Consumer Help Web: December 2005

Saturday, December 31, 2005

Join The Help Web In Supporting Royal United Hospital Charity

Give Now: The entire Help Web family has long been impressed with the work of actor and musician Anthony Head (best known for his role as Giles on TV's Buffy the Vampire Slayer) and the constant charity work he does. Head has participated in no less than 7 charities in the last 2 years, raising more than $15,000 through his online outreach campaigns. We're flattered to lend a hand because his most recent is worthy of your attention.

During this Holiday season of gifts and giving, Head is participating in the Royal United Hospital Bath's Forever Friends Appeal. The hospital is looking to raise 10 million pounds to care for children, cancer, cardiology and critical care patients. Each donation of only 25 pounds (yes, you can use credit cards and your card can be converted from dollars, drachmas or dinars) will receive a special thank you -- a program from

Jamie Cullum's 'Live on the Rec' July 31st, 2005, concert that featured Tony Head singing with Clare Teal that is autographed by Head. This is a worthy cause that deserves your attention. Give today. (Anthony Head photo copyright Sarah Fisher and used with permission.)

Thursday, December 29, 2005

Mariott Latest Company To "Lose" Consumer Data

Marriott's time-share division admitted this week that it could not find personal consumer information, including Social Security Numbers, for more than 200,000 consumers. The company said in a statement that the records may simply be "lost", but could not rule out theft.

We regret this situation has occurred and realize this may cause concern for our associates and customers," said Stephen P. Weisz, MVCI president. "We have recently mailed notifications to associates, timeshare owners and timeshare customers and are available to answer any questions they may have."

Consumer advocates, meanwhile, continue to express concern over the millions of cases of identity theft occcuring each year, many of which can be traced back to data breaches. "Organizations that handle sensitive consumer data must be held accountable for any use of that data," said Consumer Help Web President Joan Bounacos. "We encourage Congress to enact severe penalties for organizations who breach consumer trust by losing personal data and endangering consumer credit and other records."

Privacy expert Robert Douglas echoed Bounacos' comments on his web site, PrivacyToday.com, reporting that he had told The Washington Post, "For the longest time, people have said it's the consumers' fault. They don't shred their bank statements at home, or what have you. But since the California law was passed now we are learning how much of this information has been breached and is floating around out there."

Marriott joins multiple corporations who have reported data breaches this year, including ChoicePoint and LexisNexis.

Wednesday, December 28, 2005

Polaroid Personal DVD Players Recalled For Overheating

(click picture to enlarge)

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has issued a recall with Petters Consumer Brands regarding 165,000 Polaroid-branded DVD players that can overheat and pose a "fire [or] burn hazard" to consumers.

No injuries have been reported, although Petters reports receiving eight complaints of units overheating.

The recall involves external battery packs used with the Polaroid-brand portable DVD players in 7-inch and 8-inch screen sizes. The 7-inch DVD player has model number PDV-0700 and 8-inch player has a model number of PDV-0800. The players and battery packs are silver in color.

Consumers should stop using and stop recharging the battery packs immediately and contact Petters Consumer Brands for a free replacement battery pack. Consumers can continue using the portable DVD player without the battery, by detaching it from the unit, and plugging in the DC Cord or the AC Power Adapter.

Consumers should contact Petters Consumer Brands toll-free at (866) 866-6292 anytime to arrange for a replacement battery pack.

Tuesday, December 27, 2005

FDA Warns Blood Sugar Device Maker, LifeScan Given 15 Days To Respond About Why It Did Not Investigate Complaints

A letter from Barbara J. Cassens, a District Director with the US Food and Drug Administration, has warned LifeScan, Inc., of deficiencies within its OneTouch Ultra and OneTouch UItraSmart Blood Glucose Meters manufacture and distribution.

