Current Events in November 2011

Bill, of Fort Collins, Colo., wants to remind consumers that there is a difference between a chain store and a franchise. As a Budget Blinds franchise owner, he responded to a number of recent complaints about service at various Budget Blinds locations.

“I think it is very important to understand that each Budget Blinds franchise is independently owned and operated,” Bill told ConsumerAffairs.com. “It appears to me that these complaints encompass around 10 franchisees out of nearly 1,000. Our local business has grown and flourished as a result of word of mouth, and we have never once had a major complaint and every non-major issue has been resolved to our customer’s satisfaction.”

Bill asks that readers be specific when complaining about a store, always noting its location. Even if it's a chain store, a highly specific complaint could help the company isolate management problems at certain stores.

“I personally apologize if you have been mistreated by a Budget Blinds owner but if you move to my city I would love the opportunity to prove to you that the vast majority of us will exceed your expectations,” Bill said.

That's fine, Bill, but one of the reasons consumers patronize franchises is that they expect the quality to be consistent from one outlet to another, just as a Big Mac at the McDonald's in Kileen is the same as the one in Swampscott.  It's not the consumer's responsibility to keep track of which franchise outlet is which -- it's the franchisor who's responsible for enforcing conformity. 

Banking advice

Dorothy, of Kingston Springs, Tenn., sounds like someone who has worked in the financial industry, but says she is just a Regions Bank customer who wants to set some other customers straight. She's responding to several consumers who complained Regions Bank hit them with overdraft fees, even though the charge that put them over was marked “pending.”

“Understand 'pending' means the bank knows about it,” Dorothy said. “If the bank knows about it and it isn't funds covered, that's hardly the banks fault. If you chose overdraft protection or not, at the time the bank knows about it they are either going to charge overdraft protection fee or NSF fee.”

Fair enough, but for many struggling consumers living close to the margin, it's a challenging balancing act to pay bills on time and not get caught short.

“Being put into position to juggle funds is sad but a fact of today's life for many and yes, if you can't pay the bank fees you generate then maybe going cash only with no banking might even be the best option,” Dorothy said. “I too have a problem with banks paying the largest first then bouncing the small items. But if the charge is 'pending,' the bank knows about it and you will be held responsible. It doesn't matter if it is Regions or any other bank.”

What does the contract say?

Eric, of Shertz, Tex., said he recently moved into a new home and contracted with ADT to provide a security system.

“Mort is the sales rep that had me sign a contract to put in the security system,” Eric told ConsumerAffairs.com. “I informed him that the system is for doors and windows. They installed the doors but not the windows. I was told they would come back but never did. I have been moved in for three weeks now and have attempted to call Mort but he would never return my calls. I have now called his boss Friday, who states I am legallly bound to my contract and they have billed me and stated I will need to give more money to continue the window installation. Mort had lied to his boss when I called and said he never informed me that the window installation was included.”

Well, there seems to be a simple way to resolve this. Eric should look at what his contract states. Does it include window installation? If not, then he may be out of luck. Keep in mind, in case of a dispute it will be the contract that ultimately prevails. That's why consumers, before signing, should make sure it contains everything the salesman has promised.

Why car title loans are a bad idea

A cousin of the payday loan is the car title loan. That's where the lender holds the title to your vehicle for collateral on your loan. Latrisa, of Albany, Ga., reminds us of why car title loans are a bad idea.

“I had to pawn my car and before I could make the payment on my car, they came and picked my car up from my job,” Latrisa said. “I had been in contact with them letting them know that I had the money to get my car. When I called to let them know I was coming to pick my car up, they informed me over the phone my car was sold.”

Keep in mind, your car may be worth $2000 or more and you are only borrowing $500. The lender has every reason to hope you default and you shouldn't expect them to cut you any slack.

A study involving twins shows new evidence that on-the-job exposure to chemical solvents raises the risk of Parkinson's disease.

Researchers analyzed the occupational histories of twins in which one twin developed the neurodegenerative disorder, and assessed that twin's likelihood of exposure to six chemicals previously linked to Parkinson's.

Of the six chemicals investigated, researchers concluded that two common chemical solvents, trichloroethylene (TCE) and perchloroethylene (PERC), are significantly linked to development of this disease.

