Here's the blog's argument for why Bank of America isn't honoring its promise to customers and to Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA). On October 6th the bank released a letter in which it pledged to stop re-pricing existing credit card accounts—but introducing an annual fee where none existed before sure sounds like re-pricing, doesn't it? BoA explained it like this: they only promised to not raise interest rates.

However, that's not true. WalletBlog points out that the bank made no such distinction in their October 6th letter. Here's the relevant excerpt:

"In light of the concerns expressed to us by our customers, Bank of America will not implement any change in terms (risk or economic based) re-pricing of consumer credit card accounts between now and the effective date of the CARD Act."

That language doesn't draw any distinctions between types of re-pricing, so it's kind of weird to retroactively define the term as only relating to interest rates.

But this is a moot point because the letter only promises that they won't practice re-pricing between now and the implementation of the CARD Act. After that goes into effect in February 2010, the promise no longer applies. I don't know why BoA's representative bothered to misrepresent the language of the letter when he could just as easily have pointed out that it was nothing more than a temporary pledge—and mostly an empty once, since they had already re-priced many accounts in the month leading up to the letter.

As far as implementing fees after the CARD Act goes into effect, well, that's where WalletBlog says that BoA may end up in violation of the law. BoA argues that the CARD Act prohibits raising interest rates but says nothing about implementing annual fees, but WalletBlog points out that the language of the CARD Act is ambiguous, and thanks to a 1996 Supreme Court case involving Citibank, the FDIC considers the term "interest" to include:

...among other things, the following fees connected with credit extension or availability: numerical periodic rates, late fees, not sufficient funds (NSF) fees, overlimit fees, annual fees, cash advance fees, and membership fees.

It sounds like BoA may be testing the boundaries of the CARD Act and seeing if it can get away with annual fees by arguing that they're not specifically prohibited.

Be sure to check out WalletBlog's full post on the matter.

"Bank of America Tries but Fails to Defend New Annual Fees" [WalletBlog]
"Bank of America Readies Itself to Break the Law" [WalletBlog]
(Photo: mrkathika)

One reader called to complain about Citi raising credit card interest rates:Pretty neat. Give us a call and let your voice ring out!

(Photo: savagecat)

(I've edited the post for clarity and punctuation.)

So I will start off saying my husband and I have been shopping at Menards since they opened and because of our business we are there almost daily and sometime twice a day. This afternoon [November 7th, 2009] we came for the second time to get lumber and paint. I just bought my husband a surprise drywall gun last night from Menards so in exchange he thought it would be nice to look at a new drill for me.

I have had my eye on a light weight compact cordless so we started comparing them. He noticed a complete set of 2 drills, bat, chargers and so on but they were not on display, just in the box. Well I opened the box so I could see how light they are and they were perfect for me. I picked everything up that I removed from the box and stuffed it back in the box and set it in the cart. I tried to close the top of the box however because i removed everything it would not go back in place, So I left the box open.

We had several items in our cart and within a minute I found some drill bits to go with my new set so I tossed the small package in the cart. I turned my back to talk to my husband about more bits and some guy comes cruising around the corner grabs my cart and takes off walking very fast. "HEY you have my cart!" I yelled to the guy as he was already down the aisle. He let go of the cart said sorry and disappeared around the corner leaving my cart. I walked down, grabbed the cart, and came back to my husband. Very strange we both thought but we just continued shopping.

Over to building materials we went before checking out. We checked our items out (over $300.00) and the cashier never questioned the open box or looked inside.

We leave the store and a man walks up and asks for our receipt. My husband went to pull it out of his wallet and before he gets it out the guy reaches into the drill box and pulls out the small pack of drill bits. He looks at us and said you took these. We replied oh they must have been missed we will come back in and pay for them.

The guy who we now know as security asked us to come back inside. We went inside expecting to pay for the $5.99 drill bits and he tells us we have to fill out an incident paper.

They take our cart full of $300.00 worth of stuff and lead us into the security room. Inside the room we are sitting in silence while this guy is filling out paperwork and a lady that works as a CSM(?) is standing guard at the door like we are hard criminals ready to flee the country.

After several minutes of silence I ask if I am being charged for something. The security man said no I just need you to fill out this paperwork and give me your drivers license.

So I hand over my license and he said to me that he'd seen the drill bits on top of the open box then he'd seen us walk into the checkouts and not pay for them. I could not believe what I was hearing. I told him over and over this is a mistake I threw the bits in the cart and they must have landed on the box. The guard then said maybe they slipped further in the box when you moved your cart. He said well that sounds like you're just having bad luck. My husband asked if they'd seen me put the package in the box. He would not respond.

He then told me I have 2 choices. I can pay Menards $150.00 or they will call the police and charge me with theft and a $350.00 fine. We could not believe what was happening. CHARGE ME WITH THEFT! JUST BAD LUCK??? What is happening! Have they gone crazy!

I have thrown items in my cart many times and never thought twice about it. I understand if the bits were in my pocket or hidden under everything in the box but they were on top of a opened box that the cashier never even looked in the box. Honest mistake is what I call it not bad luck or theft.

So now I am in tears and faced with a choice I never thought I would make in my life. We run a professional business and I would never want to risk my reputation by being hauled out of Menards in front of everyone by the police. I was told to sign the paperwork and pay the $150.00 to avoid this from happening. So I signed and paid what they called a restitution. They refused to give me a copy of the paperwork I signed. Then they sent us on our way with tears in my eyes. I went quietly but I can't let this go.

"Just having bad luck???? (Beloit Menards)" [janesville.craigslist.org] (Thanks to M!)
(Photo: TheTruthAbout...)

In games like Mafia Wars, Farmville, YoVille and Vampires Live, you know, some of the major sources of all those garbage announcements cluttering up your Facebook, players compete to complete missions and level up. By leveling up, you can complete more difficult missions and fight off weaker opponents. You can wait for your various energies to regenerate naturally over time, or you can purchase with real money in-game boosts. Or, you can complete various lead generation offers, many of which are of the "answer page after page of questions and opt in and out of receiving various kinds of spam" variety. Some of them install malware and adware that is impossible to remove. And some of them secretly subscribe you to monthly recurring $9.99 credit card charges.

Couple this reckless profiteering with in-game incentives for recruiting more players into your network and a constant blast (if you let it) of promotional messages to your friends, and it's like Amway discovered Facebook and threw a gangster-themed house party.

Here's Mark's spiel:Here's the pertinent transcript of the talk the CEO gave to some other developers at a mixer:

I knew that i wanted to control my destiny, so I knew I needed revenues, right, fucking, now. Like I needed revenues now. So I funded the company myself but I did every horrible thing in the book to, just to get revenues right away. I mean we gave our users poker chips if they downloaded this zwinky toolbar which was like, I dont know, I downloaded it once and couldn't get rid of it. *laughs* We did anything possible just to just get revenues so that we could grow and be a real business…So control your destiny. So that was a big lesson, controlling your business. So by the time we raised money we were profitable.

I'm sorry, but if you need to scam people to keep your company going, you have a flawed business plan.

After getting reamed in an excellent multi-part TechCrunch investigation by Michael Arrington, Mark Pincus pledged to more aggressively remove scammy offers.

That's great, but c'mon. Now that they're funded and raking in the cash, they can act all contrite and go "oh! you caught us! you're right, we're bad, we'll fix that. Lah dee dah." How convenient that now you can afford morals.

