<![CDATA[Consumerist: Small Businesses]]> http://cache.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/consumerist.com.png <![CDATA[Consumerist: Small Businesses]]> http://consumerist.com/tag/small businesses http://consumerist.com/tag/small businesses <![CDATA[ Sprint Gouges Business Customer For Over $30,000 In Inflated Fees ]]> con_fatcatwithfansofmoney.jpg Allen Harkleroad of GMP Services writes, "A warning to all Sprint corporate customers that have dedicated access (T1's, etc.) if you are out of contract Sprint may be gouging you and claiming outrageously high local loop charges as the cause."

Harkleroad was told four times by Sprint reps that they had to pay over $950 per line in local loop costs—but it turns out local company Frontier Communications says they only get around $250 per connection from Sprint. So where does that other $700 go? Probably to help pay for that dead weight called Nextel. If you're a Sprint business customer you should know that you're possibly being gouged—and, if you were told the same thing as Harkleroad, lied to about the reason.

Harkleroad claims the amount he was overcharged comes up to $38,000 over two years, but we can't come up with that amount using our advanced math skills: 2 lines per month with overcharges of $700 for each one is $1400 per month, times 24 months is $33,600. It's still a huge amount, especially for a small company.

After he posted his story online, Harkleroad was contacted by Sprint over the weekend:

Update March 16, 2008 12:42pm. I got a call yesterday (Saturday 3/15) from Linda Moreno of Sprint's Executive and Regulatory Services. We had a pleasant and informative chat and was advised that she/they would get to the bottom of the issue. I agreed to give her and Sprint till Wednesday (March 19th) to resolve the issue to my satisfaction.
Sprint responded to this post with the following statement, "We are continuing discussions with Mr. Harkleroad and will work to address his concerns. But, because of Federal privacy laws and our company's privacy policies, Sprint will not publicly comment on specific customer's complaints, this includes those made by Mr. Harkleroad.

It's important to note that unlike our wireless offerings, which have national price plans in place, the prices for our wireline telecommunications and IP services vary depending on the bandwidth requirements between Sprint and the individual customer as well as the customer's physical location and proximity to Sprint's network facilities. The prices in our contracts for IP connections are negotiated, mutually agreed to and reflect an extremely competitive telecommunications market."

"Screwed by Sprint to the tune of $38,000.00 " [DesignerToday]
(Photo: Getty)

]]>
Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:05:25 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=368732&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Please Wait Until Restroom Is Unoccupied To Use Microwave. Don't Ask... ]]> pleasewaitmicrowave.jpgWith this homespun sign, Shapiro Hardware in SoHo New York politely asks that you please wait until the restroom is unoccupied before using the microwave. Huh? A commenter on the Copyranter blog where we found this notes that he used to work in a jewelry store where the electrical box was installed in the bathroom. "we got shocked when we washed our hands." says Anonymous, "25 year old owner's son didn't care. I hope his balls fry some day. There are many small businesses like this I bet."

]]>
Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:57:58 EST Ben Popken http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=362544&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Coffee Shop Installs Fake Security Camera In Bathroom ]]> Shoo, junkies! A coffee shop in Montreal has removed a "dud" security camera from its bathroom after news of it hit the local papers. Corporate headquarters asked the franchise owner to take it down, and apologized/avoided blame in a press release that said they were "not consulted in advance." The franchise owner had installed it as a sort of junkie scarecrow, to frighten away heroin users who were leaving dirty needles in the bathroom stall.

Privacy advocates are upset about the whole thing and considering legal action, but since the camera was a "non-working decoy" it will be hard to argue that any personal data was actually being recorded.

"There isn't any real material difference between a fake camera and a real camera,'' he said. "Whether they're real or fake, you still have the feeling of being watched.''

One patron of the Second Cup in question appeared to be more sympathetic with the owner's intentions.

"I am conscious the owner has to do something about the problem,'' said Steve Beshwaty as he enjoyed a cup of coffee.

"I don't find it particularly appealing to have a camera in the bathroom, but I understand the owner. ''


(Thanks to Kim!)

"Second Cup store removes bathroom surveillance cam" [CTV]
(Photo: Getty)

]]>
Tue, 05 Feb 2008 12:47:49 EST Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=352834&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Pure Weight Loss Helped Customers Lose Money, Not Weight, Says Attorney General ]]> con_pureweightloss.jpg Last week, Pennsylvania's Attorney General filed a consumer protection lawsuit against the PA-based company Pure Weight Loss and its owner, Vahan Karian. Pure Weight Loss, which has about 400 stores nationwide, announced last December that it was going out of business, and yet continued to accept pre-payment from unaware customers up to four days after posting the announcement on its website. Since closing, it has failed to reimburse customers fees for unfulfilled contracts or deliver the supplies they've already bought.

According to the lawsuit, Pure Weight Loss continued to aggressively market long-term contracts for weight loss services in the fall and winter of 2007, despite numerous financial difficulties, including tax liens, legal judgments and lawsuits against the company filed in several states.

To date, Corbett said the Attorney General's Health Care Section has received more than 850 claims from consumers approaching $500,000 for undelivered Pure Weight Loss products or services. The average claim by consumers is $880, though some consumers paid in excess of $2,000 for goods and services which were not delivered.

The lawsuit against Pure Weight Loss and Mr. Karian seeks full restitution for all consumer claims, along with civil penalties of up to $1,000 per violation - or $3,000 for violations involving senior citizens.


(Thanks to Patrick!)

"Attorney General Corbett announces consumer protection lawsuit over sudden closure of Pure Weight Loss chain; refunds sought for hundreds of consumers" [attorneygeneral.gov]

]]>
Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:15:54 EST Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=349736&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ California's Consumer Data Law Isn't Working Too Well ]]> con_bagheads.jpg The "Shine the Light" law passed in California in 2005 requires all businesses to tell customers who they sell their private data to, and to provide a no-cost way to remove your name, address, and phone number from their lists. Unfortunately, it's not being followed by more than half of the companies tested in a new report: "The California Public Interest Research Group found only one third of the survey participants received responses from companies consistent with the law."

Included in the report's recommendations are making companies provide an opt-out on their Web site and getting an "opt-in" approval from customers before their information is shared; moves opposed by small businesses.

"Typical California; Opportunity to add more and more layers of government and regulation at a time when we still have not seen this particular law fully tested," said John Kabateck from the National Federation of Independent Business.

Nice work there, Kabateck—in one sentence, you managed to come across as a smarmy caricature of a real person. Maybe that's why you're not afraid of having your identity bought and sold by the highest bidder?
"Consumer group warns of ID theft" [abc7news.com]
(Photo: Getty)

]]>
Thu, 03 Jan 2008 16:08:14 EST Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=340243&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Dell Reintroduces Windows XP ]]> After hearing from over 10,000 users wary of Windows Vista, Dell has decided to once again sell computers loaded with Windows XP. Most computer makers stopped offering XP after Vista's launch, even though many users, especially small businesses, are wary of the newfangled operating system. Dell did not consider these concerns reasonable at first.

But on Dell's IdeaStorm Web site, where visitors can post suggestions for the company and vote on the ones they think are important, a plea titled "Don't eliminate XP just yet" racked up more than 10,700 votes.
The consumer outcry has restored XP as an option to four Inspiron laptop models and two Dimension desktop models. Dell will only make Windows XP available to U.S. customers. Sorry foreigners, you are stuck with Vista. — CAREY GREENBERG-BERGER

PC maker Dell again offers Windows XP [AP]

]]>
Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:35:08 EDT Carey http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=254224&view=rss&microfeed=true