Current Events in May 2005

Most Americans give their uncritical approval to renewing the USA PATRIOT Act, passed hastily by Congress in the aftermath of 9/11. Few realize that key provisions of the measure put every American's private personal data into the hands of the very bunglers so heartily vilified in recent months for selling, losing and misplacing hundreds of thousands of consumers' records.

The drive to quickly ratify the sweeping measures so quickly passed a few years ago began in April, with Attorney General Albert Gonzales urging Congress to renew every single provision aspect of the Act before key provisions expire in December. "Now is not the time to engage in unilateral disarmament" when dealing with terrorists and their associates, he said.

The words are stirring, as politicians' words so often are. Would the response have been as positive if Gonzales had said, "Now is not the time to delay giving all of our private records to ChoicePoint and LexisNexis?"

The Watch List

One of the key provisions of the PATRIOT Act, Section 326, mandates that banks set up a process to verify the identity of all new customers opening accounts of any kind. That system, called the Customer Identification Program (CIP), would be maintained as a database and cross-referenced against a government-provided "watch list" of known terrorists, suspected terrorists, and individuals being investigated for possible suspicious activity. The database would be used to track money laundering and financing of terrorist activities within the United States.

This raises more than a few privacy concerns. No one wants to end up on a "watch list" simply for sharing a name with a known member of al-Qaeda, after all. But on its face, the system seems to make sense. Tracking the money trail is a proven way to establish criminal activity, as the FBI demonstrated by using the RICO act to take down organized crime families.

However, just as with RICO, the potential exists to use this provision of the Act for far more than just cataloguing suspicious bank account activity. Moreover, a closer observation reveals that this extensive "data mining" actually leaves innocent Americans' private data more vulnerable to identity theft and misuse, not less.

Know Your Customer, Know Your Enemy

Section 326 is titled "Verification of Identification." It involves collecting and maintaining identity data on any customer opening a new financial account at participating institutions, "including name, address, and other identifying information". Since everything the government touches must have an acronym, this is called the "Customer Identification Program", or "CIP."

This provision has brought forth a host of companies and banks offering software and database solutions that supposedly ensure the accurate collection of customer data needed to comply with this section of the act.

The IntegraSys corporation's ID Verification software, for example, cross-checks and references 23 billion data records, including everything from credit report headers to "warm address lists" that target "known sites of fraudulent activity", such as hotel mailboxes, prisons, P.O. boxes, etc.

Data-warehousing giant LexisNexis' Instant ID solution offers a Web-based "robust and high quality tool which financial institutions can utilize to verify and validate the identity of a person opening a new accountfast, convenient and effective solution to assist financial institutions in complying with the USA PATRIOT Act by verifying the identity of new account applicants."

The government "watch lists" used to verify the customer's identity are maintained by the U.S. Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). OFAC's purpose is to implement and enforce economic sanctions against known terrorists, drug dealers, and the like, "to accomplish foreign policy and national security goals." OFAC publishes and regularly updates a list of "Specially Designated Nationals" (SDN's), known or suspected terrorists and accomplices, and makes it available on its website.

OFAC itself does not mandate that financial institutions comply with identifying potential suspects ("hits") on the watch list. It instead leaves the duty of compliance up to individual financial regulators and the many companies that have stepped into the breach to provide identity verification. The official word from the Treasury Department's Office of Public Affairs is that "the final rule employs a risk-based approach that allows financial institutions flexibility, within certain parameters, to determine which forms of identification they will accept and under what circumstances."

As Kevin Bankston, staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation puts it, this was "a huge sop for data warehousers" -- a way for information brokers to further their goals of gathering exhaustive data on consumers. Given the prohibitive amount of time and effort necessary to maintain constant compliance with the frequently changing OFAC lists, data brokers seized the opportunity to gain a new foothold in the identity business.

Further complicating matters, although the PATRIOT Act became law on October 26, 2001, the Treasury Department did not issue guidelines on how Section 326 should be implemented until July of 2002. A final ruling on the guidelines was not issued until September of 2003, with a mandatory compliance date of October 1, 2003. Even given the necessity of extensive inquiries from banks to understand how the rules were to be implemented, the gap of two years between the passage of the law and the final ruling means banks were -- and are -- essentially free to use whatever means necessary to "verify customer identities."

Moreover, a more dangerous aspect of the Act allows that information to be shared with governmental agencies and other financial institutions, often resulting in customers being shut out of banking privileges altogether.

Section 314: Sharing Your Information

According to the Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Information Network (FinCEN), Section 314 of the PATRIOT Act "permits financial institutions, upon providing notice to the United States Department of the Treasury, to share information with one another in order to identify and report to the federal government activities that may involve money laundering or terrorist activity."

Essentially, this rule creates a vast web of personal data, traded between banks, credit bureaus, and the like, from which the government can pick and choose anyone it believes to be engaging in suspicious activity. This provision does have some advantageous aspects, as it was utilized to gather data in the Riggs Bank money-laundering scandal. However, it also means that many innocent Americans or foreign nationals can find themselves "unbanked" if their names match that of a suspected terrorist on the watch list, or if their Social Security Number was used in cases of identity theft.

In their zealous attempts to comply with both OFAC's lists and FinCEN's own Section 314-related lists, many banks have closed customers' accounts suddenly and without explanation -- the hardest hit being those of Arab or Muslim descent, regardless of their actual intentions, citizenship, or activity.

The actual requirements for information gathering under Sections 314 and 326 are actually not terribly daunting. Banks are required to ask for a full name, address (P.O. Boxes won't do), Social Security number, and date of birth from any customer wishing to open a new account as "minimum procedure." "Non-documentary verification" -- that is, proving a customer's identity apart from the papers they present -- can involve anything from using Section 314 to communicate with other banks regarding their financial history, to consulting with the major consumer reporting agencies (CRA's) to determine their credit activity.

Although Section 326 mandates that banks give consumers "adequate notice" that these procedures are being used, the guidelines are so vague that nothing more than a verbal description of the actions being taken can suffice.

In addition, banks are required to compile, submit, and maintain exhaustive records of the customer's identity, how it was verified, and any discrepancies encountered, for up to five years after the consumer closes the account. Imagine the prospect of bank employees coming and going with access to your personal information, even if you no longer maintain an account with that institution.

Information brokers have been lobbying to move from the cumbersome "document solution" to a completely electronic ID-verification system, based solely around mining data records and using Social Security numbers as the linchpin. As one financial services firm puts it, "From conversations with financial institutions, manual solutions can take up to 25 times longer than automated solutions, which can lead to reduced service levels and inefficient processes at the bank."

