If the FDA makes a special effort to calls it "safe" then it is indeed toxic.

Johnya2 we have to draw the line somewhere.

I mean can they blame the yesterday's weather? Last week's? Three flights ago? Seven flights ago? It's hard to prove bad faith, I admit, but these airlines are right up on the fraud line with this weather BS.

And as for the 8 hours on the tarmac sue the pants of em. And if you don't win appeal. Want some horror stories: [www.flyersrights.com.]

Sue sue sue the airlines whenever you have a case!
The market, for possibly a whole host of reasons, is not working to let these terrible corporations go out of business. Suing may be the only way left to hold these corporations to account - that is until they lobby that away.

The fee needs to be prorated.
If the fee is prorated then it continues to represent the valid expectations of the parties at contract inception -that the cell phone company had to recover the cost of the phone. If, on the other hand, as the consumer continues to pay for service, the fee does not decrease, then the cell phone company is penalizing the consumer for terminating. That penalizing should not be allowed and probably isn't as a matter of contract law were someone to challenge it.

So if I'm with ATT for 6 months and wish to terminate I should not have to pay the entire termination fee to stop service, I should have to pay 1/2 for 12 month term or 3/4 for 24 month term. Otherwise ATT would benefit with a windfall from those that cancel closer to the end of their contract.

I speculate that unless your phone doesn't work in your house or at your place of business, it takes longer than 30 days to get fed up with poor cellular service. Thus, without the pro-ration, the cell phone company actually benefits from having a network that kind of works in areas wear people live and work, but isn't that great in other places - where people shop, drive, etc. because as we can see their profits are maximal if user frustration slowly increases to the point where they finally get completely fed up and cancel- kind of a perverse result.

I've booked a couple times with hotwire. Although hotels are decent, always get a smoking room. Yuck. I don't book with them anymore because I don't like smoking rooms.

Let the shitty airlines die first: American, United, Delta, US Airways... Then assuming the airlines are correct, we should fix the oil speculation.

Preemption is a word. No need for the Pre-emption.

I've had the same experience with AppleCare. They always want you to ship your machine back too...so as to dissuade you from using the warranty. Once they have your machine, who knows what they are doing with it! Maybe they are playing soccer with it, or in my case spilling soda on it.

The amount of money you spend for an exended warranty should shift the burden to apple to show not only that the liquid damage wasn't caused by it, but that the liquid damage was the CAUSE of the problem being experienced.

Otherwise, if there is any small smudge on the case, on the inside or anywhere on the machine it will free Apple from any obligation under the extended warranty contract whatsoever. If this happens a long time prior to the expiration then Apple will enjoy a substantial windfall because of the customer's accident. And that is unconscionable.

Therefore, if they truly believe it is the customer's fault, can prove it, and will use it to deny any subsequent claim under the extended warranty no matter whether it causes the problem or not, then they should immediately cut a check for the time remaining on the extended warranty-that is fair.

I am fighting with Apple on the same issue. They insist it is liquid damage-hence the name. But if it is, it came from inside the computer and Apple is still liable. I'm not the first that Apple has done this to (there are others including the sledgehammer macbook guy).

This may be MO for laptop warranty repair. Not sure.

Like the sledgehammer to macbook guy, I had Apple Store in Clarendon, VA tell me I had liquid damage and refuse to fix my machine. I have a MacBook Pro 17 that decided not to charge the battery anymore.

It actually started working again for some time, several months. Hard to see how liquid damage could have caused it (since liquid damage usually causes a short and hence irreversable damage) Of course, they never showed me any proof of this purported damage.

Anyway, it stopped charging once again.
I tried another store, that just relied on what the Clarendon store said. Now I'm escalating or going the small claims route. Obviously my experience isn't the greatest. I know I didn't spill anything on the machine (like sledghammer man), and I've seen several postings of folks getting similar stories from AppleCare.

I harbor some concerns that Apple is not genuinely interested in Customer service. Perhaps more interested in "servicing the customer" as George Carlin put it in one of his bits. If that's true, it's kind of sad. I was always quite an Apple fan growing up. It would be too bad if Apple's successes have spoiled and corrupted this once idyllic company.