uSan Francisco Votes Down Restrictions On AirBNB Rentalsr

4 4 4 9

• 
  If you don’t live or work in San Francisco and you aren’t an AirBNB host, you probably haven’t heard of Proposition F. The proposition asked the people of San Francisco to decide the future of short-term rentals through AirBNB and similar services, limiting the number of days per year a space could be rented to 75 and creating stricter penalties for hosts who disrupt their neighbors’ lives. The measure failed.

  AirBNB, perhaps not wanting to set a precedent in an expensive city and its own hometown, spent a lot of money on their campaign against Proposition F: reportedly $8 million, far more than any candidate spent on amy of the political races on the same ballot. In fact, we posted about one of their ad campaigns against the measure, which was presumptuous and passive-aggressive enough that it attracted a backlash and was quickly taken down.

  Short-term rentals have the same problems in San Francisco as everywhere else: complaints from neighbors about guests’ behavior and noise, and concerns from local government and the hotel industry about lodging taxes and taking business away from existing hotels.

  Yet the city’s high cost of living and ongoing housing shortage mean that the idea of apartments used solely as hotel suites is an offensive one to many residents. If someone wants to rent their own home while they’re out of town, fine: that’s where the 75 days come in.

  Proposition F’s supporters, a coalition including landlords, housing activists, and the local hotel workers’ union, especially want to eliminate the practice of people renting or purchasing entire apartments to rent or sublet to short-term guests.

  The victory party may be a short one: the results of the city government elections mean that the city’s Board of Supervisors now has a progressive majority that is likely to vote in favor of restricting short-term rentals.

  Prop. F: S.F. voters reject measure to restrict Airbnb rentals [SF Gate]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

uComcast’s Holiday Gift To Subscribers: Data Caps Coming To More Users December 1r

4 4 4 9

• 
  
  Did you feel like paying more to Comcast next month to keep using the amount of data you’ve been using for years already? No? Well, if you’re in one of several markets in the southeast, tough cookies: Comcast’s data caps, and their fees, are coming to a cable modem near you this December.

  DSL Reports has noted that starting December 1, the list of Comcast cities subject to usage-based data pricing is going to get even longer. Several cities in Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, and Virginia are going to be added to the list, according to Comcast’s official FAQ.

  Markets newly added to the unfortunate shortlist will face the same base 300 GB per month cap as the other cities in the trial program, with charges of another $10 for each 50 GB over the threshold used.

  For those who don’t want to pay piecemeal overage fees, Comcast started testing a flat $30 fee for unlimited overages in Florida in October, and a few weeks later launched the same option at a higher $35 price point in Atlanta. According to Comcast’s website, this unlimited data option is also available in the newly data-capped areas as well.

  Usually, Comcast’s pricing schemes are a matter of “we do what we want because we can,” due to a complete dearth of competition in almost every market. However, this particular pricing change also includes Chattanooga, TN, which famously boasts a comparatively inexpensive, robust, publicly-owned gigabit fiber network that Comcast finally has deigned to compete against.

  The expansion of usage-based pricing across the nation is, alas, not a surprise. Comcast executive mouthpiece David Cohen said in 2014 that he expected the company to implement broadband data caps nationwide within five years.

  About 12% of Comcast users are already subject to some variety of Comcast’s data cap thresholds, the Associated Press recently reported. The more Comcast expands the trials, the more likely they are to attract some FCC scrutiny over the matter.

  Charter, meanwhile, is using its absence of a data cap plan as a selling point to convince regulators that its plan to buy Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks is in the public interest.

  Comcast is contacting affected customers to let them know they are going to be subject to usage caps going forward. However, if you are concerned or don’t want to wait, you can also check your account number or ZIP code against Comcast’s list of usage-based billing trial areas here.

  Comcast Dramatically Expanding Usage Cap Areas December 1 [DSL Reports]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Kate Cox via Consumerist

uSenators Introduce Bill To Close New Robocall Debt-Collection Loopholer

4 4 4 9

• 
  Last week, the president signed an emergency budget bill that kept the government from shutting down, but which also quietly exempted federal agencies from an important consumer protection against automated debt-collection robocalls. A new piece of legislation hopes to turn back the clock on that mistake by closing that recently opened loophole.