By the way, nice work, TechCrunch! Now, if only we could get Arrington to apply the same level of discipline to re-evaluating his gushing praise for Cash4Gold.

Zynga CEO Mark Pincus: "I Did Every Horrible Thing In The Book Just To Get Revenues" [TechCrunch]
PREVIOUSLY: Social Network Games: Fake Mobsters, Real Racket

The safety concern arises over the side hinge that expands and contracts when the stroller is opened and closed. The company plans on sending safety covers to stroller owners.

There hasn't been an official one but the CPSC is expected to make one tomorrow.

It's important to make sure that children are a safe distance away from the stroller when you're opening and closing it. And to, you know, stop opening or closing it if you hear a high-pitch screaming.

Want a stroller that's cheaper and higher rated than a Maclaren, and hasn't been recalled for finger amputation? Check out Consumer Reports latest stroller reviews and ratings (subscription required).

Stroller maker Maclaren to recall 1 million strollers on concerns children can cut fingers off [New York Daily News via Consumer Reports Safety Blog]

• Insurance mandate - Uninsured Americans will pay a penalty; low-income people exempt. House bill charges a penalty of 2.5% of adjusted gross income: that's $500 on $20,000, for example.
• Employer coverage - All employers with a payroll above $500,000 must help pay for some kind of health insurance for their employees, or pay a tax. The Senate Finance Committee version of the bill does not have this requirement.
• Insurance exchange - Allows people who are not covered to buy health insurance in nation- or state-wide markets. Available to employees of small businesses, and others not eligible for coverage.
• Public plan - Would create a new federal government-run insurance plan with its own physician and hospital rates, separate from those negotiated by Medicare. Senate Finance Committee instead offers nonprofit insurance cooperatives in each state.
• Subsidies - Households earning up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level would be eligible for subsidies of health insurance premiums when they buy insurance through the exchange.
• Small business subsidies - Tax credits for small employers that provide health care coverage for employees.
• Coverage - House and Senate Health Committee versions require plans to pay for 70% of all health care spending that the plan covers; Senate Finance Committee version requires 65%. Insurers cannot deny coverage because of pre-existing conditions, and premiums may not vary according to age on the individual insurance market as widely as they do now. People receiving federal subsidies for insurance may not enroll in a plan that includes coverage of abortions.
• Medicaid - Households with incomes up to 150% of the federal poverty level would now be eligible for Medicaid. Senate Finance Committee would expand to 133% of the federal poverty level, starting in 2014.

Sweeping Health Care Plan Passes House [NY Times]

RELATED:
How Would Health Care Reform Affect You?

(Photo: j.reed)

A few months ago, Adam was drawn in by a Facebook ad promising five North Face t-shirts for $5.

I signed up for a $5 introductory offer from Seattle Coffee Direct. I thought, "Why not?" Well the coffee arrives and I notice on my bank statement a charge for $28.10, not $5. Then I notice two charges three days apart for $38.95. When I finally call, things really get interesting. When I first get Mike from CS on the line, I don't even give him my name, acct number or anything, and he's already saying he can close the account and refund the money, two things I had yet to even ASK for. Obviously, they have to do a lot of this. What I come to find out is that by (stupidly) giving them my information, they had signed me up for twice-weekly coffee shipments, at a cost of $38.95 per week. Unbelievable.

Meanwhile, a few weeks ago, Ivan shared with us his sad story of a World Bean Cafe order turned into an epic saga in search of his refund.

Please warn your readers about this company or companies. It sells coffee beans and I was sucked in via a Facebook ad. Yes, I know, or at least I should have known better. Against my better judgment I went ahead and ordered from them back in May of this year. It has been a nightmare since.

I received my initial shipment. The week following this I received another order of coffee. I thought this was odd so I checked my credit card online system. There were 7 charges from World Bean Café at $38.95 a pop! I called them immediately and they cancelled any further orders. The representative gave me a lame excuse of not specifying a shipment frequency (there was no way to specify a frequency on the order form) and that it defaulted to two bags of coffee ordered every day. Huh?

According to my credit card company all the transactions were manually entered into a POS system so that excuse is pretty iffy. She then said I should send the coffee back and I should get the credit within 60 days. Ugh! That week the orders of coffee started to come in. I refused them. >

I waited for the credits which should have been done in the beginning of August. No credits. I called again and was told it would be at least another 30 days. No credits in the beginning of September. I called on 9/17 and was apologized to and they said it would be 5-7 business days before I received my credit. Now it is October 1 with no credits. I call again and speak to a representative named "Ralph" and he gives me the same 5-7 day spiel. Not happy with the answer, I ask to speak to a manager. I was connected to "Lucy" who says she is going to manually enter the credits into her system and gives me the 5-7 day speech. I wait. October 12 rolls around and still no credits. I checked this morning and no credits have posted to my account. All this time I have been paying interest on these transactions and am fed up. I have started the charge back procedures with my credit card company. Hopefully that will be the end of it.

Lesson learned and all I can say is, "Never Again!"

The coffee subscription scheme has been around for a long time—look at Gevalia—but the Facebook ads seem to be a new phenomenon. Let this serve as a lesson to Adam, Ivan, and all of our readers: always scroll down and make sure to read all of the fine print.

What the company actually promises (or maybe "threatens") is to ship two bags of coffee to subscribers every two weeks.

Semimonthly Program: Twice a month you will receive a package with 2 bags of coffee and will be billed $12.90 per bag of coffee, plus $6.95 per bag for shipping and handling.

So they're charging for shipping alone a bit less than you might pay for a pound of mediocre coffee on sale.

Speaking of pounds, though, there is no mention on the site of how big a bag is. Forget the grocery shrink ray that puts 12-ounce bags of coffee on store shelves—the packets pictured on the site look smaller than a pound.

(Photo: Matthew Oliphant)

(It's unclear whether the couple ever actually paid for the Bic lighters in question—the article only specifies that the footage shows they scanned the package of lighters but that the scanner didn't register it.)

The couple in question is gay and their sons are adopted, which may have introduced a whole new level of emotional reactions on both sides of the dispute. The men say their children told them that while they were being held in the security room, the security staff threatened the kids and "had made disparaging remarks about Paolucci and Hitchcock's lifestyle." It's not a stretch to imagine that such an attitude, if it existed, carried over into any face-to-face interactions. Meanwhile, the police who showed up and cuffed Paolucci, then forced the two men into the backs of different squad cars, claim that the men were causing a disturbance when they arrived at the scene.

Still, no amount of pro-gay or anti-gay outrage makes it okay for a retailer to place paying customers in such an abusive situation, especially when the retailer's own security footage—which was immediately available for review—shows that if there was any inventory issue it was due to a malfunction of the scanner. But Walmart can get away with it because it can afford to:

Asked if they intend to sue Wal-Mart, Paolucci said he and Hitchcock probably won't because other attorneys have advised them Wal-Mart historically "plays hardball" and isn't prone to settle cases out of court.

"We could spend a couple million dollars to sue them," Paolucci said.

But that doesn't mean there won't be court action. Paolucci and Hitchcock e-mailed The Tribune a copy of a letter from a law firm representing Wal-Mart seeking 10 times the retail price of the items the store still claims were shoplifted by Paolucci. The letter states the matter will be dropped if Paolucci submits the $158.40 payment.

Fortunately, the men seem to have enough money that they can afford to never shop at the discount retailer again, even if they weren't banned for life. If you're not part of a wealthy two-income family, though... well hopefully Walmart will look down favorably upon you when your post-checkout time comes, so long as you act contrite and respectful of their security team's authority.