Parkinson's disease is a movement disorder caused by the loss of brain cells that produce a molecule called dopamine. The primary symptoms of Parkinson's are tremor, stiffness, slowed movement and impaired balance, and as these symptoms progress, patients may also develop difficulty walking, speaking or completing other activities of daily living.

"The potential importance is great, since both solvents persist in the environment and are commonly used," said Samuel Goldman, M.D., M.P.H., at the Parkinson's Institute in Sunnyvale, Calif. "Parkinson's was sixfold more common in twins exposed to TCE, and ninefold more common in twins exposed to TCE or PERC."

Tenfold increase

There was also a trend toward a tenfold increase in Parkinson’s disease in twins exposed to PERC alone.

Genes play a role in Parkinson’s disease, but fewer than 10 percent of cases are due to a single gene mutation, and not all people with these mutations develop Parkinson’s, suggesting that environmental factors also contribute to the likelihood of developing the disease.

The latest study, supported in part by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), a part of the National Institutes of Health, appears in the Nov. 14, 2011 issue of Annals of Neurology.

The researchers collected the histories of 99 pairs of twins in which one of the pair developed Parkinson’s and the other twin did not. Since twins are so genetically similar, twin studies are especially useful in identifying environmental influences in disease. Of the 99 pairs, half were genetically identical twins, and half were fraternal twins.

The study team assessed the twins' lifetime work and hobby activities, specifically inquiring about occupational tasks such as electrical work, industrial machinery repair, and dry cleaning, which would potentially expose people to chemicals previously linked to Parkinson's.

The researchers also collected information on head injuries, which are suspected to increase Parkinson’s risk, and smoking history, which is reported to decrease Parkinson’s risk.

Expert evaluators, unaware of which study subjects had Parkinson's, reviewed this information and calculated lifelong exposure to six chemicals: TCE, PERC, carbon tetrachloride, n-hexane, xylene and toluene. Of these, TCE and PERC posed a notable risk for developing Parkinson's.

In this study researchers looked only at occupational chemical exposure, and the association with job categories tended toward significance only for the industrial machinery repairer and industrial worker categories. However, the chemicals evaluated here are found outside industrial settings as well.

PERC is the leading chemical used in garment dry cleaning. TCE is the most frequently reported organic groundwater contaminant, was once used as general anesthetic and coffee decaffeinating agent, and is still used widely as a metal degreasing agent.

You normally think of the U.S. Agriculture Department (USDA) as paying subsidies to corn farmers or inspecting chickens.  But the department is funding something many consider even more basic -- broadband access for rural areas.

USDA is releasing funding for telephone utilities to build, expand and improve broadband in their rural service territories across 15 states. The announcement was made by USDA Rural Utilities Service Deputy Administrator Jessica Zufolo during an address at the annual meeting of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners in St. Louis.

"Today's funding will provide residents of these rural communities with high speed internet connections to improve healthcare and educational opportunities and connect to global markets," Vilsack said. "In addition to providing much needed services to rural businesses and residents, these investments will increase jobs, not just in the near term, but through expanded opportunities in rural areas."

For example, in Minnesota, Rural Development Broadband Loan Program funds will be used to extend Paul Bunyan Rural Telephone Cooperative's existing Fiber-To-The-Home (FTTH) network to serve rural communities in North Central Minnesota.

This project will offer advanced telecommunications services to over 45,710 households and businesses. Paul Bunyan has been operating since 1952 and has been a telecommunications borrower with the Rural Utilities Service since 1953.

In North Dakota, Rural Development funds will be used to expand Polar Communications Mutual Aid Corporation's Fiber-to-the-Premises (FTTP) broadband system throughout eighteen exchanges. The upgraded system will help meet current and future requirements for delivery of voice, video and high speed data to subscribers. 

In Indiana, Perry-Spencer Rural Telephone Cooperative Inc., (PSC) provides telecommunications services to 5,711 subscribers over approximately 1,148 square miles. This loan will enable PSC to start the process of designing and building FTTP broadband services across its service area. 

The following list of awardees will receive $410.7 million in funding, contingent upon the recipient meeting the terms of the agreement with USDA.