Citing five different complaints that did not receive a response or complete investigation, Cassens' December 7 letter to LifeScan's Chairman Eric P. Milledge said that "...our investigators determined that you are manufacturing the OneTouch Ultra and the OneTouch UltraSmart Blood Glucose Meters in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act)." Cassens' letter also gave the company 15 "working" days to respond to the allegations. It was unclear how the Christmas holiday would impact that date, if at all. Regardless, the deadline for any such response is imminent if not already passed.

Neither the FDA nor (shockingly) LifeScan has any information following-up this issue on their web sites.

This is not the first time that LifeScan has run afoul of the FDA. According to a March 2001 issue of IVD Technology, the company was "ordered to pay a criminal fine of $29.4 million and an additional $30.6 million in civil penalties, damages, attorneys' fees, and restitution to the U.S. government." LifeScan was also reportedly placed on probation for three years.

MedicineNet.com says that LifeScan estimates that 4.7 milion diabetics use the company's devices to monitor their blood sugar -- the key measurement that almost every medical person agrees is critical to reducing long-term health risks and complications associated with diabetes.

[diabetes]
fda
lifescan

Monday, December 26, 2005

Your Donated Car Is Only A $500 Deduction Without Proof

Forget what Kelley Blue Book says. Forget how much you paid or whether you've just overhauled the engine. If you donate a car to charity, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) wants to remind you that you can only claim a $500 deduction.

The only exception to this rule is if the charity sells the car for more than $500. In tax-speak, that translates to deductions are "limited to the gross proceeds from the sale of the vehicle by the charity. The charity must provide a written acknowledgment within 30 days after the vehicle is sold that notifies the taxpayer of the amount of the gross sales proceeds."

That is the big news the agency reminded taxpayers of on December 22 as the year wrapped up, and taxpayers began opening their new copies of TurboTax. The IRS also cautioned that all deductions require a "charity’s written acknowledgment". In the real world, we call those receipts.

So that 1984 Nissan Stanza in the shed behind the garage? You can deduct what the charity sells the car for (yes, they're required to let you know). As with any tax issue, there are some exceptions, notably here if the vehicle is sold for less for charitable purposes, so always check with your tax preparer or the IRS itself before basing your return on blog entries and other information you've stumbled upon in the media or on the web.

Saturday, December 24, 2005

More GM Recalls As 550,000 SUVs Recalled For Brake Problems

Following an announcement earlier this week that seat belts on hundreds of thousands of its vehicles could be at fault, General Motors announced just before the holiday that another 550,000 also potentially could experience safety problems.

This latest recall covers vehicles in Delaware, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia. The vehicles are the 1999 through 2002 Chevrolet Avalanche, Silverador and GMC Yukon.

gm recall

American Express Settles Class Action Suit Over Currency Exchange

A class action lawsuit filed against American Express in a U.S. District Court in Florida has been settled for $75 million.

Hundreds of thousands of consumers were reportedly affected by the company's actions, which involved allegedly failing to disclose additional fees charged when a U.S. purchaser used their account for a purchase denominated in foreign currencies. As part of the settlement, American Express admitted no wrongdoing or fault although the company has reportedly changed its disclosure notices

Media sources claim that legal fees could account for more than $10 million of the settlement. Projections are that most consumers who filed as part of the class will receive a $15 settlement.

As of the holiday break, there was no announcement on when settlements would be disbursed to class members.

Thursday, December 22, 2005

Got Digital? You Will

Buried in the United Senate's budget bill that narrowly passed this week was a requirement that television broadcasters switch from analog to digital signals by early 2009.

Consumers with older television sets are expected to benefit from $1.5 billion that has been earmarked to help offset the cost of new televisions. Media sources report that satellite or digital cable subscribers will be unaffected.

Despite the huge amount of funds available under the proposed program (which still must be approved by the House of Representatives), consumer advocates are hopping mad.

“The consumer compensation program established in this program is unworkable, unfair and unacceptable to consumers,” said Jeannine Kenney of Consumers Union. “It provides only a fraction of the funds needed to compensate consumers for the costs of a digital transition they never asked for. And by requiring consumers to jump through restrictive hoops to request vouchers, those who most need compensation will be the least likely to receive it.”