(Oh yeah, now I remember why I don't want a Walmart anywhere near where I live.)

*Note: I originally reported the Walmart as being located in Niles, Illinois. However, the South Bend Tribune generally covers areas in Michigan and Indiana, and the couple lives in Buchanan, Michigan, which also has a Niles located nearby. I've updated the post to report the Walmart as being located in Niles, Michigan. -Chris

"Niles couple banned from Wal-Mart after dispute over BIC lighters" [South Bend Tribune] (Thanks to Shanon!)

RELATED
"Loomis Rent-A-Cops Have Shopper Cuffed, Hauled Away Over ATM Photo"
(Photo: Brave New Films)

The brothers told [6News reporter Rafael] Sanchez that they went to the gym Monday hoping to resolve the issue, but that their requests were rejected by the management at the facility.

[...]

"I'm wondering how more people are they going to do it to? After meeting two young gentlemen yesterday, they don't feel they've done anything wrong," said [brother] Pat Hannon. "They feel it's their right to get America fit."

So there you have it. Bally's wants the developmentally disabled to be physically fit. I don't see how that's a bad thing—we should all take care of our health—but it seems weird to target men and women who, you know, can't drive themselves to the gym they're joining. Maybe the two salesmen who showed up at the apartment—where "no soliciting" signs are posted—should agree to shuttle their new client back and forth whenever he feels like it.

Update: Bally's PR firm just contacted us with the following statement on behalf of the gym:

We regret that this incident occurred and have accordingly addressed the issue with the employees involved. It is common practice that we market our clubs with free trial passes to the local community but it is against our corporate policy to transport anyone to or from our facility. When our management found out about Mr. Hannon's disability, we immediately cancelled his membership and refunded all of his fees.

"Family: Gym Took Advantage Of Man With Disability" [WRTV Indianapolis] (Thanks to Becky!)
(Photo: geocam20000)

Apparently he also had insurance, and the hospital should have sent the bill to his insurer.

"I can't believe that in any country besides the U.S., any civilized country, that the parents of a murdered boy would receive this bill for $29,000 and such an insulting letter," Gerald Hawkins, the victim's father, told ABC 10 in Sacramento, CA.

The bill in question was for "five minutes in [the hospital's] emergency room," says ABC 10, who tried to assess why 5 minutes could cost $29,000.

Scott Seamons with the California Hospital Council said the critical response to Hawkins is what cost the most. He said UC Davis is a Level 1 Trauma Center, which means the best and most expensive doctors were waiting for Scott.

"Whether it was five minutes or 55 minutes doesn't really matter in the initial review and assessment of the patient," he said.

Trauma surgeons, nurses, technicians and more had to treat Scott before they realized they couldn't help, according to Seamons.

"They're all right there," he said. "And those are highly trained, highly specialized and highly paid clinical experts. Clearly in the aftermath, in hindsight, they looked at it and determined there was probably less need for that, but in the first five minutes all of those resources were right there at the side of this patient, and they cost a lot of money."

ABC 10 says that the letter included with the bill instructed the deceased to take his health care needs to a county clinic in the future. The hospital has apologized.

Why was Murdered Sac State Student's ER Bill So High? [News 10]
Slain Sac State Student's Parents Stunned by Hospital Bill, Letter [News 10]

If you're interested in statistics the Bureau has another one that you might like. The employment-to-population ratio calculates the proportion of the country's working-age population that is employed. Currently, our employment-to-population ratio is at 58.5%. Wikipedia tells us that a "high" ratio would be around 70%.

There's also something called the "underemployment" rate, which tracks part-time workers and those who have simply given up. This rate is currently at 17.5%, says the NYT.

As far as industries go, if you're in construction and manufacturing, you're in trouble. Manufacturing in particular has lost 2.1 million jobs in just the last 2 years.

Heath care, however, is doing fine. The Bureau of Labor Statistics tells us that since the recession began, heath care has added 597,000 jobs.

The news is most grim if you're a teenager: 27.6% of teenagers who are looking for work are unable to find it.

Here's a scary/depressing graph:

Employment Situation Summary [Bureau of Labor Statistics]
U.S. Unemployment Rate Hits 10.2%, Highest in 26 Years [NYT]
(Photo:Jay Adan)

54. If there is a prix fixe, let guests know about it. Do not force anyone to ask for the "special" menu.

58. Do not bring judgment with the ketchup. Or mustard. Or hot sauce. Or whatever condiment is requested.

62. Do not fill the water glass every two minutes, or after each sip. You'll make people nervous.

62(a). Do not let a glass sit empty for too long.

64. Specials, spoken and printed, should always have prices.

67. Never stack the plates on the table. They make a racket. Shhhhhh.

70. Never deliver a hot plate without warning the guest. And never ask a guest to pass along that hot plate.

78. Do not ask, "Are you still working on that?" Dining is not work - until questions like this are asked.

82. If you drip or spill something, clean it up, replace it, offer to pay for whatever damage you may have caused. Refrain from touching the wet spots on the guest.

85. Never bring a check until someone asks for it. Then give it to the person who asked for it.

86. If a few people signal for the check, find a neutral place on the table to leave it.

90. If someone is getting agitated or effusive on a cellphone, politely suggest he keep it down or move away from other guests.

PREVIOUSLY: 50 Things Restaurant Staffers Should Never Do

100 Things Restaurant Staffers Should Never Do (Part 2) [NYT]
100 Things Restaurant Staffers Should Never Do (Part 1) [NYT]
(Photo:Mike Fleming)

Treehugger's Lyod Alter is selling his one-of-a-kind miniHome Solo prototype for $100,000. Whether your trailer park is urban or of the more traditional variety, you can live off the grid in environmentally-friendly style.

In a related story, people are also selling their houses so they can live off the grid in converted shipping containers, CR Home and Garden blog reports.

For Sale: Sustain Minihome Prototype [Lyod Alter via Curbly]

Stephanie says:

Mark (my brother) reviewed the sandwich at a Perkins in Madison Wisconsin. He was sorely disappointed when the sandwich looked completely different than the picture on the menu (they used regular grilled bread instead of the French baguette). He posted the negative review of the Perkins French Dip on his blog on November 1st. The next day, someone claiming to be a Perkins regional manager left a comment on the blog urging Mark to call him and let him fix the situation. He called the number and was quickly put in touch with Jon Sanborn, the Perkins regional manager. Jon investigated the bread situation, offered Mark a gift certificate, and invited him to come back and re-review the sandwich the next time he was in Madison. Equally impressive was that there was no mention of taking the review down or altering its contents.

I find it amazing that Perkins would seek out my brother and try to ascertain what went wrong with his dining experience, especially considering the blog currently has only 15 followers and I doubt a negative review would stop any of us from going to Perkins in the future.

Anyway, it turns out that the Perkins was out of the correct bread at the time and someone should have asked if regular bread was OK.

Here's how our French Dip expert describes Perkins' response:

Mr. Sanborn was apologetic for what had happened and wanted to make it up to me. So he told me that he would mail me a Perkins gift certificate! Please realize, Perkins found me out to make this situation right, I did not complain to them. If this indicative of how their franchise is run, all I can say is, "Thank you, Perkins, for putting the customer first." About how to use my compensation, fret not faithful readers, this gift certificate will only go back into purchasing more French dips for ingestion and judging, as I wish not to profit from the deeds I undertake selflessly reviewing everyone's favorite sandwiches of perfect harmony.