Colorado

• Eastern Slope Rural Telephone Association, Inc.--$18,725,000 will be used to upgrade the existing fiber-to-the-node (FTTN) network, capable of providing modern broadband services to subscribers in 10 exchanges.

Idaho and Utah

• Albion Telephone Company--$17,075,000 in loan funds will be used to install 453 miles of buried fiber optic cables throughout the proposed FTTP system, providing nearly 60 percent of subscribers with FTTP.

Illinois

• McNabb Telephone Company--$3,700,000 in loan funds will be used to make system improvements, including constructing new FTTP facilities. A total of 115 miles of buried fiber optic cable will be deployed to improve service to subscribers.
• Shawnee Telephone Company--$30,286,000 in loan funds will be used to construct FTTP facilities, allowing Shawnee to provide voice and data services at speeds of up to 100 Mbps to both residences and businesses.
• McDonough Telephone Cooperative, Inc.--$15,728,000 in funds will be used to upgrade the rural areas with FTTH technology. Approximately 766 miles of buried fiber cable will be deployed to provide over half of the subscribers with access to improved broadband service. McDonough has been serving its rural subscribers for over 60 years.

Indiana

• Perry-Spencer Rural Telephone Cooperative, Inc.--$29,139,000 in loan funds have been awarded to Perry-Spencer Rural Telephone Cooperative Inc., (PSC) which provides telecommunications services to nearly 6,000 subscribers over approximately 1,150 square miles in southern Indiana. This loan will enable PSC to start the process of designing and building FTTP to enhance broadband services across the service area.

Iowa

• Mediapolis Telephone Company--$13,401,000 in loan funds will be used to make system upgrades to the transport system and the network architecture from the existing copper Digital Subscriber Lines (DSL) to FTTP broadband systems.
• Griswold Cooperative Telephone Company--$12,747,000 in loan funds will be used to complete a system-wide FTTP network, enhancing broadband service to all subscribers.
• La Porte City Telephone Company--$9,867,000 in loan funds will be used to make system improvements, including installation of a FTTP broadband network that will serve all of the borrower's subscribers. A total of 297 miles of buried fiber optic cable will be deployed, enabling downstream data rates of up to 20 Mbps.

Kansas

• The S & T Telephone Cooperative Association--$29,814,000 will be used to implement a full FTTH design to allow the migration to 10-20 Mbps broadband speeds to all subscribers and to provide IPTV in the near future.

Minnesota

• Paul Bunyan Rural Telephone Cooperative--$19,749,000 in Rural Development Broadband Loan Program funds will be used to extend Paul Bunyan's existing FTTH network to serve the exchanges of Park Rapids Rural and Trout Lake in North Central Minnesota. With this extension of their network, Paul Bunyan will be able to provide advanced telecommunications services to over 45,710 establishments (households and businesses) across all service areas. Paul Bunyan has been operating since 1952 and has been a telecommunications borrower with the Rural Utilities Service since 1953.

New Mexico

• Roosevelt County Telephone Cooperative, Inc.--$12,358,000 will be used to deploy new equipment and install FTTP equipment to enhance the broadband network.

North Dakota

• BEK Communications Cooperative--$26,746,000 in loan funds will be used to expand a FTTH broadband system. Upon completion of this RUS-funded project, 100 percent of BEK's subscribers will be served by fiber.
• SRT Communications, Inc.--$24,832,000 in loan funds will be used to install 2,143 miles of buried fiber optic cable and related equipment throughout the proposed FTTP system. The FTTP system will be constructed in areas outside of towns in twelve of the borrower's twenty-six exchanges. The service areas in the towns will continue to be offered DSL at speeds of at least 55 Mbps with its relatively new copper plant.
• Polar Communications Mutual Aid Corporation--$32,939,000 in loan funds will be used to expand the Borrower's FTTP broadband system throughout the borrower's eighteen exchanges. The upgraded system will help meet current and future requirements for delivery of voice, video and high speed data to subscribers. Upon completion of this RUS-funded project, 100 percent of Polar's subscribers will be served with broadband via various technologies.

Oklahoma

• Terral Telephone Company--$4,855,000 in loan funds will be used to convert the existing copper network to a FTTH system, and connect new subscribers. The proposed FTTH deployment includes construction of over 62 miles of fiber plant in and around Terral, and the replacement of the existing softswitch and power plant. This FTTH deployment will create nine jobs and save seven jobs.

