uFTC Temporarily Halts Deceptive Practices Of Mortgage Relief Operationr

4 4 4 9

• 
  
  
  

  (БРАТСТВО)

  
  
  
  

  The Federal Trade Commission continued its crackdown of deceptive mortgage relief companies this week as a federal court granted the agency’s request to temporarily halt a Los Angeles-based company that charged consumers excessive upfront fees for services they never performed.

  
  

  The FTC announced today that a court granted an order against Wealth Educators, Inc. and its president for deceiving consumers with costly relief programs.

  
  

  According to the FTC complaint [PDF], since at least October 2012 Wealth Educators – operating under several names including Legal Educators USA & Co., Stargate Mutual & Associates, Providence Financial Advocates, and Providence Financial Audits – used outbound telemarketing and websites to deceptively pitch their programs to consumers in need of mortgage help.

  
  

  Many of the targeted consumers were homeowners in financial trouble, whom the company promised it could help by lowering their monthly mortgage payment, lowering their mortgage interest rate, or obtaining loan modification or restructuring.

  
  

  The company’s website advertised Wealth Educators as ““America’s Leading Home Preservation Legal Services,” saying that it would “act on behalf of homeowners to work with your lender and avoid the lengthy and costly process of foreclosure and the stressful act of eviction that follows.”

  
  

  Wealth Educators allegedly charged consumers an up-front fee ranging from $1,000 to $5,000, promising the money would be fully refunded if the company didn’t provide the promised relief.

  
  

  Despite promises of a refund, consumers tell the FTC that when they attempted to get their money back from the company they were unable to do so.

  
  

  The FTC claims that while Wealth Educators told many consumers they could obtain a loan modification, typically through a government-sponsored program, and even quoted a specific amount consumers’ mortgage payments would be reduced, the company often did not provide the expected relief.

  
  

  Additionally, the complaint claims that Wealth Educators advised consumers to stop communicating with their lenders, delaying them from discovering that Wealth Educators had not obtained the promised mortgage relief.

  
  

  The FTC charges that Wealth Educators violated the FTC Act and the Mortgage Assistance Relief Services (MARS) Rule, now known as Regulation O, which bans mortgage foreclosure rescue and loan modification service providers from collecting fees until homeowners have a written offer from their lender or servicer that they deem acceptable.

  
  

  In addition to halting the company’s activities, the FTC seeks to freeze its assets to ensure the preservation of funds for possible consumer redress.

  
  

  Court Temporarily Halts Company From Offering Mortgage Relief Services [FTC]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  


• 
  

ribbi

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

uConsumerist Friday Flickr Findsr

4 4 4 9

• 
  

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

  
  
  
  

  (Karen Chappell)

  
  
  
  
  
  

  (Jason Cook)

  
  
  
  
  
  

  (<a href="CJ Pietri“>CJ Pietri)

  
  
  
  
  
  

  (Eric BEAUME)

  
  
  
  
  
  

  (Bjarne Winkler)

  
  
  
  
  
  

  (Renee Rendler-Kaplan)

  
  
  
  
  
  

  (Scott W. Vincent)

  
  
  
  
  
  

  (Chris WIlson)

  
  
  
  
  
  

  (Nicholas Eckhart)

  
  
  
  
  
  

  (Carbon Arc)

  
  
  
  

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

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  


• 
  

ribbi

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

uComcast Tries To Refute Philly Customer Service Study, Does About As Good A Job As You’d Expectr

4 4 4 9

• 
  
  
  

  (honeylamb)

  
  
  
  Yesterday, Philadelphia finally got around to releasing the results of a long-in-the-works Comcast customer service survey of city residents, and the results weren’t very favorable for the cable company. Of course, Comcast, which had more than a month to review the report before it was made public, is now trying to discredit it, saying the consultants that put it together should have asked Comcast — and not the citizens of Philadelphia — for accurate data about customer service.
  

  In a blog post inexplicably titled “A Philadelphia Love Story,” Comcast’s Exec VP David Cohen — who was the Chief of Staff for then-Mayor Ed Rendell the last time Comcast’s franchise agreement came up for renewal — writes that “We appreciate some of the positive conclusions in the consultant’s report [Ed. note: No duh], but overall believe many of the findings are inaccurate, over-stated, or misleading, and we will deliver comprehensive proof of those facts to the City.”

  
  

  Cohen actually complains that the consultants hired to do the report chose to speak to actual Philadelphia residents about their Comcast experience rather than rely on data from the company.