As they see it, "[u]sing a comprehensive identity verification solution provides the greatest protection against identity fraud while improving customer service, risk management, and operational efficiency."

The key players in the drive for completely automated ID verification warehouses are by no means new to the game -- they are none other than data-mining giant ChoicePoint, and eFunds, the parent company of the ChexSystems banking data clearinghouse.

Unholy Alliances

Years before its now-infamous security breach and the loss of thousands of consumer records, ChoicePoint was a major government contractor. In fact, it is by most measure the federal government's primary source of information on individual Americans.

The federal government has turned to commercial databases for information because it is not allowed to collect such data. In 1974, Congress passed the Privacy Act, which made it illegal for the government to operate its own "Big Brother" database. But Congress did not restrict private companies from conducting surveillance and gathering data on individual Americans. Nor did it prohibit the government from buying that information.

Since at least April of 2001, the Alpharetta, Georgia-based data broker has been providing multiple government agencies with thousands of data records on individuals. According to the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)'s investigation, ChoicePoint owns dozens of information brokering or collecting services, trafficking in everything from medical records, to drug test results, to arrest and criminal records.

One of their key acquisitions was the Bridger Insight software verification system, designed to provide "enhanced due diligence research to quickly uncover otherwise unknown customer information." The Bridger Insight system allows for a full-scale electronic identity verification, including helpful "risk assessment" scores as to whether or not the individual's identity data constitutes a concern, and full-page "verification reports" with "Pass" or "Fail" marks depending on the results.

If this sounds like the work of a consumer reporting agency or credit bureau, ChoicePoint's pedigree as a spin-off of credit reporting giant Equifax bears that out. However, unlike Equifax, ChoicePoint is not officially classified as a consumer reporting agency, and thus not subject to the terms of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

EPIC filed suit against ChoicePoint in 2004 for what it calls "subverting the policy goals of federal information privacy law." Also very much like a credit reporting agency, ChoicePoint was taken to task for providing inaccurate, outdated, and mixed-up consumer data records -- with a "90% error rate", according to Pam Dixon of the World Privacy Forum. Couple this with the sale of 145,000 data records to an admitted criminal enterprise, and ChoicePoint was the lucky recipient of Privacy International's 2005 "Lifetime Menace" award for being "an abuser and broker of personal information for many years now, collecting information on Americans and foreigners without having to adhere to strict privacy laws."

Nevertheless, ChoicePoint's Bridger Insight system is one of the cornerstones of the PATRIOT Act's identity verification solutions, "help[ing] more than 4,000 clients simplify the process of achieving compliance and conducting due diligence."

As detailed in ConsumerAffairs.com's special report on ChexSystems, the Bridger Insight software system was partnered with eFunds' ChexSystems database in 2002 to "help streamline Section 326 compliance efforts of financial institutions," according to eFunds' senior vice-president Mark Spilsbury.

The Scottsdale, Arizona-based "information solutions" company has positioned itself as a prime mover in the identity verification field. One of their major subsidiaries, Penley Inc., provides a host of ID verification products, including BackgroundWatch, which researches customer data and returns a three-tiered search result. The "Basic Search" returns general data, such as name, address, SSN, and the like. The "Extended Search" offers more in-depth information, including lists of property records and "possible friends and relatives" (emphasis added).

The "Complete Search" contains all of this data, plus records of any sort of license, weapon registration, and voter registration. All of this information is integrated with the ChexSystems suite to track banking records and evidence of suspicious activity. The end result is a frighteningly complete portrait of an individual's personal records, containing all of their essential data and information.

Furthermore, the "risk assessment" components allow participating financial institutions to not only study a customer's past banking history, but in the case of the QualiFile system, to actually make judgments on their future history based on "[a bank's] pre-determined risk strategy and a risk assessment score that scientifically predicts the likelihood that you will have to force-close this account."

Penley has been a strong advocate of moving to a Web-based solution for its data warehousing for some time. Their cleverly named "ID Verification" system advocates a centralized, one-stop "turnkey" process, with (in their words) "simple 'pass' or 'fail' answers which require little interpretation by the frontline employees."

The system apparently requires nothing more than an Internet connection and a Web browser to use -- no software or hardware required. Given that eFunds proudly proclaims its ownership of one of the largest debit databases in the world , and its ability to outsource its customers' operations to offshore call centers, the potential for identity theft and data mismanagement is tremendous.

Apparently, the notion that a purely Web-based information database might find itself prey to hackers and data thieves is apparently not as high a priority as ensuring that the data is collected and sold to whomever wants it.

Keeping Your Information Safe: What You Need To Know

The sheer number of data mismanagement scandals in recent months has drawn Americans' attention to the fact that their private, personal information is no longer strictly their own. It can be traded among banks, provided to the government, and used by "information brokers" to sell consumers products, predict their shopping patterns, and determine their ability to open bank accounts, receive credit cards, or apply for loans. The PATRIOT Act's "identity verification" provisions grant data brokers even more power to hoard your information and use it for whatever purpose they wish -- or worse, mismanage it and let it fall into the hands of identity thieves.

Sections 314 and 326 are not "sunset" provisions of the Act. They are permanent for as long as the Act remains law. As debate begins swirling over the necessity of the Act and its consequences for Americans, greater attention must be paid to the fact that the very thing this Act was passed to protect -- Americans' freedom and liberty -- was endangered by the ability of data sellers to take our information and turn it into a commodity.

If you are concerned about your right to privacy and keeping your information safe, there are many resources to consult, including the following:

• The USA PATRIOT ACT: The full text of the act, a summary, related bills, and other information, direct from the Library of Congress.

• The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC): A nonprofit, nonpartisan public research center that specializes in privacy rights, First Amendment protections, and civil liberties. EPIC has a special section devoted to ChoicePoint and its abuse of consumer privacy.

• The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF): Focused on protecting digital rights, freedom of expression on the Internet, and the right to online privacy.

• FinancialPrivacyNow.org: An arm of Consumers' Union, aimed at providing Americans with all the tips and knowledge they need to protect their personal and financial information.

• ConsumerAffairs.com's Financial Services Section: Full of the latest news regarding the financial world and how to make sure you can gain the services you need without sacrificing your privacy or rights as a consumer.

Attorney General Lisa Madigan said House Bill 1465, the Vulnerable Adults Protection Act, would provide for the identification and management of convicted felons residing in nursing homes or other long-term care facilities, and provide for notification to other residents of the facilities.

In Illinois, approximately 100,000 adults reside in licensed long-term care facilities. Madigan said this population must be protected from residents who, because of their criminal history, pose a risk of harm.

However, Madigan said, the current intake process for residents of long-term care facilities fails to take into account an offenders criminal history and the corresponding risk he or she may pose to the vulnerable adults in these facilities.