According to Consumers Union, more than $2 billion extra will be required for all Americans to switch to the new digital signals, even by 2009.

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

400,000 Chevys Recalled For Faulty Seat Belts

The United States National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has notified consumers of a recall affecting 425,593 Chevrolet Express and GMC Savana for the 2003-2006 model years. According to the government agency, some of the front and rear seat belt buckles do not latch or unlatch. The agency also said that "in the event of a crash...occupants may not be properly restrained."

Two conditions affect the seat belts.

The agency also said that dealers will inspect the buckles and, if found to be inoperative, the entire buckle assembly would be replaced. For buckles found to be operative, dealers will replace only the upper buckle cover. The manufacturer has not yet provided an owner notification schedule for this campaign. Owners should contact Chevrolet at 1-800-630-2438 or GMC at 1-866-996-9463.

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

Patients Choose Hospitals Mostly On Reputation Says JD Power Study

Patient perceptions of a hospital’s reputation plays an important role in hospital selection, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2005 National Hospital Service Performance StudySM released today.

The study, which measures satisfaction among recently discharged hospital patients, finds that three-fourths of patients use reputation-related information as their primary criteria in selecting a hospital. Nearly one-half (48%) of patients say that the hospital’s overall reputation was their primary criterion for selection, while 25 percent say the availability of good doctors and having skilled nurses on staff was most important in their selection.

"Perception plays an important role in the choices today’s healthcare consumers make," said Steven D. Wood, senior vice president and general manager of the healthcare practice at J.D. Power and Associates. "More than ever before, patients have a choice for their healthcare providers, and this choice depends a great deal on the personal services rendered at a highly emotional time in their lives. As patient choices increase, hospitals need to continue to enhance the clinical and experiential quality of patient care and effectively communicate their performance in the communities they serve."

The study finds that 59 percent of respondents whose hospital stay was planned indicate that they were involved in the hospital selection decision either solely or with a doctor, while only 8 percent felt they were constrained by what their health plan would allow. Among patients who were "delighted" with their hospital experience (providing a score of 10 on a 10-point scale), a strong majority (86 percent) say they are likely to choose the same hospital in the future should the need arise, and 83 percent would recommend the hospital to others.

The study measures overall patient satisfaction in five categories: dignity and respect; speed and efficiency; comfort; information and communication; and emotional support.

Patients overall are very satisfied with the service they received during their most recent hospital stay, with 74 percent of patients giving the hospital high ratings regarding their hospital experience. Hospitals receive the highest ratings from patients in the area of dignity and respect, which includes the courtesy of doctors and nurses and the hospital personnel’s respect for privacy. Conversely, patients have consistently given hospitals the lowest ratings for speed and efficiency, with only 36 percent of patients indicating they were delighted.

Hospital patients who are 66 years old and older report much higher levels of satisfaction than do younger patients. Forty-two percent of patients 66 years old and older report being delighted with the overall hospital service experience, compared to 25 percent among patients 18 to 45 years old and 31 percent among patients 46 to 65 years old. The proportion of patients who indicate they are delighted is lowest among childbirth patients (26%), compared to medical (35%) and surgical (34%) patients. Patients living in a rural area are more likely to be delighted as compared to patients living in an urban area (38% of rural patients are delighted compared to 32% of urban patients).

The 2005 National Hospital Service Performance Study is based on responses from approximately 2,500 patients who stayed in a hospital for at least one night within the previous three to nine months of being surveyed.

Sunday, December 18, 2005

IRS Cuts 3 Hours Each Day From Consumer Tax Help Phone Lines

The Internal Revenue Service has announced plans to reduce the agency's budget by cutting phone service for consumers seeking tax help. The agency said it would eliminate three customer service hours each day from its service and save approximately $10 million annually.

President Colleen M. Kelley of the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) called the move "an absolute outrage" and said that her organization was notified the change would be made January 23, 2006, a period she called the height of taxpayer help season.