  
  

  “[The consultants] never contacted Comcast to solicit objective, verifiable data,” states the blog post, “resulting in conclusions that are not based on easily available and decisive data, and that are simply untrue.”

  
  

  What’s curious is which statistics from the survey Cohen cherry-picks to complain about.

  
  

  He claims that the 15% of survey respondents who said they got a busy signal while trying to call Comcast are lying, because Comcast’s in-house data puts it at only .05%.

  
  

  As for the 61% of people whose calls weren’t answered within 30 seconds, Cohen claims that Comcast has this down to less than 10%, putting it in compliance with the FCC customer service standard.

  
  

  But that’s it.

  
  

  Sure, Cohen claims that “Similar discrepancies can be found in virtually all aspects of the consultant’s findings and report,” but why not single them out? If you’re going to debunk something, go all the way.

  
  

  Which is why we note that Cohen doesn’t dispute the fact that Philadelphia had the lowest customer satisfaction level of all six markets surveyed by the consultants in the last six years, while also having the highest rates for service in those markets.

  
  

  The Comcast post doesn’t take issue with the fact that nearly 2/3 of Philly subscribers had to call customer service in the previous year, or that billing issues were the top reason for calling the company.

  
  

  It doesn’t try to explain away why 99% of the 1,759 written comments on the survey were unfavorable, with complaints about price hikes, bad customer service, slow and expensive Internet, and Comcast’s regional monopoly dominating those comments.

  
  

  Whatever the actual data for busy signals and customers put on hold, the fact remains that a large portion of Philadelphia residents are unhappy with Comcast and the lack of options available.

  
  

  If Comcast truly loved its home town, then it will have to do a better job of explaining why it chose Atlanta for the launch of its ultra-high-speed 2Gb fiber service over Philadelphia, which has the third-lowest level of broadband penetration among large American cities.

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  


• 
  

ribbi

by Chris Morran via Consumerist

uSprint Opening For Business Inside 1,435 RadioShack Stores Todayr

4 4 4 9

• 
  
  
  

  A rendering of what the new SprintShack store branding could look like.

  
  
  
  Things move fast when you’re in the newlywed phase, and Sprint is no exception: Only a few weeks after Standard General acquired 1,740 RadioShack stores at a bankruptcy auction, Sprint will be opening stores inside 1,435 RadioShack locations today. Soon, those stores will bear new co-branded Sprint-RadioShack signage.
  

  The move will more than double Sprint’s retail locations, the company says in a press release. No existing Sprint stores will be closed, a spokesman tells FierceWireless, “since we picked these locations based on among other things our existing store footprint.”

  
  

  Before teaming up with RadioShack, Sprint had about 1,100 company-owned retail stores, compared to AT&T’s more than 2,000 retail locations and Verizon Wireless’ roughly 1,700 stores (not including a large amount of other dealers).

  
  

  This won’t necessarily mean every single Radio Shack store slated for change will get a Sprint makeover today. Instead, Sprint is planning to have that done in the second half of the year.

  
  

  “The rebranding and build-out of the store-in-a-store concept will take some time to be complete in all the stores and we will be doing that in waves,” a Sprint spokesman Scott Sloat told FierceWireless.

  
  

  The stores-within-the-stores will take up about 1/3 of each location’s footprint, where Sprint’s retail employees will sell phones and service. Sprint is paying for overhead costs, distribute commission on its merchandise and pitch in with advertising. At most of those co-branded stores, Sprint’s logo will be more prominent than RadioShack’s.

  
  

  Sprint set to open 1,435 co-branded locations with RadioShack tomorrow [FierceWireless]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  


• 
  

ribbi

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

uAmazon Files First Lawsuit To Block Companies From Selling Fraudulent Positive Reviewsr

4 4 4 9

• 
  
  
  

  (Louis Abate)
  

  
  
  
  For the first time in the 20 years that Amazon has allowed users to review products, the company is taking legal action against businesses it claims sells fake reviews to third-party sellers.
  

  The Seattle Times reports that Amazon filed a lawsuit Wednesday in a Washington state court against four websites – BuyAmazonReviews.com, BayReviews.net, BuyReviewsNow.com. and BuyAzonReviews.com – and their operators, accusing the companies of an array of illegal business practices that undermine customer trust and the integrity of the online retailer.