HB 1465, which amends the Illinois Nursing Home Care Act and the states Code of Corrections, is sponsored in the House by Rep. James Brosnahan (D-Evergreen Park) and in the Senate by Sen. Edward Maloney (D-Chicago).

This bill would put into place common-sense measures to immediately ensure that violent offenders, including sex offenders, who seek admission to our states licensed facilities are identified and managed appropriately, Madigan said. Vulnerable adults must be protected from residents who, because of their criminal history, pose an unacceptable level of risk to these residents.

The proposed amendment to HB 1465 will bring about important and immediate change to the nursing home industry. Not only will this legislation make the environment in nursing homes safer for residents and staff, this legislation will also make the communities where these facilities are located safer places, Brosnahan said.

It has been demonstrated that this legislation is necessary to protect the elderly and the mentally ill, Maloney said. This extends to the residents of the communities in which these facilities are located.

HB 1465 would amend the Nursing Home Care Act to require that the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) create new rules, within 30 days after the bill is signed into law, providing a mechanism for the identification, risk assessment, care planning, treatment and discharge of violent offenders, including sex offenders.

Madigan said licensed facilities would be prohibited from accepting a sex offender or an offender on parole, probation or court-ordered supervision, unless the facility has complied with the new provisions. Licensed facilities also would be required to provide written notification to residents of the facility if a sex offender or parolee resides in the home.

Finally, the Act would be amended to allow access for law enforcement to residents who are sex offenders or under supervision to ensure compliance with the terms of the Sex Offender Registration Act and parole or probation conditions.

The bill also would amend the Code of Corrections to require that the Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC) provide critical information including sentencing orders, social investigations, evaluations, reports of disciplinary infractions and parole plans to the licensing agency when a parolee becomes a resident of a state-licensed facility during his or her parole.

IDOC also would be required to provide written notification to the police chief and sheriff of the municipality where the home is located, as well as the licensing state agency IDPH, Department on Aging or the Illinois Department of Public Aid whenever a parolee is a resident at a home in their jurisdiction or under their agency.

Madigans office also has drafted House Bill 2386, known as the Lifetime Supervision of Sex Offenders Act, which currently is under consideration in the Senate. Under HB 2386, mandatory supervised release would be extended to range from three years to the natural life of the offender based on the risk the sex offender poses to communities and families.

You may not think of cell phones as dangerous but as their use rises, so does the risk of fires and other unexpected mishaps. There've been scattered reports of cell phones exploding and catching fire and even of cell phones emitting sparks that ignite gasoline fires. In response, the industry and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) have issued some safety tips.

Lithium-ion (Li-Ion) batteries, which are commonly found in todays cellular phones, have a lot of energy in a small package, the commission notes. Li-Ion batteries are more sensitive to physical stress than alkaline batteries found in toys and flashlights and need to be treated with more care.

Neither CPSC nor the cell phone lobbyists made any mention of British researchers' warnings that children should avoid using cell phones because of the risk of brain tumors from long-term exposure to radio frequency emissions.

Here are the safety tips from the CPSC and the cell phone industry's lobbying arm:

1. Do not use incompatible cell phone batteries and chargers. Some Web sites and second-hand dealers, not associated with reputable manufacturers and carriers, might be selling incompatible or even counterfeit batteries and chargers. Consumers should purchase manufacturer or carrier recommended products and accessories. If unsure about whether a replacement battery or charger is compatible, contact the manufacturer of the battery or charger.

2. Do not permit a battery out of the phone to come in contact with metal objects, such as coins, keys or jewelry.

3. Do not crush, puncture or put a high degree of pressure on the battery as this can cause an internal short-circuit, resulting in overheating.

4. Avoid dropping the cell phone. Dropping it, especially on a hard surface, can potentially cause damage to the phone and battery. If you suspect damage to the phone or battery, take it to a service center for inspection.

5. Do not place the phone in areas that may get very hot, such as on or near a cooking surface, cooking appliance, iron, or radiator.

6. Do not get your phone or battery wet. Even though they will dry and appear to operate normally, the circuitry could slowly corrode and pose a safety hazard.

7. Follow battery usage, storage and charging guidelines found in the users guide.

CPSC handled three recalls last year -- the Kyocera Smartphone, Kyocera Slider, K400 and 3200 Series and Verizon Wireless LG-brand cell phones.

"CPSC has received reports of incidents and injuries involving cell phones batteries and chargers in a variety of environments," said CPSC Chairman Hal Stratton. "CPSC will continue to do its part by investigating and recalling batteries that present a safety hazard, and we ask that consumers do their part by following some basic safety steps in their day-to-day use of cell phone batteries."

CPSC also urges consumers to properly dispose of their old batteries and equipment. All major carriers have recycling programs. For more information, go to www.recyclewirelessphones.com.

The two biggest automakers in the world are talking about forming a joint venture to begin manufacturing hydrogen-powered cars. General Motors Corp. and Toyota Motor Corp. refer to the proposed undertaking as Project Apollo.

Japan's Kyodo news agency reports that the automakers are expected to formally discuss Project Apollo at a top-level meeting this weekend in Japan. There is no formal or informal agreement between the two automakers, however.

Fuel cell and hydrogen driven cars currently are about ten times more expensive to produce than conventional automobiles. The combined technological of the two companies would produce a large worldwide competitive advantage.

GM is already working on fuel cell development with, with several Southern California companies and at its own Advanced Technology Center in Torrance. Toyota is the worldwide leader in hybrid technology.

GM has insisted for years that it will have a commercially viable fuel cell vehicle ready for the market by 2010, and insiders say the company is well ahead of schedule in several key areas. Toyota has been a major proponent of hybrid technology, which combines standard gasoline engines with electric power.

Carmakers see fuel cells as desirable because if they can be perfected, and if a retail fuel distribution system is developed, they would remove the auto industry from much of the debate over air pollution and fossil fuel consumption.

The effort to produce fuel efficient if not green cars is spreading through the auto-industry, in large part because of Toyota's success with hybrid technology sales.

In a effort to save what is left of its automobile sales share, scandal plagued Mitsubishi Motors will start selling electric cars in 2010.

The company hopes to show off its expertise as well as mend its battered reputation by entering the hybrid and electric-car market. To that end Mitsubishi showed off a tiny test vehicle equipped with motors embedded in the rear wheels that run on a lithium-ion batteries.

Sales of Mitsubishi cars have fallen since the automaker acknowledged five years ago it had been systematically hiding auto defects from authorities. Its global production in March dropped 11 percent from the same month a year ago.

The Mitsubishi electric car, which will be available for test fleets next year, has a cruising range of 93 miles on a single charge and can be recharged in a regular home.

May 12, 2005
Homeowners with decks or playground equipment made of treated wood should take note of a federal study that finds yearly application of oil- or water-based stains or sealants can reduce the amount of arsenic released by the wood.

The data show that oil- or water-based sealants or stains that can penetrate wood surfaces are preferable to products such as paint, because paints and other film-formers can chip or flake, requiring scraping or sanding for removal, which can increase exposure to arsenic.

Consumers should consider the required preparation steps -- sanding, power washing, etc. -- before selecting a product to minimize potential exposure to arsenic, both for initial application and re-coating, the study said.

The results are from a study of chromated copper arsenate (CCA)-treated wood conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).

The information is based on first-year results from two-year studies initiated by CPSC and EPA in 2003 to determine which stains, sealants and paints are most effective in reducing potential arsenic exposure from existing CCA-treated structures. EPA tested the performance of 12 coatings on older wood and CPSC tested eight coatings (seven were the same as the EPA group) on new (as of August 2003) CCA-treated wood.

CCA was a pesticide treatment commonly used in the past to prevent deck and playground wood from rotting and insect damage. Effective Dec. 31, 2003, the use of CCA to treat virtually all wood intended for residential use was eliminated.

Key points for parents and consumers:

• If you are concerned about potential exposure to arsenic, sealants, when applied at least once a year, have been shown to reduce dislodgeable arsenic from the wood.
• Oil or water-based, penetrating sealants or stains are preferred.
• As always, parents and other caretakers should follow these precautions for children who play on or near decks. Always wash hands thoroughly after contact with treated wood, especially prior to eating and drinking, and ensure that food does not come into direct contact with any treated wood.
• At this time, EPA and CPSC said they do not believe there is any reason to remove or replace CCA treated structures, including decks and playground equipment.
• Consumers should follow manufacturer recommendations when handling the wood, including the same precautions that workers should take: wear gloves when handling wood, wear goggles and dust masks when sawing and sanding, always wash hands before eating, and never burn CCA treated wood.
• The majority of exposure that is estimated to occur to children is from hand-to-mouth activities (i.e., children touching the surface of CCA-treated wood and then putting his/her hand in his/her mouth). This activity is most prevalent in children aged 1 to 6 years of age.

A French study finds that men with a resting pulse of more than 75 beats a minute are a elevated risk of sudden cardiac death. A heart beat that responds sluggishly to exercise is also a danger sign, the researchers found.

The findings, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, are based on a study of 5,713 apparently health working men between the ages of 42 and 53 years. None had been diagnosed with heart disease.

The test subjects underwent standardized testing between 1967 and 1972 and researchers examined data on the subjects' resting heart rates, the increase in rate from the resting level to the peak exercise level, and the decrease in rate from the peak exercise level to the level one minute after the termination of exercise.

During a 23-year follow-up period, 81 subjects died suddenly.

The risk of sudden death was increased in subjects with a resting heart rate that was more than 75 beats per minute and in subjects with an increase in heart rate during exercise that was less than 89 beats per minute, and in subjects with a decrease in heart rate of less than 25 beats per minute after the termination of exercise.

"These three factors (were) strongly associated with an increased risk of sudden death," the researchers said.

The research is the first large study to show an association between so-called heart rate profile and the future risk of sudden cardiac death in healthy people, said lead author Xavier Jouven, a physician at Georges Pompidou European Hospital in Paris.

The test could be useful for men over 40 and women over 50 who have at least two risk factors for heart disease, which may include high cholesterol, high blood pressure, obesity or a family history of heart disease, physicians not associated with the study said.

Sudden cardiac death is responsible for 5 percent to 10 percent of all U.S. deaths, or roughly 350,000 to 500,000 deaths a year. It strikes people as young as their 30s and 40s, often with no prior warning.

H&R Block will pay $360 million to settle a class action lawsuit over its tax-refund loans, under the terms of a proposed settlement. The company says the settlement gives it a green light to continue the practice in the future.

Block and its partner, HSBC Financial Services, were accused of gouging consumers who took out refund anticipation loans at interest rates frequently exceeding 100 percent.

The settlement covers 28 million customers who made more than 55 million transactions with the company. It would consist of $110 million in cash and $250 million in coupons which consumers could redeem for $6 worth of tax-preparation services.

Class members will also receive cash after plaintiffs' attorney fees are awarded by the judge, with the amount dependent on how many class members file a claim.

H&R Block said the settlement would also create a "safe harbor" allowing Block and HSBC, which financed the loans, to continue to sell the products.

"It really puts this whole issue behind us," company spokeswoman Linda McDougall said.

The proposed settlement must be approved by U.S. District Judge Elaine E. Bucklo in Chicago. Bucklo rejected an earlier proposed settlement in 2003.

Under the refund anticipation loan program, customers who owed a tax refund could receive most of the money in two to three business days by paying a fee to file the return electronically and a loan processing fee.

According to a report released in January 2005 by the Consumer Federation of America (CFA) and the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC), consumers paid more than $1.4 billion in loan charges and fees in 2003 associated with RALs. These short-term loan terms reportedly had annual interest rates of 70 percent to more than 1,700 percent.

Without the state law, lenders in Texas operate under a bank model and use out-of-state affiliates to make loans, limiting interest rates and making it harder to squeeze more profit out of cash-short consumers.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has been taking a dim view of banks' involvement in payday loans and other forms of predatory lending.

In New York, an appeals court on Monday upheld a lower court decision shutting down a payday loan operation that targeted military families near Fort Drum; the decision voided hundreds of illegal loans.

The State Appellate Division Third Department affirmed a lower court ruling finding JAG NY - which operates three NY Catalog Sales stores in Watertown and Queensbury - engaged in a scheme to make illegal high-interest loans to consumers.

"It is clear that New York State will not countenance loan sharking of any kind," New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said.

In issuing the lower court ruling last January, Justice Bernard J. Malone of State Supreme Court in Albany found that NY Catalog Sales violated laws that prohibit usurious loans, forced consumers to agree to unconscionable contractual provisions that constituted fraud, and made loans without a license.

The January decision marked the first time a state court has found a payday loan offer to be a scheme to illegally circumvent New Yorks usury law.

The lower court ruling found both NY Catalog Sales and its owner, John Gill, liable for the violations of law, and awarded monetary relief for injured consumers. The court decision also declared null and void any outstanding loan arranged by NY Catalog Sales with an interest rate that exceeds legal limits. It is estimated that there are hundreds of such loans.

The appellate court ruling will allow a court-approved referee to review each individual loan to determine restitution for defrauded consumers. It is estimated that the value will be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

In September 2004, Spitzer filed a lawsuit against NY Catalog Sales alleging that it was attempting to disguise its payday loans as "catalog sale" purchases. Payday loans are short-term unsecured loans that borrowers promise to repay out of their next paycheck. Due to the exorbitant interest rate of payday loans, as much as 400 - 900 percent, they are illegal in New York State.

N.Y. Catalog Sales promoted the availability of fast cash of up to $500 in advertisements, flyers and store front signs to attract consumers into its stores. Consumers were told that, for every $50 to be borrowed, they would have to buy $15 in gift certificates or catalog merchandise.

Consumers would then present the store with a check in the amount of the cash they wished to borrow and the cost of the merchandise or gift certificate. The store would agree to deposit the check on the consumers next payday.

As in most payday loan scenarios, NY Catalog Sales customers were usually unable to repay their loan on their next payday, and fell into a cycle of repeating their transactions so that they could use the newly borrowed cash to cover the existing debt. With every "roll-over" of their loans, however, the consumers were required to purchase additional merchandise or gift certificates, quickly resulting in the total cost of the purchases exceeding the amount of money received by the consumers.

In the past few years, Spitzers office has made other efforts to stop illegal payday lending schemes. In November 2004, Spitzer entered into a settlement with Las Vegas-based Cashback Payday Loans, Inc. which had been providing payday loans to New Yorkers over the Internet.

The settlement barred Cashback from lending in New York State, voided outstanding loans with New Yorkers, and required the lender to pay restitution.

In 2003, Spitzer filed a lawsuit to put a stop to a "rent-a-bank" scheme in which two Pennsylvania-based check-cashing companies contracted with a Delaware bank in an illegal effort to circumvent New York States laws that limit interest rates to 16 percent.

After months of shopping, interviews with mattress makers, and evaluations of mattresses by industry experts, Consumer Reports concluded that there is no one best bed for everyone, no single brand is more or less prone to trouble and the most heavily advertised brands may not be the most comfortable.

The magazine enlisted the help of four couples who took mattresses home and slept on them for a month and an additional 59 staffers tried different models in the labs. One conclusion: comfort is relative.

The investigation includes results from an online poll in which 19 percent of innerspring-mattress owners complained about pressure to trade up to a costlier bed, and 15 percent said that the salesperson used a hard-sell approach.

Myths

Among some of the myths the investigation dispels:

• Firmer is better. The best bed is the one that is most comfortable for you. Medical experts CR interviewed say there have been no well-controlled studies to indicate the best firmness overall.

• Coil count is critical. Any number above 390 in a queen-size mattress should be plenty. CR consultants concluded that coils in all but the cheapest mattresses -- less than $800 for a queen-size -- are "overdesigned for their function."

• A higher price guarantees a better bed. Anything but the cheapest mattresses can be a fine choice.

• If you move in your sleep, the bed is to blame. Turning around while sleeping is normal; it's a problem only if it disrupts your sleep.

• You must include a box spring, to be protected by the warranty. Despite sales pressure to buy both mattress and foundation, it's not always required.

• Stores sell the same mattress under different names. Retailers often claim that their mattress A is comparable to a competitor's mattress B. Though you may find beds that are truly alike, most "comparables" CR studied had little in common.

How to Choose

Before you shop, the first thing you need to do is determine if you truly need a new mattress. A mattress can last 10 years, as long as your kids don't use it as a trampoline. Think about buying a new mattress if you are waking up tired or achy; tend to sleep better at hotels than at home; your mattress looks saggy or lumpy and if you're over the age of 40 and your mattress is five to seven years old -- bodies tolerate less pressure as they age.

CR also advises you choose the appropriate mattress size, as even healthy sleepers shift positions during the night, and cramped quarters can keep them from moving freely. When you are at the store, keep the following in mind: • Understand the name game. Manufacturers usually modify any innerspring mattress they make for different sellers, changing the color, padding, quilting pattern, and so forth. Consumers are the losers. Since such mattresses are at least somewhat different, and the names vary, you can't comparison shop.

• Choose the right firmness. Don't rely on names: Levels are described differently. If a mattress is too firm, it won't support all body parts evenly and may cause discomfort at the heaviest points (hips and shoulders). If it's too soft, you could sink into the surface and have a hard time moving, which could cause tingling, numbness, or aches.

• Do the 15-minute in-store test. Don't be embarrassed to lie down on lots of mattresses in the store. Salespeople expect it. Wear loose clothes, and shoes that you can slip off. Spend at least five minutes on each side, your back, and your stomach if you use that position.

• Look for a comfort guarantee. Some businesses give you two weeks to several months to return or exchange a bed you don't like.

• Don't count on warranties. They cover defects in materials and workmanship, not comfort or normal wear. They're typically in effect for 10 years; luxury brands like Duxiana, Select Comfort, and Tempur-Pedic are in effect for 20.

• Wait for a sale, and bargain. Specialty mattresses may have a set price, but you can save at least 50 percent off list price for innerspring type. Ads for "blowout" sales make such events seem rare. They are not. If the price is good, buy; if not, wait. However, an advertised "bargain" may not be all it seems, so read the fine print.

Specialty Brands

Many of the estimated 70 million Americans who complain of sleeplessness are turning their backs on conventional innerspring beds and are buying alternatives such as Duxiana (springs in layers), Select Comfort (air-filled, with adjustable firmness for each partner), and Tempur-Pedic (polyurethane "memory foam").

To assess the beds-which cost $1,500 and up in queen size, CR asked four couples to spend a month using each at home. CR also asked 59 staffers to lie down for about 15 minutes on each bed (hiding the brand names) in one of our labs, the way consumers should try in a store. Finally, CR asked visitors to http://www.ConsumerReports.org about recent mattress-buying experiences. Here are the results:

• Duxiana with Pascal System: Panelists praised its support and comfort. On the whole, long-term testers liked it but thought it wasn't worth the price. Buy only if your budget allows. Have a Duxiana bed? Tell us about your experience.

• Select Comfort Sleep Number 5000 Bed: Some panelists praised its support, but many criticized the model they tried. Six of the eight long-term panelists said they probably wouldn't buy the traditional model under any circumstances, but most users who tried the plusher pillowtop version called it comfortable.

• Tempur-Pedic Classic Swedish Sleep System. Some long-term testers called it "supportive and cushiony," but others used different language: "not enough cushioning," "feels like sleeping on wet or hard sand," "pressure on hips and back." It elicited stronger opinions pro and con, than the other beds.

Bottom line: For each of these beds, our panelists' opinions ran the gamut from "aah" to "ick," which just reinforces the need for an in-store tryout.

Learn more about mattress anatomy and how to get a good night's sleep by going to http://www.ConsumerReports.org. Free from May 10 to July 6 in the "Home & Garden" section.

Operators who sent illegal spam and made deceptive claims for a bogus fuel-saving product have settled Federal Trade Commission charges that their e-mail and Web sites violated federal laws.

The settlements bar violations of the FTC Act and the CAN-SPAM Act, and bar the defendants from making or assisting others to make deceptive product claims.

In October 2004, the FTC filed a suit in U.S. District Court alleging that marketers, and the resellers working with them, were making deceptive claims for Fuel MAX and Super FuelMax products. The Web site operators and their affiliates - spammers who drove traffic to their site - made claims such as:

• Increase gas mileage 27%+ by helping fuel burn better;
• Reduce emissions by 43%;
• Smoother engine;
• Pays for itself FAST!!!!
• Gives an extra 10% more horsepower;
• Based on the size of your gas tank you will save from $8 for a typical 15-gallon gas tank, but larger V8 SUVs and trucks will save up to $20 per tank.

The FTC alleged that the magnetic "fuel saver" does not save fuel, does not increase gas mileage, and does not reduce emissions. The agency claimed that the false claims violate the FTC Act. The agency also alleges that by providing promotional materials with false claims to affiliates, the defendants provided them with the means to violate the FTC Act.

The FTC charged that by inserting the names of innocent third parties in the "from" or "reply to" fields - "spoofing" - and failing to provide a valid physical postal address, the marketers were violating the CAN-SPAM Act.

Settlements with Mark C. Ayoub, his companies, Diverse Marketing Group, Inc., and Diverse Marketing Group LLC; and Floyd and Marcia Tassin and their company, Net Marketing Croup LLC, bar them from making misrepresentations in connection with the sale of fuel-saving devices or any product or service sold over the Internet. In addition, they prohibit them from providing others with the means and instrumentalities to commit deception.

Small pets have sickened as many as 30 people -- many of them children -- with dangerous, multidrug-resistant bacteria in at least 10 states, federal health officials are warning.

Lately, the definition of pocket pets has expanded to include a few animals that are not quite that little, but that are housed in cages. Common pocket pets include rats, mice, rabbits, gerbils, hamsters, guinea pigs, and ferrets as well as rodents bought to feed other animals such as snakes.

Unfortunately, owning a pocket pet can be hazardous to your health. The little critters can carry Salmonella and other diseases.

The Salmonella germ is a group of bacteria that can cause diarrheal illness in humans. They are microscopic living creatures that pass from the feces of people or animals, to other people or other animals. Animals can carry this germ and not appear to be ill. Rodents, like reptiles, may spread Salmonella to people.

Choosing a Pocket Pet

When choosing a pocket pet, dont pick one that is quiet, tired, has diarrhea, or looks sickly. The pet should be lively and alert with a glossy coat free of droppings. The animals breathing should be normal. There should be no discharge from the eyes or nose.

If one of the animals in the cage in a pet store has diarrhea or looks sick, the others may have been exposed to an infectious disease. Do not choose any of these animals as your pet. Wash your hands immediately after handling pet store animals or after touching animal cages or bedding.

If your pet dies soon after you buy it, it could have been ill with a disease that could also make people sick. Tell the pet store and do not reuse the cage until it has been cleaned and disinfected.

Tips for Preventing Salmonella from Rodents

• Washing hands with soap and water after handling rodents or their cages and bedding is the most important thing you can do to reduce the risk of Salmonella transmission.
• When cleaning up droppings from your pet, always wash your hands thoroughly afterwards. Young children, especially those younger than five years old, should be closely supervised when cleaning cages and should wash their hands immediately following handling rodent feces.
• Do not eat food or smoke while handling your pet.
• Do not handle pets in food preparation areas.
• Do not kiss your pet or hold it close to your mouth.

More information is available on the CDC Web site. Learn more about keeping yourself and your pet healthy by visiting CDCs Healthy Pets Healthy People web page.

Satellite television provider EchoStar Communications which does business as Dish Network will pay a civil penalty of $50,000 for telemarketing calls made to Missourians on the states No Call list, Attorney General Jay Nixon said.

The assurance of voluntary compliance alleges that EchoStar and its authorized dealers placed telemarketing calls soliciting the sale of satellite television services since July 2001 to consumers on Missouris No Call list.

As part of the agreement approved by Circuit Court Judge Lucy D. Rauch, EchoStar and its authorized dealers will cease calling Missourians on the list, and will provide Nixons office with a report of measures the company has taken to assure future compliance with state law.

"Missouris No Call law was implemented to assure Missourians that they could sit down to the dinner table without constant, uninvited interruptions by incessant telemarketing calls," Nixon said. "Through our aggressive enforcement efforts, Missouri citizens can be assured that we will continue to take whatever steps are necessary to protect their rights and privacy."

EchoStar will pay a civil penalty of $50,000 to the Missouri Merchandising Practices Revolving Fund, and any future violations could cost the company up to $2,000 per call.

Currently, more than 1.9 million Missouri households have signed up for the Missouri No Call list. Missouri residents not yet on the list can have their numbers included or can file a complaint regarding a No Call violation via the Attorney Generals Web site or by calling 1-866-NOCALL1.

To date, Nixons office has obtained more than $1,248,000 from businesses for violating Missouris No Call law.

Department officials say an on-site monitoring visit determined that an emergency existed requiring immediate action to protect the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the home based on widespread infestation of rodents and insects.

Inspectors say they found rodent droppings, urine-soaked kitchen plates and insects crawling all over residents' clothing and bedding.

Noble Residential Care Home housed 34 residents. A separate, unlicensed building housed eight additional residents. An interagency relocation team from the OSDH, Department of Human Services, and the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services coordinated the relocation of the residents, working with the residents, their families and guardians to find new homes and make the transition as smooth as possible.

James Joslin, assistant chief of Long Term Care Services at the OSDH, reported all residents were out of the building within 24 hours.

"It is a credit to the assisting agencies as well as the receiving facilities that we were able to get these people moved so quickly. We regret the sudden disruption to the residents' lives but the living conditions in this facility fell well below the standards we expect of a licensed residential care home," Joslin stated.

The facility has ten days to request a hearing on the decision to relocate the residents.

"We take our responsibility to protect the residents of these facilities very seriously and we will continue our inspections to ensure the residents are receiving quality care and the operators are meeting state regulations. The residents continue to be our primary concern," said State Health Commissioner Dr. Michael Crutcher.

The action included notice to the facility of the Department's plans to file a petition to not renew the facility's license.

An Illinois judge has ordered "hail storm chaser" Robert Olson to pay $1.1 million in penalties and $574,000 in restitution to consumers. Olson and his company, Hail Restoration inc., allegedly solicited storm-related roof repair jobs in the Chicago area and collected down payments but never did the work.

"This was a particularly horrible case of home repair fraud that cost consumers hundreds of thousands of dollars," Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan said. "Under (this) order, Robert Olson will no longer be able to knock on consumers doors and use Hail Restoration to bilk consumers out of hard-earned dollars needed for home repair."

The defendants also were permanently prohibited from doing home repair in the state of Illinois.

Madigans office has received a total of 150 consumer complaints against Olson and Hail Restoration, alleging he accepted down payments from Illinois residents and then failed to repair damages to the consumers roofs. At last 30 complaints were filed by senior citizens.

In December 2004, Madigan filed a lawsuit against Olson and Hail Restoration, alleging Olson and his team of sales representatives traveled the Chicago-area going door-to-door to solicit work by claiming consumers homes had sustained roof damage during storms. Many of the consumers signed contracts during the first visit by a Hail Restoration representative to their homes.

Madigan said that as part of Hail Restorations scam, Olson and his sales representatives told prospective customers that repairs could be done to their homes at no cost to the customers. Olson negotiated, without a proper license, with the customers insurance companies. The customers then signed over to Olson the checks that were paid by their insurance companies to cover damages. However, after receiving the payments, Hail Restoration never made the repairs.

According to Madigans lawsuit, on one occasion in June 2004, the defendants informed an elderly Maywood resident that she was entitled to have the hail storm damage to her home repaired at no cost. The elderly woman signed a contract with the defendants and signed over a $7,843 insurance check to the defendants. Following that, the defendants never showed up at her home to begin the repair work.

The defendants were charged in December 2004 with multiple violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act and the Home Repair and Remodeling Act for failing to complete the work for which they contracted and, in many cases where work was begun, for performing substandard work.

Madigans lawsuit also alleged the defendants violated the law because they never obtained either a roofing license or a public adjusters license in Illinois and failed to inform customers of this. Finally, the lawsuit charged that consumers were not provided with the legally-required Home Repair: Know Your Consumer Rights pamphlet.

U.S. consumer interest in SUVs dropped sharply in April as people turned to more fuel-efficient vehicles. Truck-based SUVs have become a traditional profit center for U.S. automakers while fuel savers have long been a strength of Japanese automakers, such as Toyota Motor Corp. and Nissan Motor Co.

Large gains at Toyota, Nissan North America and American Honda fueled an increase in April sales, while General Motors and Ford Motor Co. posted declines.

Toyota, Nissan and Honda said sales in April were their best ever for the month and in Toyota's case, the best month ever in its history in the United States.

Sales of Toyota's Prius, the most popular gas-electric hybrid car on the market, nearly tripled compared with April of last year, to 11,345.

General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. sales were down slightly, while DaimlerChrysler AG showed a nearly 9-percent gain. Leading Japanese and Korean automakers, however, posted big double-digit increases.

Industrywide, passenger car sales were up 11 percent in April, while light truck sales rose only 1.3 percent. SUVs, particularly large ones like the Ford Expedition and GMC Yukon, seemed to be hardest hit. With a 28-gallon tank, it can cost $60 or more to fill up an Expedition.

Toyota and Nissan also won customers by offering significantly larger discounts last month. Rebates, low-interest loans and other come-ons rose by 76 percent at Nissan to $1,800 and by 107 percent at Toyota to $1,100.

Both continue to trail the traditional Detroit brands, which average $3,400 in incentives.

Routine use of episiotomy for uncomplicated vaginal births has no benefits and actually causes more complications, according to a review of scientific evidence sponsored by the HHS Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).

Episiotomy, one of the most common surgical procedures in the U.S., is the surgical cutting of the perineum -- the skin between the vaginal opening and the anus -- and is a common procedure used in an estimated one-third of vaginal deliveries to hasten birth or prevent tearing of the skin during delivery.

But in an article in this week's issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, researchers reported that episiotomy did not achieve any of the goals it is commonly believed to achieve.

The researchers concluded that routine use of the procedure -- now undergone by more than 1 million U.S. women each year -- should be discontinued, and the incision should only be considered to speed delivery when the health of the baby is at risk.

When providers restricted their use of episiotomy, women were more likely to give birth without perineal damage, less likely to need suturing, and more likely to resume intercourse earlier.

Women who experienced spontaneous tears without episiotomy had less pain than women with episiotomies. Complications related to the healing of the perineum were the same with or without episiotomy.

In addition, the evidence showed that episiotomy did not protect women against urinary or fecal incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse or difficulties with sexual function in the first three months to five years following delivery. No research described the long-term impact of episiotomy later in adult life when incontinence is most likely to occur.

"The routine use of episiotomy has been standard for years, with apparently limited research to support it," said Carolyn M. Clancy, M.D., director of AHRQ. "This evidence could help many women with uncomplicated births avoid a procedure that is of no benefit to them."

The evidence report concludes that any possible benefits of the procedure do not outweigh the fact that many women would have had less injury without the surgical incision. The scope of the review did not include neonatal outcomes, and therefore the report cannot comment on possible benefits of episiotomy for the babies.

The review was conducted by AHRQ's Evidence-based Practice Center at RTI-International-University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Raleigh, North Carolina.

After each new identity theft scandal, credit bureaus scramble to offer customers the latest tips to protect their personal information from being stolen, misused, or abused. Yet some of the biggest dangers to Americans' personal information come from the credit bureaus and consumer reporting agencies (CRA's) themselves.

The three major credit bureaus -- Equifax, Experian, and Trans Union -- all offer comprehensive, and expensive, "identity protection" packages, which claim to insure the user from damages incurred by misuse of their personal data and issue notifications of fraud to creditors and other agencies who view consumers' credit on a regular basis.

Yet many Americans find themselves threatened with collection or unable to obtain credit due to a credit bureau's mistakes. The major CRA's consistently fail to report accurate information, change credit ratings based on erroneous data, and often "mix up" customers' information, resulting in innocent consumers being harrassed or penalized for actions they did not commit.

Moreover, as Consumers Union pointed out recently, "When a company improperly breaches a consumer's sensitive information, the onus is on that consumer the victim to fix the problem." Customers have to contact the credit bureau and attempt to prove that they were not responsible for the actions committed using their identity, a process made more difficult by the lack of direct contact options most credit bureaus provide.

ConsumerAffairs.com receives a constant stream of complaints from irate customers regarding credit bureaus' inability -- or unwillingness -- to protect the personal information of the very people they claim to assist.

Experian

Larry W., a computer support specialist from Centreville, Virginia, ordered his credit report from FreeCreditReport.com, a subsidiary of Experian. He was shocked to find that his personal information was gone and replaced with someone else's, one Lawrence W. of nearby Woodbridge, Va. His own name was listed as an alias, and he had access to all of the other man's personal records.

"All of my information was mixed in with his, and still is," he says. He tried contacting Experian multiple times to address the error, and was told he could only change the information via their online dispute form, which encountered errors every time he tried to make changes. Larry is considering seeking legal counsel to resolve the issue and correct the changes.

A similar circumstance befell John P., of Laurel, Delaware, in June of 2004. Experian mixed his identity with two other individuals who owed high levels of credit card debt, thus leaving John to be harassed by creditors and collection agencies constantly. "I have sent a certified letter to Experian, and I've made a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission ... I still can't seem to get this cleared," he said.

The most common complaint from Experian customers revolves around "mixed identity" information on their reports, such as placing another person's credit obligations on their report, and the inability to contact any company representative to make changes.

Any user wishing to confirm or change their data, or to use Experian's identity protection services, must first purchase a credit report and create a log-in account, thus ensuring that the company makes its money and has access to your information. In addition, Experian charges merchants or vendors any time it reports changes to a customer's account, perhaps explaining why customers' data is so often inaccurate or out of date.

Trans Union

Robert S., of Victorville, California, was a victim of Bank of America's recent loss of customer data tapes. He placed a "fraud alert" on his accounts, and yet, when he tried to purchase a cell phone for his elderly mother some time later, he found that he was denied credit because the phone vendor couldn't verify his identity with Trans Union.

"The home telephone number Trans Union has on file for me is incorrect, and US Cellular is unable to verify my credit...My mother's safety is paramount in my mind, and the block Trans Union is providing could directly impact on her safety, should she need emergency service."

Trans Union, like Equifax, requires customers to purchase their products in order to verify their information, such as their "ID Fraud Watch", which costs customers $43 per year. The "ID fraud watch" claims to offer comprehensive protection to users, including weekly "fraud watch" emails and regular access to a Trans Union credit report.

Such conveniences are cold comfort to Mike R. of San Francisco. Mike was impersonated by an identity thief in a contact with MBNA, and Trans Union reported the activity as a "hard" credit inquiry on his report, thus lowering his credit score.

Despite Mike's citing of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which demands creditors investigate inquiries, Trans Union did nothing about the new inquiry. In Mike's words, "[Trans Union] would not accept that [it] had any statutory responsibility to investigate the accuracy of some types of disputed information on consumer credit reports."

Equifax

Equifax customers recite a litany of failures to update personal data, mixing customers' reports and exposing their personal information, and an unwillingness to admit fault, let alone solve any issues.

Meanwhile, their product line spotlights the Equifax Credit Watch Gold product, which offers daily credit alerts and unlimited credit reports for the token fee of $99.95 for twelve months.

William C., of Gresham, Oregon, suffered heavy business losses and increased insurance rates when Equifax mixed his identity information with another individual, who had a different Social Security number and numerous derogatory entries on their report, thus damaging William's credit.

"I proceeded to provide the correct information. Following this, Equifax proceeded to enter my correct SSN into the same incorrect old report and issue it out again and again."

Another Equifax customer signed up for their "credit alert" service to receive notifications of major activity or changes to their credit file, only to find that "[w]hile I received their advertisements regularly, I never received a single alert even when I generated several credit activities where I know the lender used Equifax."

What You Can Do

On April 13th of this year, Federal Trade Commission chairman Deborah Platt Majoras testified that "the Commission receives between 15,000 and 20,000 contacts a week from victims of identity theft and consumers who want to learn how to avoid becoming a victim."

While many options exist to protect consumers' data from scam artists, "phishers", and the like, what does one do when supposedly reputable credit agencies endanger their private information?

ConsumerAffairs.com's special report on understanding credit, Plastic Prison, offers some basic tips on dealing with credit bureaus. In addition, here are a few tactics to pursue when investigating cases of inaccurate information:

• Get the right phone numbers. If you purchase a product from the three major credit agencies, you will be given a special toll-free number that grants you "member access" to its site. Don't bother with the numbers they give out publicly. Use the member access numbers to call them at all times.

• Keep records of everything. Make copies of all documentation you send to credit bureaus. Send any documents via certified mail and request that the Post Office track it from delivery to receipt. Any faxes should be sent with transmission logs that verify the contents were sent properly. If you've purchased credit products from one of the three bureaus, save a copy of and/or print it out for future reference. Each report will have a number, and that number will be your only way to maintain your access to the "members only" part of any credit bureau's site.

• Contact the authorities. Your local and state police, the utility companies you do business with, and the local and state governments should be made aware the minute you believe your identity has been compromised. Document any and every instance where inaccurate information on your credit report has caused you financial or legal hardship.

• Keep your information secure! Don't give out your Social Security number unless you have to. Use specialized passwords when making any online transactions. Avoid using easily-obtainable information like your date of birth, your mother's maiden name, etc.

May 3, 2005
Polaris Industries is recalling selected Sportsman and Scrambler model ATVs because of a problem with the electronic control modules in some units.

Affected by the recall are the following models: Polaris 2004.5 Sportsman 500, 2005 Sportsman 400, Sportsman 500, Sportsman 600, Sportsman 700, and 2005 Scrambler 500.

Some 2004.5 and 2005 Model Year Sportsman and 2005 Model Year Scrambler 500 ATVs were assembled with possibly defective Electronic Control Modules (ECM) which may fail and overheat. If this were to occur, excessive heat could cause a fire, possibly resulting in serious injury or death.

Affected units can be verified by comparing the last six digits of the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) to the serial number range in bold type below. NOTE: Not all 2004.5 and 2005 vehicles are affected. Please review the affected unit table below.

Polaris has received 26 reports of the ECM overheating. No injuries have been reported.

Only select model year Polaris ATVs are part of this recall. The Sportsman ATV model and serial number identification decal is located on the right front side of the front radiator covering. The Scrambler 500 ATV model and serial number identification decal is located on top of the front cab cover. The VIN, or serial number is permanently stamped into the left frame rail behind the left front wheel of all Polaris ATVs.

Polaris dealers sold these ATVs nationwide from August 2004 through February 2005 for between $5,999 and $7,299.

Remedy: Free repair. Contact your Polaris ATV dealer to schedule an appointment for ECM replacement. Polaris has notified registered affected consumers directly about this recall.

Consumer Contact: Call Polaris at (800) 765-2747 between 8 a.m. and 12 midnight ET everyday, or log on to the companys Web site at www.polarisindustries.com.

The recall is being conducted in cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).