The IRS had previously sought to save money by reducing the number of customer service centers it operates, but abandoned that plan earlier this year after consumer advocates and other interested parties protested.

Friday, December 16, 2005

Experian's Parent Prompts Concern After Buying Shopping Site

GUS plc, the mammoth UK company that owns credit reporting agency Experian among other entities, has gobbled up PriceGrabber.com, a comparison shopping site that competes with companies such as eBay owned Epinions.

A GUS statement claimed that PriceGrabbed had 17 million visitors in November 2005 and would generate $60 million in revenue this calendar year.

"This marks another entry by this company into the American marketplace, and consumers should know who they are dealing with," said Consumer Help Web president Joan Bounacos. "The industry forming the heart of this company is notoriously consumer-unfriendly. Under subsidiary names, GUS companies have run afoul of US consumers before, and we are concerned about their functioning as a shopping comparison site for consumers who may not know their true identity. We are very concerned to see the companies own press release talking about 'improving the quality of leads...by adding Experian data and analytics.' That is a very slippery slope they are climbing."

Bounacos said she was also concerned about a Federal Trade Commission complaint filed earlier this year against an Experian company using the name consumerinfo.com. The United States government reached a settlement with that company over "deceptive marketing" practices through the use of multiple web sites promising "free" credit reports.

FCC Unsure It Can Compel Cable Pricing

Two weeks ago, Consumer Help Web published an entry about FCC Chairman Kevin Martin's call for a la carte cable television pricing. It turns out that Martin's agency may not have the authority to do anything.

According to a story in today's Washington Post, FCC spokesperson Donna Gregg told a Media Institute gathering that the agency is studing whether it has the authority to compel change.

Gregg's comments follow a rather weak statement made Monday by Martin, who said, "I am pleased that some cable companies may respond to consumer demand and begin to voluntarily offer family tiers."

If "family tiers" seems at odds with "a la carte", you are not alone. It strikes us that way too.

Wednesday, December 14, 2005

DirecTV, Outsource Companies Settle With FTC For Millions; Largest Do Not Call Penalty Ever

Satellite television provider DIRECTV will pay $5,335,000 to settle FTC charges that, since October 2003, DIRECTV and companies it hired to promote DIRECTV programming have been violating the Do Not Call (DNC) provisions of the Commission’s Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR). This is the largest civil penalty the FTC has ever announced in a case enforcing any consumer protection law.

At the Commission’s request, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed the complaint and stipulated settlements in Federal District Court in Los Angeles. The complaint names as defendants DIRECTV, five firms that telemarketed on its behalf, and six principals of those telemarketing firms. Settlements with DIRECTV and two of the telemarketing firms and their principals were filed along with the complaint.

“This multimillion dollar penalty drives home a simple point: Sellers are on the hook for calls placed on their behalf,” said Chairman Deborah Platt Majoras. “The Do Not Call Rule applies to all players in the marketing chain, including retailers and their telemarketers.”

The Complaint

The complaint alleges that telemarketers calling on behalf of DIRECTV contacted consumers on the National DNC Registry. In addition, the complaint alleges that one of the telemarketers – Global Satellite, directly or through another entity – abandoned calls to consumers by failing to put a live sales representative on the line within two seconds after the called consumer completes his or her greeting, as required under the law.

Finally, the complaint alleges that DIRECTV provided substantial assistance and support to Global Satellite, even though it knew or consciously avoided knowing, that Global Satellite was violating the TSR.

Terms of the Court Orders

The FTC announced proposed stipulated final orders with DIRECTV and two telemarketers, Communications Concepts and its principal and American Communications of the Triad and its principal.

The first order requires DIRECTV to pay $5,335,000 in civil penalties. The proposed settlement agreement also prohibits DIRECTV, whether acting directly or through its authorized telemarketers, from violating the TSR. The proposed settlement tracks the relevant Telemarketing Sales Rule provisions, prohibiting calls to consumers on the DNC Registry, calls to consumers who asked not to receive calls on behalf of a particular seller, and abandoned calls.
The proposed settlement also requires DIRECTV to terminate any marketer of its products who DIRECTV knows or should know is making cold calls to consumers without express, written authorization from DIRECTV. The proposed settlement also prohibits DIRECTV from assisting and facilitating any telemarketer it knows or consciously avoids knowing is violating the Telemarketing Sales Rule. Finally, the proposed settlement imposes extensive monitoring requirements on DIRECTV mandating that the company oversee those marketers selling its goods or services.