  
  

  Amazon says in the lawsuit that it actively monitors its website for “false, misleading and inauthentic reviews.” However, in certain instances that practice hasn’t been sufficient, leading the company to determine legal action was necessary.

  
  

  “Despite substantial efforts to stamp out the practice, an unhealthy ecosystem is developing outside of Amazon to supply inauthentic reviews,” the suit states. “Defendants’ businesses consist entirely of selling such reviews.”

  
  

  The lawsuit details a variety of allegedly illegal practices – including trademark infringement, false advertising and violations of the Anticyber­squatting Consumer Protection Act and the Washington Consumer Protection Act – used by the defendant businesses in order to facilitate the creation of positive paid reviews.

  
  

  For example, Amazon claims that buyazonreviews.com promises that for $19 to $22 per review it will provide five-star write-ups in a “slow-drip” manner as to avoid detection by the retailer.

  
  

  The site also allegedly tells potential customers to “simply ship empty packages in an effort to fool Amazon into believing the reviewer was a ‘verified purchaser.'”

  
  

  GeekWire reports that in one instance, buyazonreviews.com chastised a reviewer for complaining that they had not received a product, telling the company paying for the review: “All our reviewers know of the process and I am not sure as to why she sent this to you but I will ensure it does not happen in the future.”

  
  

  Similarly named buyamazonreviews.com allegedly promised that customers “can have unlimited 4 and 5 star reviews this week,” while Bayreviews.net used Amazon’s logo to advertise “a unique system that generates high quality 5 rating reviews to your Kindle eBook,” the suit states.

  
  

  “Defendants are misleading Amazon’s customers and tarnishing Amazon’s brand for their own profit and the profit of a handful of dishonest sellers and manufacturers,” Amazon claims in the lawsuit. “Amazon is bringing this action to protect its customers from this misconduct, by stopping defendants and disrupting the marketplace in which they participate.”

  
  

  However, the owner of buyamazonreviews.com objects to Amazon’s characterization of the company’s business practices.

  
  

  He tells The Seattle Times that his company simply helps Amazon’s third-party sellers get reviews by connecting them to consumers willing to write those reviews.

  
  

  “We are not selling fake reviews,” he said, noting that in many cases reviewable products are offered at a discount. “However we do provide Unbiased and Honest reviews on all the products. And this is not illegal at all.”

  
  

  Amazon is seeking unspecified damages and requests that the sites cease and desist activities related to the retailer, provide information on each fake review created and the accounts of the people who paid for them.

  
  

  Amazon sues to block fake reviews on its site [The Seattle Times]
  
  Amazon files first-ever suit over fake product reviews, alleging sites sold fraudulent praise [GeekWire]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  


• 
  

ribbi

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

uShoplifter Hiding In Grocery Store Ceiling After Allegedly Stealing $8 Worth Of Stuff Prompts SWAT Responser

4 4 4 9

• 
  
  
  

  (Alan Rappa)

  
  
  
  The natural instinct to flee when caught kicked into overload for one suspected shoplifter, who police say crawled into a supermarket’s ceiling after getting busted with $8.50 in stolen goods. Her urge for a refuge took a seven-hour police effort, complete with a SWAT team response and store evacuation.
  

  Police in Baltimore County say the woman was stopped by security staff at the grocery store for allegedly swiping a bag of chips and some hair accessories, reports CBS Baltimore.

  
  

  “They took her back to the loss prevention office, but she ran off when they found some needles in her purse. She ran to the back of the store, up onto a catwalk and then disappeared into the ceiling,” a police rep explained.

  
  

  Law enforcement wanted to make sure the ceiling wouldn’t collapse on shoppers, and used a scissor-lift in their effort to extract her from her hiding spot. A few ceiling tiles fell but the store didn’t suffer any other damage.

  
  

  She was taken to a local hospital after complaining that she was in pain after the incident.

  
  

  Shoplifter Hiding In Ceiling Stole $8.50 Worth Of Goods [CBS Baltimore]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  


• 
  

ribbi

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

uPhiladelphia Finally Releases Results Of Comcast Customer Service Survey; It’s Not Prettyr

4 4 4 9

• 
  
  
  

  Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter has been a vocal supporter of Comcast and of its efforts to acquire Time Warner Cable, in spite of the company’s low customer satisfaction scores and high prices in its home city.

  
  
  
  Earlier this week we told you how the city leadership here in Comcast’s hometown of Philadelphia appeared to be dragging their feet in getting around to releasing the results of 15-month-old survey of city residents about Comcast service, even though the cable company had already been shown the report. Today, the city finally got around to sharing this info with the public and it’s about as unpleasant as you’d expect.
  

  We’re still working our way through the massive 571-page Needs Assessment Report [PDF], but here are some figures that instantly pop out.

  
  

  • Even though Philadelphia is the place Kabletown calls home (and which Comcast execs apparently actually refer to as “Kabletown”), the consultant who put together the report notes that the customer satisfaction level was the lowest, by as much as 11%, of other Comcast franchise areas studied over the last six years:
  

  
  
  
  

  Of other Comcast-dominated markets studied by the consultants in recent years, Philadelphia has the lowest level of customer satisfaction.

  
  
  
  

  • Even though Philly is home to Comcast, gives the company huge tax breaks, Comcast services are significantly more expensive here than in other markets:
  
  

  
  

  • 64% of Comcast customers in Philly had to call customer service in the last year. Nearly 1/3 of those calls were related to billing issues.

  
  

  • 15% of Philly residents who called Comcast customer service reported getting a busy signal. That’s five times the level specified by the FCC and Philadelphia’s Franchise Customer Service Standards requirements.

  
  

  • 61% of callers said their call had not been answered within 30 seconds; more than six time the FCC and city franchise standards.

  
  

  • Of the 1,759 residents who provided additional written comments on their surveys, 99% of the responses were unfavorable.

  
  

  Here are the top 9 most commonly used phrases in the written comments:

  
  

  1. Price (375 times) – Comcast’s rates were frequently described using terms like: “Overpriced,” “Price Gouging,” “Prices are too High,” “Ridiculous amount,” “exorbitant price,” “High prices,” “quarterly price increases,” “Prices are outrageous,” “need affordable prices,” “prices arbitrary,” “stop price hikes,” “unfair pricing,” and “need lower Prices.”

  
  

  2. Customer Service (316) — Here customers said Comcast service “needs improvement,” is “poor,” “bad,” “terrible,” “awful,” “lousy,” “horrible,” “frustrating,” “nonexistent,” and our favorite, “not kind.”

  
  

  3. Internet Services (312) — Comcast’s Xfinity service was painted with the following terms: “intermittent issues,” “poor,” “need better prices,” “no other options for provider,” “quite slow,” “service not worth the cost,” “not reliable,” and “need free internet service for low income and senior citizens.”

  
  

  4. Pay (300) — The use of this term covered a variety of sentiments, like “They should pay their fair share of taxes,” “wish we could pay per channel,” “we pay high prices for slow internet,” “I pay for channels I don’t want,” “They don’t pay taxes,” and “I pay a low introductory rate and then have to pay a huge rate for same service in 6 months.”

  
  

  5. Monopoly (297) — Respondents feelings on this topic were pretty clear with statements like “Comcast has a monopoly,” “Comcast is a monopoly,” “horrible monopoly,” “Comcast’s Monopoly is ridiculous,” “the City should break this monopoly,” and “unfair monopoly.”

  
  

  6. Competition (217) — Of course, if there’s a monopoly, then people are going to mention the lack of choices with sentiments including “need competition,” “the City should promote competition,” “Comcast has no Competition,” “the City should make sure there is competition,” “there is no competition,” and “there is zero competition.”

  
  

  The release of the Needs Assessment report kicks off the process of the Philadelphia City Council actually reviewing Comcast’s franchise agreement with the city. Many advocates and some members of the Council believe this is a chance for the city to curb rate hikes, demand better service and conditions that would require Comcast to provide more low-cost broadband access and perhaps funding for educational programs for the city’s cash-strapped schools.

  
  

  “Now it’s up to the City to take these voices collected in the needs assessment – and the many more who will speak across neighborhoods, and at public hearings – and use them to inform any future deal with Comcast,” says Hannah Sassamann of the Media Mobilizing Project, which helped to put pressure on the city to release the report. “This is a once-in-a-generation negotiation determining the communications future of our city… We need affordable cable and communications services in the poorest big city in America, real choices and competition in our communications market, protection for Comcast workers and consumers, and a Comcast that pays its fair share in Philadelphia as a condition of any new franchise agreement.”

  
  

  “We were elected by our constituents to leverage our public investment and assets to benefit the 99% of us, not the wealthy one-percent,” said Councilman Wilson Goode, Jr. in a statement.

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  


• 
  

ribbi

by Chris Morran via Consumerist