  Before the passing of last week’s bipartisan budget bill, federal law prohibited most non-emergency automated calls to cellphones unless the recipient has given their prior express consent to receive these messages.

  Nestled in that 144-page piece of legislation were a few paragraphs that amended the Communications Act to carve out an exemption for the collection of debts owed to the federal government. This change will open the door to millions of Americans being targeted with automated debt-collection calls on everything from back taxes to student loans to mortgages.

  Even by the most generous estimates, allowing the government to make debt-collection robocalls would have little-to-no effect on federal finances — raising the question of why this provision was ever inserted in the first place.

  By the time critics noticed the pro-robocall provision in the budget bill, it was too late to do anything about it. Making any change to the legislation would have delayed passing of the bill, putting the government at risk of another temporary shutdown.

  But as the bill floated inevitably toward the president’s pen, several lawmakers spoke up about creating a post-budget fix.

  Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts made good on his promise to try to roll back the robocall provision, introducing the Help Americans Never Get Unwanted Phone calls (HANGUP) Act.

  The new bill [PDF] seeks to re-amend the Communications Act, removing the loophole language inserted by the budget bill.

  Markey has lined up a number of co-sponsors for the bill, including Sen. Ron Wyden (Oregon), Sen. Claire McCaskill (Missouri), and Sen. Bob Menendez (New Jersey), Sen. Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut), Sen. Patrick Leahy (Vermont), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Massachusetts), Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vermont), and Senators Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota).

  Our colleagues at Consumers Union — along with more than a dozen other organizations, including the National Consumer Law Center, Consumer Federation of America, and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group — have come out in support of the HANGUP Act and its goal of reinstating protections against unwanted robocalls.

  Even though the budget bill opened up the debt-collection loophole, the Federal Communications Commission has nine months to craft rules dictating the conditions under which the government would be allowed to make these robocalls.

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Chris Morran via Consumerist

uOhio Voters Just Say No To Legalized Recreational Marijuanar

4 4 4 9

• 
  A controversial ballot initiative in Ohio that would have legalized recreational and medical marijuana — but would have also concentrated the authority to mass-produce the plant in the hands of only 10 growers — has fallen flat, meaning the Buckeye State won’t become the fifth state to legalize pot for recreational use.

  With nearly 80% of precincts reporting as of right now, votes against Issue 3 — the legalization measure — outnumber the yes votes by 65% to 35%.

  Earlier on election day, ReponsibleOhio, the group behind the push for Issue 3, successfully convinced a court in Hamilton County — home of Cincinnati — to keep the polls open there for an additional 90 minutes following complaints of long lines, technical issues, and other delays.

  However, early results from Hamilton County are not favorable for legalization, with nearly 60% of counted votes going in the “no” pile.

  While the results may seem to indicate a general disinterest in legalization, the truth may be more complicated and will lead to much speculation from Wednesday morning quarterbacks.

  As we noted in September, a number of pro-legalization Ohioans were skeptical about Issue 3 and planning to vote against the measure. They objected not just because Issue 3 would concentrate all commercial pot production in the hands of 10 growers, but because ResponsibleOhio’s primary financial backers were the same investors who own those pre-selected farms.

  The most notable face of that campaign has been former boy-bander Nick Lachey, who has appeared in TV ads for Issue 3, but who can’t even vote in Ohio because he’s registered in California.

  The one-time reality star conceded defeat on Twitter Tuesday night:

  While I may not agree, the people of Ohio have spoken and that's the way it's supposed to work. Change takes time. #democracy #respect

  — Nick Lachey (@NickLachey) November 4, 2015

  Supporters of Issue 3 had tried to counter the cries of “monopoly” by pointing out that it would have allowed individuals to grow a small amount of marijuana for their own use. To some detractors, this is like telling people it’s okay to create a gasoline monopoly by allowing people to drill in their backyards.

  Even if Issue 3 had passed, the predicted success of a second ballot measure may have spoiled ResponsibleOhio’s plans. Issue 2 is intended to prohibit monopolies from being written into the state constitution. Supporters of this measure say that its language would effectively nullify Issue 3 if both initiatives were to pass. As things stand right now, votes in favor of Issue 2 have a narrow edge on the no votes.

  Some legalization supporters believe that the case can still be made for recreational and medical marijuana in the state and are looking ahead to next year to put together a measure that will garner even more attention from voters because of the presidential election.

