there are some 221 million set-top boxes being leased in the U.S. right now, that would put the industry’s annual revenue at nearly $20 billion.

    While the senators understand the technological need for having a set-top box, they believe that consumers should not be forced to lease just one or two models made available by their pay-TV provider.

    “Consumers should have the same range of choices for their video set-top boxes as they have for their mobile phones,” said Senator Markey in a statement. “When Congress last year regrettably removed the requirement that cable company services be compatible with set-top boxes purchased in the marketplace rather than rented directly from the provider, we doomed consumers to being captive to cable company rental fees forever. We also endangered a competitive set-top box marketplace, replacing consumer choice with cable company control. We need a new, national consumer-friendly standard that will allow consumers to choose their own video box irrespective from their pay-TV provider. Consumers should not be forced to rent video boxes from their pay-TV provider in perpetuity.”

    Blumenthal says the $200+ annual expense on set-top box leasing is “unjust and unjustifiable. As the world becomes increasingly connected and technology advances, new innovations must be able to break into the cable marketplace and provide the vigorous competition that drives down prices for consumers. Consumers deserve competitive options in accessing technology and television – not exorbitant prices dictated by monopoly cable companies.”



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist


uWhole Foods Announces Five Cities Getting One Of Its Cheaper Storesr


4 4 4 9
  • Back in May, Whole Foods announced it’d be making a play for that coveted category of customers, the almighty millennials, by launching a new line of lower-cost stores. The company has now revealed which cities will see those first cheaper stores.

    If you’re on the East Coast and hoping for lower prices, well, you’re out of luck for now: the first of five “365 by Whole Foods Market” locations the company is opening in the second half of 2016 is slated for the Silver Lake neighborhood of L.A. The company says it made the “strategic decision to renegotiate the lease in development for the Silver Lake location,” transforming the Whole Foods Market there into a 365 by Whole Foods Market store.

    The other locations getting a millennial-baiting store include Houston; Bellevue, WA; Portland, OR and Santa Monica, CA.

    These spots were chosen due to a “high demand for both quality food and value in a convenient format,” according to a statement by Jeff Turnas, president of 365 by Whole Foods Market.

    In May, Whole Foods co-founder and co-Chief Executive John Mackey said prices will be lower at the new stores, which will also cost less to run and be “hip, cool, and tech-oriented.”

    Whole Foods could use a boost right now, as it admitted earlier this week that the company had its weakest increase in quarterly sales since the early days of the Great Recession.



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uPot-Centric Colorado Credit Union Sues Federal Reserve Bank For Denying Accountr


4 4 4 9
  • fourthcornerpicThe state of Colorado no longer outlaws recreational marijuana use, but the U.S. government still considers it a Schedule I controlled substance, so many businesses making money from the locally legal sale of cannabis are having trouble finding banks to handle their cash. One credit union formed with the goal of providing financial services to those in the marijuana industry received a charter from Colorado, but has filed suit against a regional Federal Reserve bank for blocking its ability to work with other banks.

    Denver-based Fourth Corner Credit Union, whose stated mission is to “service the unique financial needs of the cannabis and hemp industries and their supporters,” received a charter from Colorado regulators in late 2014. The credit union then reached out to the Federal Bank of Kansas City to apply for what’s known as a “master account.”

    Master accounts at Fed branches allow banks to not only deposit their cash reserves, but gives banks the ability to easily transact business with other financial institutions by settling credits and debits through the account at that Fed branch bank. Basically, the master account is the bank’s bank account.

    Without a master account, “a depository institution is nothing more than a vault,” notes Fourth Corner in its lawsuit [PDF].

    The credit union accuses the Fed bank of delaying review of Fourth Corner’s master account application for nearly nine months, claiming that the usual turnaround for processing an application is only five to seven days.

    Fourth Corner argues that federal law requires the Fed banks to provide their payment services to all “depository institutions,” even if the institution is not a member of the Federal Reserve system.

    Despite the increasing decriminalization and legalization of marijuana, many established financial institutions are refusing to accept deposits from pot sellers, growers, and distributors out of concern that it may lead to unwanted scrutiny of their business from federal regulators and law enforcement.

    In early 2014, the U.S. government attempted to provide some guidance for banks who might find themselves involved with marijuana money, but it may have only muddied the waters. Banks now know they should file “suspicious activity reports” that are specific to the pot industry, but they don’t really know if they are breaking federal law by continuing to do business with these account-holders.

    As a result, there are a number of licensed marijuana businesses in Colorado and Washington who can’t deposit their piles of cash in the bank.

    Not only does this make it difficult for these businesses to pay taxes, rents, salaries, and other costs that would normally be dealt with through checks or electronic transfers, it is a growing public safety risk. In an era when gas station and fast food heists turn up less money because of increased use of credit cards, robbers will certainly be tempted to go after primarily cash businesses that have no bank in which to deposit their earnings.

    Part of the Fed’s eventual decision to deny the Fourth Corner master account application was the fact that the National Credit Union Administration — an independent federal regulatory agency — refused the credit union’s application for deposit insurance.

    In order to get a master account, an institution must show that it’s eligible to receive this type of insurance, but Fourth Corner argues that the insurance need not come from the NCUA and can be privately obtained. The credit union has filed a separate suit against the NCUA claiming it was denied due process in the insurance application review.

    Andrew Freedman, Colorado’s director of marijuana coordination, had hoped the Fed would be more open-minded about Fourth Corner’s business.

    “We thought it was a good solution to the problem,” Freedman told Dealbook about the Fed’s decision. “Here was a place willing to take on the risk of banking this underbanked group — and that could do rigorous compliance.”



ribbi
  • by Chris Morran
  • via Consumerist


uConsumerist Friday Flickr Findsr


4 4 4 9
ribbi
  • by Laura Northrup
  • via Consumerist