I informed Mr. Sanborn that in late January I would be in Madison again, and that I would love to review the same Perkins' French dip again. He told me that he doesn't really care what I do with my blog, just that he wants me to be happy.

Perkins Restaurant and Bakery at 5237 University Ave Madison, WI 53705 [The French Dip Review]
Update: The Perkins French Dip Review of November 1, 2009 and Jon Sanborn [The French Dip Review]

Ford Unveils New Car For Cash-Strapped Buyers: The 1993 Taurus

It could get you in trouble at work:

I have a company supplied T-Mobile blackberry. Very unfortunately, when my phone wasn't working, one of the women in our IT department went to my T-Mobile account page to correct the issue and found a very graphic and clear picture of a woman's breasts. It created a terrible situation. No one – and I mean NO ONE - would believe me when I told them that I did not take the photo, nor did I put it there. I finally had to just drop it because the more I insisted that it wasn't mine, the more guilty I sounded. The problem here is that I am the head of the Human Resources Department. I wish it had turned out to be a funny situation, but it didn't take that path. For many other people, this could be humorous. In my situation, it wasn't.

It could arouse spousal suspicion:

I stumbled across this article this morning, and the same thing happened to me!!!!!!! I was actually sitting at the computer with my wife, looking at my bill and trying to add ring-back tones, and all of a sudden, there was a picture of some girls butt with a caption reading "kiss this". WTF!!?!?? She FLIPPED! To this day, she STILL talks about it! I can understand how she would accuse me of this, but I KNOW for a FACT this picture was never, ever on my phone!!!!!!! How does this happen?!?!

Or you could see something a little more graphic than what our original reader saw:

Dear Sir or Madam:

I am contacting you regarding the highly offensive pictures that have appeared on myTMobile home page. Please see the attached screenshots from last night. As of now, those photos still appear on my homepage whenever I access my account.

I have attempted to resolve this matter via the proper channels, ending in a conversation with TMobile tier-2 technical support. The answers I have received so far are unsatisfactory, and to be frank, somewhat condescending.

I was first told that I had somehow unknowingly uploaded these photos myself, or that I had left my phone unattended and a nefarious person of mystery had uploaded them via my handset without my knowledge. I use an unlocked handset that is not sold by TMobile, and thus do not have the software installed to access TMobile's proprietary MobileLife service. Additionally, I have never used the MobileLife service, nor have I accepted the EULA for the service. Therefore, it is impossible that I have uploaded these offensive pictures, or that someone did so using my handset without my knowledge.

Following that, I was told the photos must have been taken by the TMobile customer who first had this number, and were somehow leftover in the MobileLife folder attached to this number. Again, that is impossible- I have had my number since 2004. It was a Nextel number, then SunCom, then became TMobile when SunCom was purchased. It has never been a TMobile number before now.

Next, the technical support rep told me that this had never happened before, and that the user who took these pictures must have simply transposed digits of intended recipient's phone number. I pointed the rep to http://consumerist.com/5395978/reader-paid-my-t+mobile-bill-saw-some-boobs, indicating that this is not a rogue occurrence. She replied that, even after seeing this article, it still was not TMobile's fault and I should just delete the pictures and move on.

These are the offending pictures (the originals were sent to us as uncensored screencaps of the browser window, but we've cropped them and added cats to obscure the naughty bits).

Another reader wrote in:

just got a new iPhone. Unlocked it and then checked my account online. I thought it was just some weird fluke thing because they couldn't even put a picture up of my phone. Where did the pictures come from? I have no idea. I don't even what "MobileLife" is. My images were both wrong and Oh My God!

The reader who sent this one in said, "I've never uploaded photos to tmobile's website, this picture isn't
from my phone."

Additionally, after the Huffington Post picked up this story, they received a complaint and a different picture from one of their readers:

The question is, why is it only porn? Why aren't people seeing pictures of strangers birthday parties and goofy faces and so forth? And what is Tmobile going to do about fixing the problem? And how are they going to win their affected customers' trust back?

We've reached out to T-Mobile and passed these complaints and pictures on to them, and they've promised that they'll have a statement ready for us soon. UPDATE: T-Mobile's statement:

T-Mobile is aware of reports from a few customers who have seen inappropriate or unwanted pictures in their online "MyAlbum" section within their MyT-Mobile account. We are taking these reports seriously and actively investigating these issues.

Our initial analysis of the reports leads us to believe that pictures were likely sent to some customers' mobile number by a third party, whether the customers knew the sender or not. If a customer has not had picture messaging enabled on their handset, a picture sent to them may be delivered only to their online MyAlbum account. For this reason, some customers are surprised when they see the picture for the first time in their MyT-Mobile account.

We will continue to investigate the reports but if customers would like to avoid receiving picture messages in the future they can explore using T-Mobile's Message Blocking features which are accessed through their MyT-Mobile account online.

(Cat pictures: amboo who? and D.P. Rubino)

From the NY AG's office:

"Rather than compete fairly, Intel used bribery and coercion to maintain a stranglehold on the market," said Attorney General Cuomo. "Intel's actions not only unfairly restricted potential competitors, but also hurt average consumers who were robbed of better products and lower prices. These illegal tactics must stop and competition must be restored to this vital marketplace."

To obtain exclusive agreements, Intel paid hundreds of millions of dollars annually - and in some years billions of dollars - in so-called "rebates" to individual computer makers. These rebates were actually just payoffs with no legitimate business purpose that Intel invented to disguise their anticompetitive nature. Intel also attempted to erase the most obvious traces of its anticompetitive scheme by eliminating crucial but flagrantly objectionable provisions from written agreements or by camouflaging language about illegal guaranteed market shares with terms like "volume targets."

As for how this affects you, the consumer, the AG's office says that "Intel repeatedly pressured computer makers to guarantee it specified market shares of their sales, which prevented computer makers from responding to consumer demand."

The AG's office quotes some internal emails from Dell, HP and Intel in which alleged "anti-trust" activity is discussed. For example this is from an internal e-mail from HP executive in June 2004 after HP defied Intel and launched an AMD product: "Intel has told us that HP's announcement on Opteron [AMD's server chip] has cost them several $B [Billions] and they plan to ‘punish' HP for doing this."

And here's another one in which a HP executive discusses the possible repercussions for using another company's products:
"If you do and we get caught (and we will) the Intel moneys (each month is gone (they would terminate the deal). The risk is too high. Without the money we do not make it financially."

Here's the breakdown of how the AG's office says different computer makers were paid off by Intel to guarantee market share and keep businesses from using their competitor's products:

Dell

* In 2006, Intel paid Dell almost $2 billion in "rebates," and in two quarters of that year, rebate payments exceeded Dell's reported net income
* From 2001 to 2006, Intel granted Dell a privileged position vis-à-vis other computer makers in return for Dell's agreement not to market any products from Advanced Micro Devices ("AMD") (NYSE: AMD), Intel's major competitor
* Intel and Dell collaborated to market microprocessors and servers at prices below cost in order to deprive AMD of strategically important competitive successes

HP

* Intel threatened HP that it would derail development of a server technology on which HP's future business depended if HP promoted products from AMD
* Intel paid HP hundreds of millions of dollars in rebates in return for HP's agreement to cap HP's sales of AMD-based products at 5% of its business desktop PCs
* In 2006, Intel and HP entered into an broader, company-wide agreement to pay HP $925 million to increase Intel's shares of HP's sales at AMD's expense

IBM

* Intel paid IBM $130 million not to launch an AMD-based server product
* Intel threatened to pull funding for joint projects that benefited IBM if IBM marketed AMD-based server products
* Intel pressured IBM to launch another AMD-based server only on an "unbranded" basis

The NYT says that Cuomo's suit is the "first formal antitrust action against Intel by any government agency in the United States in more than a decade."

ATTORNEY GENERAL CUOMO FILES ANTITRUST LAWSUIT AGAINST INTEL CORPORATION, THE WORLD'S LARGEST MAKER OF MICROPROCESSORS [NY AG]
Full Complaint (PDF) [NY AG]
(Photo:hanapbuhay)

Apparently, AT&T is quite concerned that less technically savvy potential customers will look at the maps and think AT&T doesn't work in Montana or something.

Verizon has already changed the commercial to include a disclaimer that voice and data are still available in the white space on AT&T's map, and have removed a reference to AT&T customers being "out of touch." This, however, was not enough for AT&T.

From their lawsuit:

By continuing to use a "3G" coverage map in its advertisements, Verizon is still conveying the message that AT&T has no coverage in the white or blank space included in the map, and thus AT&T customers cannot use their phones in large portions of the United States.

You can read the lawsuit here.

AT&T sues Verizon over 'there's a map for that' ads [Engadget]

UPDATE: More customers are having this problem, and have sent in their pictures. See "T-Mobile Surprise Porn Not An Isolated Incident"

Andrew writes:

I have my cell phone service with T-Mobile. This past weekend, I received a e-mail from them saying that my new bill was ready to be viewed and paid for. Being the expeditious person that I am, I logged in to T-Mobile's website, whipped out my trusty credit card, and paid my bill online that same day. In doing so, I made a mental note to print out a copy of the bill for my records on Monday morning when I got to work (where I have a printer access). A little on the anal-retentive side I'd agree with you, but whatever.

Anyways, I logged into the T-Mobile website this morning to do all of this, and attached to this e-mail is a screen shot of my profile page after I finished logging in. Notice anything odd at the bottom of the page, perhaps in the right hand side of the screen, where it says "Connect with MobileLife"? ;)

I assure you that I don't upload pictures of topless women to my T-Mobile account, and that those pictures weren't from my camera phone (which I don't use, and even if I did, look at what type of phone I have! That crappy Razr couldn't take anywhere near that sort of clarity that those shots provide.)

We asked Andrew for his phone number so T-Mobile could look up his account when we asked them for comment, and when he wrote back to provide it, he also included another screenshot, with a different picture, from later in the day.

We sent these pictures to T-Mobile and asked if they knew anything about it. They didn't: "T-Mobile is looking into it and investigating the situation." We asked if they'd heard of this happening before, and they said it was "not common." T-Mobile customers, has this recently happened to you? Let us know.

Consumerist Meetup
Wed. 11/4/09 6-9pm
Botanica Bar
47 Houston St, NY NY 10012

Happy hour special all night long
Free drinks until our $500 bar tab runs out

Via Subway:
BDFV to Broadway/Lafayette
6 to Bleeker St.
NRW to Prince St

From NJ:
NJT or PATH To Penn Station, walk E. to 34th St, Herald Square, take BDFV to Broadway/Lafayette

From Connecticut and so forth North:
Metro North to Grand Central, 6 to Bleeker St.

If you're driving, there's a parking garage at 284 Mott between Houston and Prince. Most on-street parking opens up at 6pm.

Here's a map that shows on-street parking:

View Larger Map
And one that shows nearby garages:

View Larger Map
And here's what Botanica Bar looks like!

(Photo: e.Bergquist)

From WLTX:

The man, whose description was sketchy , entered the fast-food restaurant just after 2 p.m. Monday and pointing a gun at the cashier, demanded money and told the cashier to get on the floor, said Lt. John Hickey of the Haverstraw Police Department.

The man then walked into the manager's office, which is located at the back of the store.

"He requested an application for employment and the manager said 'No,'" Hickey said. The manager asked the suspect to leave; he left the premises in an unknown direction.

This is total failure. He got neither money, nor tacos, nor a job application.

Police: Man Robs Taco Bell, Then Gets Job Application [WLTX] (Thanks, Nicholas!)
(Photo:Morton Fox)

If you this clip, you should also watch Theresa in this ShamWow test video.

For the full condom review and ratings, check out this article on ConsumerReportsHealth.org (subscription required).

Which condom, or contraceptive method, do you prefer?

How Consumer Reports Tests Condoms [Consumer Reports]

Everett writes:

The person on the other end of the phone informed me, "due to the changes made by [the Card Act], Capital One would have to deny any charges that goes over your credit limit starting in February of 2010. However if you want to maintain the ability to go over your credit limit you could opt to have your account stay the same as it is now. Your fee for going over your credit limit would be dropped to $29 (from $39) if you chose to do this." I find it interesting that I can waive federal law applying to my credit card account for a potential savings of ten dollars. Comparing that to everything I'd lose out on, I decided to "opt in" for the law to apply to me.

I was also told I could "change my mind at any point, and give Capital One a call to let them know."

Actually, this is brilliant. Some people don't need the government telling them they can't live outside their means and they should be able to claim a discount for being a more profitable credit card customer.

I am curious whether "have your account stay the same as it is now" means that you would opt out of ALL of the CARD act provisions, or whether it's just the overlimit fee part.

UPDATE: Turns out that this is just about getting people to opt-in to overlimit fees: Update: Capital One: Waive Your Rights, Get $10 Off Your Next Overlimit Fee!

(Photo: helgasms!)

He writes:

While channel surfing this evening I happened to skim by the QVC channel (around 6:50pm CST Sunday night) and noticed they were selling Wiis for the holiday season. The only thing that struck me as weird was the insane price they were selling this item.

Looking at the prices (on tv):

$349.00 + $13.97 S&H = $362.97

for the following items:

Nintendo Wii console retail (with Wii Sports)
Go Play Circus Star Games
Handgun Accessory
Golf Accessory
Tennis Accessory
Baseball Accessory
Steering Wheel

but seeing what these items are retail:

Nintendo Wii console: $199.00 MSRP
Go Play Circus Star Games: $14.99 (new at GameStop)
Wii sports pack (has all accessoies sans handgun accessory): $19.99 (new at GameStop)
Handgun Accessory: $5.99 (new at Sears)

All of these is $239.97 plus tax.

I wonder where they are getting this $140+ amount from. :|

Is QVC trying to cash in for the Christmas rush? All through out the show they were saying that the wii was going to be "rare". They were also saying that the Wii had true HD output which is totally untrue (unless 480p is considered HD). It just seemed unreal to me. Oh, and they sold about 2800+ of these.

To confirm what Joe/Mordecai suspects, the Wii is not in HD and Nintendo has repeatedly said the slumping-sales system will not be hard to come by this holiday season.

In the time since he sent the email, QVC got crrrrrazy and slashed the price to a low, low $318.20 before tax, shipping and handling. Only an $80 markup?! They're practically giving it away!

As a loyal reader I must inform you of a recent incident I had at "The Shack of Price Gouging" (formerly Radio Shack). Last week my fiancé lost her mini USB cord for her digital voice recorder which she uses to record her nursing lectures. She realized that the critical piece of equipment was missing when she went to download the lectures to her computer. We quickly went to the nearest Radio Shack to find a new cable where the salesman attempted to pressure us to buy a $24 digital camera replacement cord. The horrible part is how the salesman tried to pressure us into buying the cable telling us that we won't find a better deal elsewhere.

Irony!! Desperate and running out of time, we went to the Dollar Tree right next door and found a 2 foot cable that worked well for a single Dollar! The best part of the experience was going back into "The Shack" minutes later to confront the salesman with our new cable and receipt for $1.05. His reaction was priceless: "You mean to tell me that you came back here just to show me this?" I will admit that the salesman was just trying to do his job; however, I used to go to radio shack to get affordable wires and cables. What are they doing? Honestly, I would have never looked at the dollar tree if a simple $10 or less option was available in their store. But, with prices so outrageous I will not be shopping there.

Maybe the high pressure sales tactics are in order to prevent customers from wandering out of the store and going next door.

(Photo: Mike Hepp/Penn Can Mall fan site)

Southwest has since apologized to the child's mother, and offered a refund and travel voucher.

Southwest apologizes to mom on Calif. flight [AP]

(Photo: woodleywonderworks)

Margo wrote to us about her own experience:

Facebook's new "stay connected" sidebar will show you ANYONE in your friend list. Including dead people. I've been asked twice this week to improve the Facebook existence of someone who passed away this summer, despite emailing them several times to alert them of this person's untimely demise.

You can set a deceased Facebook user's page to memorial mode, but this requires action on the part of someone close to that person. Not all dead Facebook users' pages are memorialized, and it's not clear that being in memorial mode keeps the late Facebook user's name out of your "Reconnect" suggestions. Putting a dead person's profile in memorial mode does remove them from all suggestions.

Of course, the "reconnect" feature doesn't just encourage us to interact with the dead—it also suggests that we stay in touch with people we might be in contact with every day. Or who we don't want to be in contact with at all.

Have you had any incredibly awkward "Reconnect" suggestions? Does anyone actually like this feature?

Memories of Friends Departed Endure on Facebook [Facebook Blog]
Contact form: Deceased [Facebook]

Facebook Memorializes Dead With New Reconnect Feature [ChannelWeb]

OutKastz in Orlando snapped this picture at a local Boston Market:

Do they mean they don't have any of the chicken that goes with the $1 meals left, or they don't have any chicken at all? The latter would be a pretty serious problem for a restaurant that primarily sells chicken.

Boston Market has since taken the coupon down from their site, but Buxr has an uploaded version available. The chain is still running their Kids Eat Free (two free children's meals with one adult meal purchase) promotion. As Chicago Now's Frugalista points out, if you have kids, the free meals deal may work out almost as well as the $1 coupon. The kids' meal promotion ends today, and the $1 coupon expires on Sunday.

Ironically, this promotion was timed to compete with Monday's grilled chicken giveaway at KFC. Because we all know how well KFC's original grilled chicken giveaway went.

Speaking of free food, you can get a free Blackjack Taco at Taco Bell tonight after dark.

More cheap chicken: $1 Boston Market meals [Baltimore Sun]
Deal Report: $1 Meals at Boston Market [Frugalista]
Boston Market: $1 Real Chicken Meal [Buxr]

(Photo: RBerteig) [If you liked this picture, check out the Cats in Hats You Bought at Target group on Flickr.]

Thoughts:
1. "The Lexus eventually came to rest in a dry riverbed where it burned for an extended period of time." Presumably, the family inside also burned for an extended period of time.
2. "No attempts to retrieve data from the EDR [Event Data Recorder] have yet been made." Why not?
2. Why significant factor #5 blacked out?
3. As commenters noted, the 3 seconds to push the pushbutton ignition could have been a problem.
4. This picture does not even look like a car anymore. It looks like a Cthulhu abortion.
5. Note how the all-weather mat is bonded to the pedal.
6. The car was a loaner while the driver's car was in the shop, which would explain why he wasn't familiar with its every nook and cranny, or its unique "hold the start button for 3-seconds to shut off the engine while the car is moving" feature.



If you're driving and your gas pedal gets stuck, put the car in neutral until you can slow and get off the road.

NHTSA report (PDF) [via CR Car Blog]
PREVIOUSLY: Toyota: 911 Call Of Family's Fatal Lexus Crash Due To Gas Pedal Stuck On Floormats
Toyota Recalls 3.8 Mil Cars For Stuck Gas Pedal Danger

After many phonecalls, United informed Steph via email that they will pay $3,174.20 of the claim. They will let Steph know in 60 days whether they are going to continue looking for her gear or not.

"I was a hell of a lot safer tossing myself off a cliff in a nylon squirrel suit. It's awfully hard to base jump with no parachutes though. Thanks United! You're the best!" wrote Steph on her blog.

Here's a video of Steph climbing and jumping off the 400-foot Castleton Tower, in Moab, Utah.

Guitars, the luggage of people with broken guitars, rock-climbing equipment... United seems to have a problem safely delivering valuable baggage, or owning up to its mistakes.

So, next time, if you're flying with a lot of expensive gear, make sure to have it insured, or send it FedEx.

United Loses BASE Gear [High Places] (Thanks to Mark!)

If you're interested in the deal, here's how it works: You get 60-days to evaluate the car. If you don't like it, you can return it and get the purchase price and the sales tax back. You have to keep the car for at least 30 days, and if you do more than $200 worth of damage to it — or put more than 4,000 miles on it — you no longer qualify.

There are a few more limitations and whatnot — and in all it's pretty clear that returning a car is a hassle. You'll be stuck with the fees from licensing, titling or registration, insurance, dealer installed accessories, aftermarket products or add-on equipment (other than factory options ordered with the vehicle), dealer fees, ancillary products including extended warranties or service contracts, finance charges, etc, etc.

If you're sure you want to buy a GM and don't want this guarantee — you get a $500 cash incentive for opting out— which may just be a better deal than the return policy.

60 Day Satisfaction Guarantee FAQ [GM]
GM Extends Vehicle Refund Program Until January [NYT]

The WSJ says:

The agreement would extend the existing credit for first-time home buyers, worth up to $8,000, while offering a new credit of up to $6,500 for some existing homeowners, Senate aides said. The reduced credit would be available to all home buyers who have been in their current residence for a consecutive five-year period in the past eight years.
...
The credit would be extended from its current expiration date of Dec. 1 to all contracts entered into by April 30, and closed before July 1. It is expected that income limits on people claiming the credit would be increased to $125,000 for singles and $250,000 for couples, from the current $75,000 and $150,000, aides said. The credit phases out for people making more than those amounts.

Will this credit help you buy a house?

Home Buyer Credit Gets New Life [Wall Street Journal]
(Photo:coffeego)

This year, they sued PepsiCo. But the paperwork was lost in layers of corporate bureaucracy, and PepsiCo failed to send a representative, winning the men a default judgment of $1.26 billion. Yes, with a B.

Pepsi is fighting the judgment, arguing that the statute of limitations surely has run out when the meetings in question occurred 28 years ago and the product has been on the market for 15 years. Oh, yeah, and they didn't hear about the lawsuit soon enough.

In court papers, PepsiCo claims it first received a legal document related to the case from the North Carolina agent on Sept. 15 when a copy of a co-defendant's letter was forwarded to Deputy General Counsel Tom Tamoney in PepsiCo's law department. Tamoney's secretary, Kathy Henry, put the letter aside and didn't tell anyone about it because she was "so busy preparing for a board meeting," PepsiCo said in its Oct. 13 motion to vacate.

When Henry received a forwarded copy of the plaintiff's motion for default judgment on Oct. 5, she sent that to Yvonne Mazza, a legal assistant for Aquafina matters. Remembering that she still had the other document, Henry passed it to Mazza too. The next day Mazza sent the documents to David Wexler, a department attorney, and he "immediately" called the agent to get a copy of the complaint.

Lawyers for PepsiCo distributors Wis-Pak Inc. and Carolina Canners Inc. made court appearances in June and July. PepsiCo was at a loss to explain why it hadn't heard about the case from them. "It's just another unfortunate thing that didn't come together," Jacuzzi said.

There will be another hearing in early November. The original article does not explain why it took the men 15 years to finally sue.

Price to PepsiCo for Not Being in Court: $1.26 Billion [National Law Journal]

(Photo: marcus_in_ny)

John T. Unger is an artist who makes firepits, which are decorative metal bowls that you place on your deck or in your backyard and burn fires in. They're pretty cool looking; I'd own one if I had a deck, or a backyard, or $800. Rick Wittrig, the owner of FirePitArt.com, also makes and sells firepits, and it seems quite possible he stole many of his earlier designs from Unger's work—his bowls went up for sale approximately a year after Unger's bowls, and in many instances they're virtually identical. They're also slightly cheaper.

Unger was understandably upset that someone had swooped in and usurped the market he'd been carving out for himself. Here are three examples of Unger's original work and the copycat products Wittrig sells, along with estimated dates provided by Unger of when they were created. (Click the image to see it at full size.)

Unger contacted Wittrig:

Concerned about preserving my reputation and rapport with art buyers, I sent a Cease and Desist letter on April 30th, 2009 asking that Mr. Wittrig cease manufacturing the designs which were being confused as my own. A letter of flat refusal came back in response. In further correspondence, I explained my concerns over confusion of authorship, provided his attorney with copies of the copyright certificates as well as the original photos used to apply for copyright. I stated clearly that I have no objection to him creating original works that could share the marketplace in their own niche. Several times in the course of correspondence, I asked Wittrig to provide any evidence that his designs were original works. Given the opportunity to deny copying my designs, Wittrig did not- he only asserted that he was within his rights to continue making them on a large scale. Then he filed suit to have my copyrights removed, as well as for damages and legal fees.

I asked Rick Wittrig if Unger's claims were true, but he didn't respond. Well, actually he did, but only to say,

John has indeed written a carefully crafted emotional story omitting a lot and embellishing even more. I suspect your email is one sided in nature and you are not truly interested in the truth. The facts are all public knowledge and if you [are] an "editor" you will check them.

Oooookay. Well, fine! I edited my way over to the Tennessee Middle District Court's Eelectronic Court Filings (ECF) System, and edited a look at the actual lawsuit.

In it, Wittrig doesn't deny that Unger's designs came first. He simply claims that Unger has no right to copyright his fire pit designs, as they are utilitarian objects and not decorative works. Here's some of the relevant language from the lawsuit (emphasis mine):

9. Over the course of the subsequent months and extensive communications between legal counsel for the parties, Defendant [Unger] has continued to assert his allegations of copyright infringement, further basing them on the registrations of copyright claims made by Defendant, and issued by the U.S. Copyright Office under numbers VA 1-667-92, VA 1-667-096 and VA 1-667-181, all for a number of articles that are in fact outdoor fire pits, but were registered by the Copyright Office as "Sculpture/3-D Design," on the basis of Defendant's claims and representations.

[...]

16. An actual case or controversy exists within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 2201 as to whether Plaintiff's manufacturing, marketing and selling of Plaintiff's Fire Pits infringes on any copyrights of Defendant.

[...]

21. Defendant's Fire Pits are functional, utilitarian and useful articles that are not subject to copyright protection.

Utilitarian objects can't be copyrighted, but decorative elements on them sometimes can. The U.S. Copyright Office say this on the matter of utilitarian objects (emphasis mine):

"Pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works" include two-dimensional and three-dimensional works of fine, graphic, and applied art, photographs, prints and art reproductions, maps, globes, charts, diagrams, models, and technical drawings, including architectural plans. Such works shall include works of artistic craftsmanship insofar as their form but not their mechanical or utilitarian aspects are concerned; the design of a useful article, as defined in this section, shall be considered a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work only if, and only to the extent that, such design incorporates pictorial, graphic, or sculptural features that can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independently of, the utilitarian aspects of the article.

I spoke with a lawyer familiar with copyright law and showed him the pictures of Unger's and Wittrig's bowls. He too pointed out that decorative elements can be granted copyright protection so long as they're not required for the device or tool to function. He also pointed out, however, that the design has to be original enough to warrant copyright; if, for example, your design elements were pulled from Mayan iconography, then even if someone steals your idea of putting those icons on a utilitarian object it would be hard for you to press a copyright claim.

That doesn't prove Unger or Wittrig is right in this case. All it does is show that there may be some real questions for the judge to resolve, possibly on a case-by-case basis for each design. It may turn out that Unger and Wittrig both come out winners and losers in the battle.

That copyright stuff is fascinating, but what does it mean ultimately for a consumer looking to buy a firepit? Do you purchase from the artist who had the idea first, or do you buy a nearly identical version for slightly less money from the copycat? Maybe Wittrig was a jerk for suing the artist to get rid of his copyright claims, but then again maybe he really doesn't think they should be protected designs.

From a consumer perspective, Wittrig's bowls are slightly cheaper, but Unger has the market cornered on old fashioned concepts like convenience and creating an emotional experience. Unger's website is easy to navigate, and there's a narrative around his bowls—you see his role as an artist in creating them, you learn what each design means to him, and so on. By contrast, it's obvious Wittrig (or at least his web developer) should be put in Flash Prison for the FirePitArt.com website, which opens a new full-screen window and auto-plays music like some horrible MySpace parody.

My gut instinct is always to buy cheaper, unless by doing so I'm causing enough harm that it exceeds my "I must pretend it isn't there in order to live in this world" threshhold. And obviously, Consumerist is all about making the best choice as a consumer, not as a "friend of the artist" or "outraged netizen." In the end, all copyright battles aside, you have to decide how much loyalty you feel to the original producer of a good when there's a cheaper knockoff version available.

"Imitator Sues Me to Overturn Copyrights: Please Help Defend My Art" [johntunger.com] (Thanks to Shannon and Yamen!)
Firepitart.com LLC v. Unger
"Hot-rod style fire pit" [Boing Boing]

RELATED
youthoughtwewouldntnotice (Thanks to catastrophegirl!)

Here are the top 15:

1. Social worker
2. Special events coordinator
3. Probation officer
4. News reporter
5. Music ministry director
6. Membership manager
7. Fundraiser
8. Commercial photographer
9. Assisted living director
10. Minister
11. Marriage/family therapist
12. Curator
13. Substance abuse counselor
14. Film/TV producer
15. High school teacher

What would you add to the list? Besides your own job, of course.

Stressful jobs that pay badly [CNN Money]

(Photo: helgasms!)

7. Free drinks until our $500 tab runs out, happy hour drink special all night (even during the tab).
6. Free tshirts sporting the brand-new Consumerist logo.
5. Cool videos shown by the Internets Celebrities crew.
4. Possible appearance by a famous person.
3. Special surprise gift bestowing!
2. Hang out with Meg and Ben and Consumerist gang.
1. Meet other Consumerist readers - put a face to a commenter name!





It all goes downnnn

Wed. 11/4/09 6-9pm
Botanica Bar
47 Houston St, NY NY 10012

Should be a good one, see you there!

View Larger Map

Rank - Company - CEO - approval rating

10. US Postal Service - Jack Potter - 21%
9. Sun Microsystems - Jonathan I. Schwartz - 21%
8. eBay - John J. Donahoe - 20%
7. Convergys (a horrible call center company) - Dave Dougherty - 19%
6. Pfizer - Jeff Kindler - 19%
5. Sears Holdings - W. Bruce Johnson - 19%
4. RadioShack - Julian C. Day - 16%
3. Sports Authority - Doug Morton - 12%
2. United Airlines - Glenn F. Tilton 8%
1. Office Depot - Steve Odland - 7%

Does this jibe with your experience? Who you would you nominate as the worst CEO?

Glassdoor Q3 CEO Watch List Report [GlassDoor] (Photo: Epiclectic)

* only CEOs with 50 or more reviews were included.

I signed up for Wachovia's Way2Save program, which gives you 5% interest on your savings the first year. You can only deposit $100 a month into the account. The only other way to put money in is by account activity (paying bills, etc). So I scheduled a lot of $1 bill payments to my credit cards every day to try to get as much money in the savings account as possible.

Wachovia put a temporary hold on my checking account without telling me. There was no phone call, email, or online notification. So imagine my horror when I got emails from their billpay service saying they couldn't withdraw the money from my checking account and were reversing the bill payments. I had deposited several hundreds in cash (in person) into the checking account, so I knew it couldn't be because the funds hadn't cleared. And the bill payments totaled only around $200 anyway.

When I called, it turns out that Wachovia had put a temporary hold on my checking account, freezing the funds. No one was able to explain why, but they said the hold was gone. They weren't able to stop the payments from reversing.

The end result? My credit cards are charging me over $5000 in reversed payment fees (150 reversed payments * $39 average per returned payment, you do the math). In particular, Chase has canceled all my cards because of the multiple returned payments. I called my Chase small business card account, and the specialist at Chase said they could not do anything, or even waive *some* of the returned payment charges, unless I could get Wachovia to send a letter saying the returned payments were the result of bank error.

I called Wachovia, and they refused to do anything. Their stance is that it was not a bank error because I scheduled the bill payments, not them. There were no notes on my account (because I had talked to someone in bill pay, which apparently is a contracted out service, not part of their own system). They had no record of any hold on the account, and even if there was a hold, it wasn't their responsibility because I had scheduled the bill payments myself. They also mentioned deposit availability, though I pointed out that I had deposited cash. I'm going into a branch on Friday, but I don't think they will write anything for me either.

I haven't called the other credit cards yet. I'm dreading calling my other credit cards to see if they will waive anything. So in the end, I am stuck with this fiasco. At least Christopher's problem was caused by the same bank charging him the fees. They have the power to waive the fees. What happens when the problem is caused by a different bank, and that bank won't help at all, not even write a stupid letter?

I hate Wachovia. I don't have problems with it if the problems were caused by my scheduling bill payments, and there wasn't money in the checking account. I do have problems when the checking account says I have several hundred dollars available, I had deposited more than enough cash to cover the bills the previous week, and there is NO notification that a temporary hold had been put on the funds. How is that my fault and not the bank's???

Do you have any EEOB-type email addresses I could possibly use to write to the service departments at Chase, Bank of America, Discover, Amex, and Citibank?

Or any advice on how to handle the situation? Ways I can convince Wachovia to write the freakin' letter? Or am I stuck sucking it up?

The wildest thing about this is the idea that Wachovia would have no record of the minute-to-minute status of your accounts, including your deposits and when funds became available. You should go into a Wachovia and have a nice long sit-down with someone there, where you both go over the account item by item if necessary, until they have to admit that there is not a single reason those payments should have been reversed. After all, if they don't have a reason for—or even a record of—placing the hold, it should be easy to determine that you always had the funds necessary to cover your payments.

For now, keep this with Wachovia. It's on them to correct their mistake, and to provide you the necessary evidence you need to get your other creditors to reverse the charges and re-open those accounts. Unfortunately our Wachovia contact info is getting pretty dated (although now there's a Twitter contact), but maybe you can get somewhere if you EECB Wells Fargo. (Tell them you're a dirty telemarketer who wants to rip off old people and they should prick up their ears.)

For other Wachovia customers, you might want to find a less dangerous way to save your money. Tying it to bill payments is pretty risky, and you don't have to have an exceptional case like Susan's to wipe out your gains—a single error, whether by you or Wachovia, could easily do it.

(Photo: suburbandollar)

Christopher mentioned that there had been a $4.50 debit that had never posted, so I asked him to elaborate:

The 4.50 never posted and would have been dated before on 10/21 depending on if it had been a legitimate charge. The charge was there on the 21st but cleared without posting (temporary hold due to a broken credit machine). It was dated on the 21st.

So if that charge was not a real charge—it doesn't even show up on the 10/22 section of transactions, as you can see above, and it didn't seem to impact the balance—how again did BoA justify the overdraft?

Christopher says Bank of America won't actually investigate the issue and give him a real answer. Instead, they're just keeping him in a "web support" loop that's growing smaller and smaller:

I also find it highly difficult to continue a thread with them as it is limited to 10,000 characters but each time includes the previous message(s) in an un-editable quote in that 10,000 character limit. So after three messages that is full, and I must start a new thread, which then gets the same chain letters, in order.

Update: Several commenters made good suggestions below. To help Christopher and future readers, I'm highlighting some of them here:

lankysob says this is how BoA's Overdraft Protection works:

When BoA approved the Overdraft Protection (which was tied to my BoA Amex card I set up long ago as backup to save me from paying the stupid $35 O/D fees per transaction), it moved $100 from my Amex to my checking account and considered everything cool. When I called to complain and ask why would an account that has more than $0.00 in it ever need Overdraft Protection, I was told that BoA "goes ahead and determines a dollar amount ABOVE $0.00 based on the credit/debit history of the last few credit/debits applied to your checking account, and then uses that number as it's '0 Point' as to when to kick Overdraft Protection into effect for you." I was, understandably, outraged by this and asked "Ok, well where is this magic number you've chosen for me so I know to treat that as my $0.00 amount?" "We can't/aren't able to give you that information because it's not an exact number that stays the same."

Both Hobart007 and MedicallyNeedy suggest that you go into a local branch and speak to the branch manager in person. If it's a first time issue or you can convince the manager it's BoA's mistake, he or she might waive it.

And trillium points out a helpful feature on the BoA website:

A little known of (I know I didn't know about it ) feature on the B of A website is on the left hand side titled "Available Balance History". Unlike the default view this shows the order of which charges have hit as well as holds on the account.

(Photo: P/\UL)

<- Franken clip.

In the second clip, Sen. Whitehouse asks: "Did you actually read the bill that is the subject of today's hearing?"

Here she uses the big "UC" - that less strict bankruptcy laws have the "unintended consequence" of encouraging more people to seek bankruptcy. Her solution to so many medical bankruptcies is then to make it harder to seek bankruptcy, rather than addressing the underlying over-inflated costs that drive consumers into medical bankruptcy in the first place.

Pharmaceutical companies like Eli Lilly, Merck and Novartis number among The Hudson Institute's funders.

You can watch the entire session and read and search the transcript here on C-SPAN.

(Thanks to Dirk!)