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Chris Morran via Consumerist

uPayPal Angers The UK With Ad That Doesn’t Acknowledge Existence Of Santar

4 4 4 9

• A new holiday season ad from PayPal aired across the UK during “The X Factor,” peak family-viewing time. Its premise is simple: two brothers wait to sneak glances at their Christmas presents as their parents bring them in the house. The ad has drawn hundreds of complaints to the national ad watchdog because it ignores the existence of Santa Claus. No, really.

  The older brother explains, in the world-weary and infititely knowledgeable way of big brothers everywhere, that no packages coming into the house and their parents not going out on shopping trips means that they will obviously not be receiving any Christmas presents at all.

  In a statement to the Guardian, a spokeswoman for PayPal defends the ad, explaining that it never says that there is no Santa, or “Father Christmas” as he’s called there. Even if so, the ad certainly implies that by making the children sad that they won’t be receiving any gifts at all because their parents didn’t buy them any.

  We just want to take a moment to say we’re sorry that some people have been upset by our new UK Christmas TV advert. Our ad aims to take a fun look at those Christmas presents kids know come from their parents, and not in any way say Father Christmas doesn’t also deliver presents to them.

  However, PayPal has now agreed to only show this particular ad after 9 PM, since children young enough to believe in Santa aren’t old enough to stay up late or use use PayPal.

  PayPal Christmas ad gets hundreds of complaints it implies Santa isn’t real [The Guardian]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

uTarget Expands Instacart Trial To San Franciscor

4 4 4 9

• 
  Target started something new for that company about six weeks ago: grocery delivery service by partnering with the delivery service Instacart. It’s part of an effort to not only make same-day delivery an option, but to expand Target’s grocery business. The trial in Target’s hometown of Minneapolis was so successful, it’s expanding to another city already.

  The Target/Instacart (Targetstacart? InsTarget?) partnership is now expanding to Instacart’s hometown and biggest market, San Francisco. The area is a veritable lab of different ways to shop at Target, with curbside pickup through the company Curbside also available in some stores. It appears that Instacart shoppers can order only groceries, while curbside pickup shoppers can order anything in the store that will fit in their car.

  “Our goal is to make grocery shopping easier and more convenient, so that our guests can shop Target wherever, whenever and however they want,” the president of Target.com and mobile said in a statement. Yes, shoppers. Come to Target however you want: just make sure that you buy groceries at Target.

  Partnering with Instacart gives the company access to delivery for customers who want it, but without investing in actually hiring its own drivers and order-pickers. Whether this remains what Target (and other grocery stores that want delivery) do in the future will be interesting to see, assuming that grocery delivery takes off at all among car-owning suburban customers.

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

uFamily Gets Out Of Jeep, Watches It Catch Fire After Recall Repairr

4 4 4 9

• When you dutifully bring your car to a dealership for a recall repair, you generally assume that the repair is going to fix the problem, and that your vehicle is not going to catch fire anyway. Back in May, we learned that NHTSA was looking into a Chrysler recall where fires were still reported in recalled vehicles that had been repaired.

  It was after that investigation began, and after a revised version of the service instructions went out to dealerships warning that previous recall repairs may have been performed incorrectly, that a family in northern California parked outside a Taco Bell and had just sat down to eat when their young daughter noticed smoke coming out of their 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee. You can see the aftermath of that fire before.

  The vehicle had been recalled before for an issue with the wiring in the passenger side visor, and the family was under the impression that the problem had been fixed. They aren’t alone, either––there are nine known vehicles that have also caught fire after having the recall repair, and possibly more, considering that the original recall included hundreds of thousands of vehicles.

  Maybe the family would be less angry at Fiat Chrysler and the dealership if they hadn’t brought the vehicle in twice for issues related to the visor: the light bulb on the visor went out once, and they smelled smoke in the cabin of the SUV.

  The good news is that once a local news station became involved, Fiat Chrysler of America swapped out the burned Jeep for a new one. The family remains upset, though, that their

  It’s sad that drivers need to check on service bulletins for their cars themselves for peace of mind, but at least they’re easy to access online.

  Call Kurtis Investigates: Jeep & Dodge SUVs Catching Fire After Recall Repairs [CBS Sacramento]

  
• 
  

ribbi

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist