понедельник, 28 сентября 2015 г.

uMan Tries To Open Airplane Door At 30,000 Feet, Says He Thought It Was The Bathroomr


4 4 4 9
  • (arsheffield)
    There aren’t many doors to choose from on an airplane, so if you don’t want to find yourself suddenly flying solo*, you better be darn sure you’re picking the right one. Easier said than done for one man who says he mistook the exit door for the bathroom on a recent flight.

    The Telegraph reports the story of a man who says he was arrested and fined €600 for the incident on a KLM Airlines flight from Edinburgh to Amsterdam. He says he was also told he’s been banned from flying on the airline for five years.

    According to his side of the story, staff accused him of trying to open the jet door at 30,000 feet, which would be impossible to accomplish due to cabin pressure. He claims it was just his attempt to get to the lavatory.

    When it was time to fly home, he says KLM staff refused him boarding and informed him that he was banned.

    “The crew told me to stay in my seat and I was to be arrested when the plane landed,” he told the Telegraph. “I tried to explain it was a simple mistake. It was a misunderstanding. The police came and arrested me. They weren’t too friendly. They weren’t too friendly.”

    He isn’t sure if he’ll face any further action, but insists he’d never try to open an exit door on purpose.

    “I realize the danger of that sort of thing,” he added.

    KLM told The Telegraph that a passenger had been handed over to authorities due to “his misbehavior” onboard.

    *Again yes, we realize this is not possible due to physics.

    Passenger who tried to open plane door at 30,000ft ‘thought it was a toilet’ [The Telegraph]



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uIf You’re Using iOS9, Check This Setting To Make Sure You Don’t Blow Through Your Data Planr


4 4 4 9
  • (Adam Fagen)

    Even if you’re not one of the reported 13 million folks who bought a brand-new iPhone 6S or 6S+ this weekend, you may want to go have a look in your phone’s settings. There’s a new feature in iOS9 that’s supposed to be convenient for consumers, but is causing overage problems and billing headaches for some users.

    The offender is called Wi-Fi Assist, Quartz reports, and it’s a feature in the newest version of Apple’s mobile operating system.

    Wi-Fi assist is meant to, well, assist your phone when you’re in a situation with poor or spotty wifi. That free coffee shop network not doing what you need it to? Your phone will start boosting the signal with 4G or 3G cellular data instead.

    For customers with unlimited data on their plans, that’s not a problem. But for anyone who does have a metered data plan — which is tens of millions of consumers — those little “boosts” can add up to big, unexpected overages surprisingly quickly. Some users tweeted complaints of popping from their regular 1-3 GB of usage to as high as 4-7 GB.

    The option is enabled by default, so if you haven’t explicitly gone into your phone’s settings to turn it off yet, it’s on right now. To disable, go to Settings –> Cellular and scroll all the way down. The Wi-Fi assist toggle is at the bottom.

    You might want to turn off this new iOS 9 setting if you don’t have unlimited data [Quartz]



ribbi
  • by Kate Cox
  • via Consumerist


uRegulators Take Action Against Fifth Third Bank For Auto-Lending Discrimination, Illegal Credit Card Practicesr


4 4 4 9
  • fifthFederal regulators dished out a double dose of enforcement today by taking action against Fifth Third Bank for allegedly charging higher interest rates to minority borrowers for car loans and deceptively marketing credit card add-on products to bank customers. 

    The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, along with the Department of Justice, announced today that Fifth Third Bank must pay $18 million to harmed African-American and Hispanic auto loan borrowers, and an additional $3 million in relief to eligible consumers affected by deceptively marketed credit card add-on products.

    Fifth Third Bank – which operates approximately 1,300 branches in 12 states – provides what are known as “indirect” auto loans to consumers, meaning it provides auto dealerships with loans at a set, risk-based interest rate and then allows the dealerships to add-on a “dealer markup,” which can then be split between the dealership and the bank.

    The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) prohibits creditors from discriminating against loan applicants on the basis of categories like race and national origin.

    The Bureau and the DOJ began looking into Fifth Third’s compliance with ECOA back in January 2013.

    Since then, the agencies found that the bank charged African-American and Hispanic borrowers higher dealer markups for their auto loans than non-Hispanic white borrowers. These markups were without regard to the creditworthiness of the borrowers.

    As a result of the illegal discriminatory pricing and compensation structure, the CFPB alleges that thousands of minority borrowers from January 2010 to September 2015 were charged on average over $200 more for their auto loans.

    According to the terms of the settlement [PDF], Fifth Third must:
    • pay $12 million into a settlement fund that will go to harmed African-American and Hispanic borrowers whose auto loans were financed by Fifth Third between January 2010 and September 2015;
    • pay any additional funds necessary into the settlement fund to bring its total payment to harmed consumers to $18 million;
    • hire a settlement administrator to distribute funds to victims;
    • substantially reduce or eliminate entirely dealer discretion – only 1.25% above buy rate for auto loans with terms of 5 years or less, and 1% for auto loans with longer terms.

    Today’s action against Fifth Third Bank is part of a larger joint effort between the CFPB and DOJ to identify and address discrimination in the direct and indirect auto lending market. Earlier this year, the agencies took action against Honda’s financing unit for similar violations. In that case, the company agreed to provide $24 million in restitution to borrowers who were affected by discriminatory loan pricing.

    Two years ago, the agencies took action against Ally Financial and Ally Bank. In that case, the company was ordered to pay $80 million in restitution and a $18 million civil penalty.

    In addition to the illegal discriminatory pricing action, the CFPB also took action against Fifth Third for violating the Dodd-Frank Act for deceptive acts or practices in the marketing and sales of its “Debt Protection” credit card add-on product.

    According to the CFPB, from 2007 through February 2013, Fifth Third deceptively marketed and sold the product to its customers during telemarketing calls and online.

    The product was marketed as a promise to allow enrolled cardholders to request the cancellation of credit card payments if they experienced certain hardships such as job loss, disability, and hospitalization.

    Telemarketers did not tell some cardholders that by agreeing to receive information about the product, they were being enrolled and would be charged a fee, the complaint alleges.

    Depending on the version of the product, consumers who enrolled were charged a monthly fee of either 0.81% or 0.89% of their card balance. In September 2012, Fifth Third ceased telemarketing the product and ceased all other enrollments in February 2013.

    Additionally, from December 2011 through September 2012, Fifth Third sent cardholders product “fulfillment kits” that contained incorrect descriptions of the product’s cost, benefits, exclusions, terms, and conditions.

    Among other things, the CFPB claims that Fifth Third’s illegal practices included: misrepresenting costs and fees for coverage; misrepresenting or omitting information about eligibility for coverage; and illegal practices in the enrollment process.

    According to the terms of the settlement [PDF], Fifth Third must:
    • provide $3 million in relief to roughly 24,500 customers;
    • cease engaging in illegal practices; and
    • pay a $500,000 penalty to the CFPB’s civil penalty fund.



ribbi
  • by Ashlee Kieler
  • via Consumerist


uOnce Medicaid Decides That You’re Dead, It’s Hard To Come Back To Lifer


4 4 4 9
  • not_dead_yetWhen you’re dead, you generally can’t come back. It’s also difficult to come back when you’re actually alive, but the government thinks that you’re dead. An 87-year-old on Brooklyn is understandably worried, because Medicaid has declared her dead. If other government services believe them, dead people don’t need to do things like visit doctors or eat, so her income, food stamps, and health insurance would stop. This would be bad.

    It was New York City’s Bureau of Fraud Investigation that declared the woman dead. They claim that records show that she’s deceased, and they’re ending her benefits. A “computer error” killed her off, but it’s not as easy as just hitting “undo” on that error and restoring her government services.

    The process of appealing her alleged death means going to Social Security and to the state DMV so they will issue her a non-driver ID card. The problem is that all of that could take weeks, and she still needs money to live on and medical services right now.

    For example, she’s being treated for cancer, and has already canceled a doctor’s appointment. If the federal government thinks that she’s dead, she won’t receive her Social Security check.

    After a call from the local CBS affiliate, the city promises that they’re working on her case.

    Brooklyn Woman Mistakenly Declared Dead, Has Medicaid Cut Off [CBS New York]



ribbi
  • by Laura Northrup
  • via Consumerist


uHilton Looking Into Possible Hack Attack Affecting Guests Using Credit Cards At Its Restaurants, Gift Shopsr


4 4 4 9
  • (Adam Fagen)
    Hilton Hotels says it’s looking into a possible hack attack connected to point-of-sale registers and a variety of Hilton properties. If you bought something at a restaurant, gift shop or other store at a Hilton property recently, you should take a closer look at your credit card statements for any fraudulent activity.

    According to security researcher Brian Krebs, who cites sources at five different banks, the breach appears to have taken place between April 21 and July 27, and is likely limited to credit card transactions at those POS registers.

    Hotels under the Hilton name, as well as the company’s Embassy Suites, Doubletree, Hampton Inn and Suites, and Waldorf Astoria Hotels & Resorts are believed to be affected.

    Hilton now says it’s checking things out.

    “Hilton Worldwide is strongly committed to protecting our customers’ credit card information. We have many systems in place and work with some of the top experts in the field to address data security,” the company said in a statement. “Unfortunately the possibility of fraudulent credit card activity is all too common for every company in today’s marketplace. We take any potential issue very seriously, and we are looking into this matter.”

    If you bought anything at Hilton properties between April and July, now is definitely a good time to check out your credit card statements and look for any fraudulent charges from that hotel. The incident could date back to November 2014, however, and may still be ongoing.

    Banks: Card Breach at Hilton Hotel Properties [Krebs On Security]



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist


uWe Tried It: Does Country Crock’s New Formula Actually Taste Like Garbage?r

uPossible Scammer Threatens To Call Police On The Police Asking Questions About Suspicious Mailingr


4 4 4 9
  • (Alan Rappa)
    Who’s a scammer to turn to for help when they feel they’re being harassed? Apparently, the authorities: police in Vermont say they were investigating a possible scam targeting senior citizens, and called up the alleged scammer with a few questions — who then threatened to call the cops.

    Burlington police shared the trouble they had while investigating a potential scam targeting residents in the area on Twitter 9 (h/t CBS Boston), after some people received a postcard alerting them to a package they had waiting to be delivered, that they didn’t know they had coming to them. The mailing asks for a credit card number to get the package on its way to the recipients, which sounds a lot like a scam.

    Police called the number listed on the card to ask a few questions, but a woman who picked up couldn’t provide a legitimate address or company name. She hung up, and the police called back, and spoke to a woman who threatened to call the police on the police.

    When a Twitter follower told police they should’ve given the woman the main number for the Burlington Police Department and have her report their call, police said that’s exactly what they did.

    According to the police department’s Twitter account, cops are still looking into the business and its mailer in an attempt to verify whether it is indeed, a scam or some kind of legitimate venture.

    Here’s more info on how you can help protect your loved ones from suspected elder scams.



ribbi
  • by Mary Beth Quirk
  • via Consumerist