The orders against Communication Concepts and American Communications require the companies to pay civil penalties of $25,000 and $50,000, respectively and bar both companies and their principals from future violations of the TSR and its component DNC Rule. The orders contain judgments of $205,000 against Communications Concepts and $746,300 against American Communications, both which have been suspended based on those companies’ inability to pay.

Settling Defendants and Ongoing Litigation

The proposed settlements announced today, if adopted by the court, would settle the Commission’s complaint and end its litigation against the following five defendants: DIRECTV, Inc.; Communication Concepts, LLC, also doing business as (dba) Rogers Group; Jim Turner, individually and as an officer of Communication Concepts; American Communications of the Triad; and Michael Gibson, individually and as an officer of American Communications of the Triad.

Litigation continues with the following seven defendants: D.R.D., Inc., also dba Power Direct; Daniel R. Delfino, individually and as an officer of D.R.D.; Nomrah Records, also dba Direct Activation; Mark Harmon, individually and as an officer of Nomrah Records; Global Satellite, LLC., also dba Mavcomm; William King, individually and as an officer of Global Satellite; and Michael Gleason, individually and as an officer of Global Satellite.

The Commission vote approving the complaint against DIRECTV and the five corporate defendants and their principals was 4-0, as was the vote to approve the stipulated final orders against DIRECTV and the two corporate defendants and their principals. The complaint and stipulated final orders were filed by the DOJ on the FTC’s behalf on December 12, 2005, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division.

NOTE: Stipulated final judgments are for settlement purposes only and do not necessarily constitute an admission by the defendants of a law violation. Stipulated judgments have the force of law when signed by the judge.

Monday, December 12, 2005

Tie-Breaking Merck Case Ends In Mistrial

After winning and losing one, reaching a mistrial seemed a natural for beleagured drug maker Merck in its battle to protect itself from what are reportedly thousands of pending lawuits and claims regarding the company's Vioxx product.

Consumers claim using the drug could cause coronary problems, and the first jury, based in Texas, agreed. That jury award more than $250 million. Unfazed, Merck announced it would individually fight each lawsuit.

U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon in Louisana's Eastern District sent the jury home after they reported that they were hopelessly deadlocked. Pundits on both sides claim victory although Wall Street sent the stock down nearly 3% after the mistrial was announced.

Consumer Help Web has published a checklist for former Vioxx users seeking legal representation. When the advocacy organization published the list this fall, Consumer Help Web President Joan Bounacos said, "Merck may be vigorously defending itself, but the blood is in the water. It is critical that consumers pick the right attorney if they intend to participate in legal proceedings." Bounacos added today that simply using a search engine with the phrase "Vioxx attorney" yields tens of thousands of listings.

Friday, December 09, 2005

Gulf-Based Seafood Safe Says Government

The states of Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana, along with U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have analyzed hundreds of samples of fish and shellfish from the waters affected by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

To date, the data show no reason for concern about consuming seafood from the Gulf region due to the hurricanes. The samples were analyzed for chemical and microbiological contaminants that could have been introduced by the hurricanes. The extensive seafood tissue sampling occurred in an area from the estuaries of New Orleans to Gulf Shores, AL. The sampled areas included Lake Pontchartrain, Mississippi Sound, Mobile Bay as well as the offshore areas of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Additional monitoring is currently in progress and results will be announced as they become available.

While many oyster harvest areas have been tested and re-opened, other areas remain closed until routine sampling by existing state regulated Molluscan Shellfish Programs determines that oyster harvesting can resume. Current data from analyses of fish and other shellfish from these areas show no reason for concern.

Health officials advise that consuming raw seafood always poses a potential risk from bacterial and viral contamination. This risk can be reduced by thoroughly cooking seafood.

As always, fishermen should avoid catching seafood in areas with visible oil sheens or slicks, and should only harvest live seafood. Consumers should follow proper sanitary practices when handling and preparing seafood for consumption. Also, health officials advise that following simple guidelines is appropriate when preparing fish and seafood at any time, not only after a storm event. These guidelines include keeping seafood cold until ready to cook and thoroughly cooking seafood. Consumers can further reduce risk by not eating the skin or organs, such as crab "fat". It is also recommended that broiling, grilling or poaching fish are healthy, low-fat methods of cooking.

For more information, contact the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals (Kathleen Golden, 1-888-293-7020), the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (Robbie Wilbur, 601-961-5277), the Alabama Department of Public Health (Dr. Neil Sass, 1-800-201-8208) or U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Eryn Witcher 202-564-4355).

Thursday, December 08, 2005

200,000 Oil-Filled Heaters Recalled

As winter chills set in throughout the U.S., the Consumer Product Safety Commission and King of Fans, Inc have recalled over 200,000 heaters. According to the government agency, consumers should immediately stop using the heaters.

The manufacturer, King of Fans, reports more than 80 incidents of leaking oil, two reports of minor burns and two falls. The portable electric radiator-style heaters have seven fins, one of which has the control panel attached to it. The units are gray with a black control panel. “Maxi-Heat™” is printed below the handle indentation on the control panel. The model number 70030 and date codes 0705 and 0805 are printed on the UL label on the lower right side of the control panel. The following purchase order numbers are located on the bottom of the radiator heater’s packaging: 56199910, 56199924, 56199961, 57105731, 57105732, 57100092, 57100089, 57100086, 57105685, and 57105686.

The heaters were sold in Home Depot stores in October and November for approximately $35 each. Consumers can return the heaters to a Home Depot retail location for a refund or call the manufacturer, King of Fans, toll-free at (866) 443-1291 between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. Monday through Friday.

Wednesday, December 07, 2005

DSW Shoe Store Didn't Protect Consumer Data Says FTC

Shoe discounter DSW Inc. has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that its failure to take reasonable security measures to protect sensitive customer data was an unfair practice that violated federal law. According to the FTC, DSW’s data-security failure allowed hackers to gain access to the sensitive credit card, debit card, and checking account information of more than 1.4 million customers. The settlement will require DSW to implement a comprehensive information-security program and obtain audits by an independent third-party security professional every other year for 20 years.

Columbus, Ohio-based DSW operates approximately 190 stores in 32 states. In 2004, DSW generated $961 million in net sales and sold approximately 23.7 million pairs of shoes.

According to the FTC’s complaint, DSW uses computer networks to obtain authorization for credit card, debit card, and check purchases at its stores and to track inventory. For credit and debit card purchases, DSW collects information, such as name, card number, and expiration date, from the magnetic stripe on the back of the cards. This magnetic stripe information is particularly sensitive because it contains a security code that can be used to create counterfeit cards that appear genuine in the authorization process. For check purchases, DSW collects information such as routing number, account number, check number, and the consumer’s driver’s license number and state. In each case, the information was wirelessly transmitted to a computer network located in the store, and from there was sent to the appropriate bank or check processor.

The FTC charges that until at least March 2005, DSW engaged in a number of practices that, taken together, failed to provide reasonable and appropriate security for sensitive customer information. Specifically, the agency alleges that DSW:

created unnecessary risks to sensitive information by storing it in multiple files when it no longer had a business need to keep the information;
failed to use readily available security measures to limit access to its computer networks through wireless access points on the networks;
stored the information in unencrypted files that could be easily accessed using a commonly known user ID and password;
failed to limit sufficiently the ability of computers on one in-store network to connect to computers on other in-store and corporate networks; and
failed to employ sufficient measures to detect unauthorized access.

The FTC charges that a total of approximately 1.4 million credit and debit cards and 96,000 checking accounts were compromised, and that there have been fraudulent charges on some of these accounts. Further, some customers whose checking account information was compromised have incurred out-of-pocket expenses in connection with closing their accounts and ordering new checks. Some checking account customers have contacted DSW to request reimbursement for their expenses, and DSW has provided some amount of reimbursement to these customers.

According to DSW’s SEC filings, as of July 2005, the company’s exposure for losses related to the breach ranges from $6.5 million to $9.5 million.

The FTC alleges that DSW’s failure to secure customers’ sensitive information was an unfair practice because it caused substantial injury that was not reasonably avoidable by consumers and not outweighed by offsetting benefits to consumers or competition. The settlement requires DSW to establish and maintain a comprehensive information security program that includes administrative, technical, and physical safeguards. The settlement also requires DSW to obtain, every two years for the next 20 years, an audit from a qualified, independent, third-party professional to assure that its security program meets the standards of the order. DSW also will be subject to standard record keeping and reporting provisions to allow the FTC to monitor compliance.

This is the FTC’s seventh case challenging faulty data security practices by retailers and oth

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

Westin First American Hotel Chain To Go Smoke-Free

Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. (NYSE: HOT) announced today that its upper upscale brand, Westin Hotels & Resorts, will become the first hotel chain to introduce a brand wide smoke-free policy. Effective January 2006, all 77 Westin hotels in the U.S., Canada and the Caribbean will go 100% smoke-free, including all guestrooms and public areas.

In preparation for implementation of the new policy, 2,400 smoking rooms will undergo an extensive cleaning process. This includes replacing all soft goods, deep cleaning and treating all hard surfaces, walls and carpets to eliminate allergens, replacing air filters and deep cleaning all air conditioning units. All Westin hotels and resorts will offer a designated outdoor area for guests who smoke.

Monday, December 05, 2005

Top Safety Picks Chosen For First Time By Insurance Industry Trade Group; Honda, Ford, Saab, Subaru Among Gold Winners

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety today announces 10 cars (2006 models) that win its first ever Top Safety Pick award. The awards recognize car designs that afford the best protection for people in front, side, and rear crashes, based on performance in Institute tests. The winning vehicles were chosen from among current models of small, midsize, and large cars plus minivans. There's a winner in three of these four groups. The winners include 2 large car designs, 7 midsize cars, and 1 small car. No minivans meet the Institute's criteria to earn a Top Safety Pick. Pickups and SUVs weren't included in this round of awards because side impact tests of most of these vehicles haven't been conducted yet.

"Now that we're rating vehicles' front, side, and rear crashworthiness, based on test performance, we decided to give consumers an overall assessment based on all three tests. These Top Safety Picks are replacing our previous 'best pick' designations that were awarded separately for front and side crash test performance," Institute president Brian O'Neill explains.

"The new awards mean consumers can compare cars' ratings more quickly and easily. They won't have to review multiple sets of test results separately. And when we test new car designs as they are introduced next year, it's possible that some additional models will be added to the 2006 Top Safety Picks."

Criteria to win gold and silver awards: Top Safety Pick winners reflect an elite fraction of the car market. Winners of the gold award have earned good ratings in the Institute's frontal offset and side impact crash tests, and their seat/head restraints are rated good for protection against neck injuries in rear impacts. Silver awards go to vehicles with good performance in the front and side crash tests plus acceptable seat/head restraint ratings. Awards are by car size class because vehicle size and weight influence occupant protection in serious crashes. Larger, heavier cars generally afford more protection than smaller, lighter ones. Top Safety Picks indicate the best choices for safety within each size class, but they don't mean a small car that's an award winner affords better protection than a larger car that didn't win a Top Safety Pick.

Almost all of the 10 winners are relatively new designs, and they all have side airbags designed to protect people's heads. This reflects the improvements manufacturers have been making in the side and rear crash protection afforded by their newer cars (most vehicles have afforded good occupant protection in frontal crashes for several years).

"This is one reason Volkswagen and Audi cars are 5 of the 10 award winners. This company has introduced 5 new designs since the 2005 model year and made the commitment to ensure that these designs perform well in Institute tests," O'Neill points out.

Winners by vehicle size class: Among large family cars, the Ford Five Hundred and its twin Mercury Montego were new designs for the 2005 model year. However, only the models with optional side airbags are Top Safety Pick winners. Another winner is the Audi A6, a large luxury model that was redesigned for the 2005 model year.

"The midsize group is the heart of the car market," O'Neill says. "About 40 percent of new cars sold every year are midsize, so it's good news that consumers have a number of Top Safety Pick choices in this size group from moderately priced to near luxury models." Seven of the 10 Top Safety Picks are midsize. The Saab 9-3 and Subaru Legacy are gold award winners. The Audi A3, A4, Chevrolet Malibu with optional side airbags, and Volkswagen Passat and Jetta are silver award winners.

The Honda Civic is the only small car among the 13 the Institute has evaluated that meets the criteria for a Top Safety Pick. It's the only car in this size group that has earned a good overall rating in the Institute's side impact test.

No minivans are among the award winners. This doesn't mean minivans are unsafe. It means none of the current designs the Institute has tested meets the award criteria. The Honda Odyssey, Toyota Sienna, and Nissan Quest are rated good for front and side crashworthiness, but their seat/head restraints are marginal or poor.

Friday, December 02, 2005

New Airline Travel Policies Unwrapped In Time For Holidays

Beginning December 22, airline travelers can expect to see more random screenings, fewer prohibited items and a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) workforce more dedicated to detecting and defeating more serious threats, such as explosives. These changes are part of an update to security procedures announced today by Assistant Secretary Kip Hawley, to address the ever-evolving threat to commercial aviation.

The specific changes include more additional screenings of passengers and their bags using a variety of methods selected at random. Passengers will also once again be able to carry small tools and scissors on-board aircraft. These changes will allow TSA to focus resources on more serious threats.

“It is paramount to the security of our aviation system that terrorists not be able to know with certainty what screening procedures they will encounter at airports around the nation,” said Kip Hawley, Assistant Secretary. “By incorporating unpredictability into our procedures and eliminating low-threat items, we can better focus our efforts on stopping individuals that wish to do us harm.”

Passengers will continue to walk through a metal detector and have their carry-on and checked baggage screened. However, these measures may now include a brief additional search of their person or their property. Examples of this additional screening include: explosive screening of shoes, hand-wanding of passengers, enhanced pat down searches and inspections of carry-on bags. These searches will be generated at random and will take only about a minute to complete. They will allow Transportation Security Officers (TSOs) to better screen passengers for explosives and other threats to the aviation system.

Beginning December 22, scissors with a cutting edge of four inches or less and tools such as screwdrivers, wrenches and pliers smaller than seven inches will be permitted on board.

Scissors longer than four inches and tools such as crowbars, drills, hammers, and saws will continue to be prohibited from carry-on bags. Lighters will continue to be banned from the cabin of aircraft and in checked baggage.

In addition to these changes, the agency’s 43,000 Transportation Security Screeners have been re-classified as Transportation Security Officers (TSOs).

Thursday, December 01, 2005

Help Web Partner Site Offers Child-Safe Holiday Ideas

In the wake of yesterday's announcement that approximately 6 million children's necklaces and zippers are being recalled for potentially toxic amounts of lead, we were reminded by our sister web site, BEADING HELP WEB, that they have plenty of projects that are child-safe and perfect for the holidays.

In addition to the ideas on the site's front page, the following projects are available on the site:

Amy's Gone Wild Bracelet

Breast Cancer Awareness Bracelet - "Kathy"

Breast Cancer Awareness Dangle Necklace

Book Buddies Bookmark

Rachel Earrings

More projects are added weekly so be sure to bookmark the site, and special thanks to its publisher for reminding us all that gifts for the holidays need not be store-bought. Indeed, the most precious gifts can be handmade.