South Carolina

• Sandhill Telephone Cooperative, Inc.--$5,930,000 will be used to provide for system improvements, including purchase of a new switch.

Tennessee

• North Central Telephone Cooperative Corporation--$27,069,000 will be used to upgrade portions of North Central's outside plant and network infrastructure by deploying a FTTP network.

Washington

• Inland Telephone Company--$24,823,000 in loan funds will be used to expand Inland's FTTP broadband system and connect new subscribers.
• The Toledo Telephone Co., Inc.--$18,091,000 in loan funds will be used to install 292 miles of buried fiber optic cables and related equipment throughout the proposed FTTP system, offering enhanced service to all Toledo subscribers.

Wisconsin

• Union Telephone Company--$13,308,000 in loan funds will enable Union to deploy approximately 336 miles of fiber, which will provide approximately 60 percent of Union's subscribers with access to improved broadband services.
• Marquette-Adams Telephone Cooperative, Inc.--$19,781,000 Marquette-Adams will use loan funds to complete a system-wide FTTP network, including over 370 miles of new or modified buried fiber, providing enhanced broadband service to all subscribers.

Complaints to ConsumerAffairs.com about rental car companies appear to be on the rise. Customers complain of hidden fees and charges for damage to vehicles discovered long after they were turned in.

Despite that, J.D. Power and Associates reports customer satisfaction with rental cars has increased for a second straight year. They obviously didn't talk with Dianne, of Paradise, Calif.

“I rented a jeep from the Cancun Airport,” Dianne told ConsumerAffairs.com. “The car was returned within 10 days and I was charged for 30 days. When I asked Hertz for the copy of the final contract with the signed return date, they lost the copy. I was asked to sign a black bank slip when I rented the car. And the amount was filled in later with forged amount of the final bill. I have received no recourse.”

ACE is No. 1

To be fair, Hetz did not top the J.D. Power rankings for rental car customer satisfaction. ACE Rent-A-Car did. A check of our files show that ACE, indeed, draws very few consumer complaints – five in the last two years.

ACE Rent A Car ranked highest in J.D. Power's customer satisfaction among rental car companies for the first time with a score of 793, performing particularly well in the shuttle bus/van and costs and fees factors. This is also the first time the Indiana-based independent rental car company appears in the study rankings.

Enterprise was second in the rankings with 787, performing particularly well in the leisure/personal customer segment. National ranks third with 768.

"Rental car companies continue to build upon the improvements made in 2010 and are bouncing back from the lower satisfaction levels reported in 2008 and 2009," said Stuart Greif, vice president of the travel practice at J.D. Power and Associates. "As positive as this increase in satisfaction is, there remains ample opportunity for rental car companies to further delight their customers in the future, particularly in leveraging technology."

Room for improvement

According to Greif, there are opportunities for rental car companies to enhance the rental car experience, save customers time, better inform and set customer expectations and create efficiencies for rental car company operations. These include integrating customers' mobile devices within rental cars for hands-free communication, music or navigation; digitally measuring gas tank levels for more accurate charges; communicating mileage and gas information digitally from the vehicle as customers return cars; and providing real-time estimates of shuttle van or bus arrival times to customers.

Another area apparently not explored by J.D. Power is what rental car companies tell their customers the charge will be and what it actually ends up being. ConsumerAffairs.com has heard from many consumers who say they dropped off vehicles after filling the gas tank, only to later find their credit cards have been charged for a “refueling fee.”

Others, who say they declined the rental company's expensive insurance, report they were assessed steep charges to repair damage found after they turned in the vehicle. Still others complain of getting misinformation about costs from company personnel behind the counter.

Advice for consumers

J.D. Power gently suggests customers could do a better job of understanding how the system works. It offers these tips for improving the car rental experience:

• If a kiosk is available, use it instead of waiting in line at the counter. While very few customers currently use kiosks, those who do tend to be more satisfied with the experience overall.
• Understand the different options offered—such as insurance and fuel—before reserving or picking up a vehicle.
• Reserve a navigation system in advance if necessary and leverage smartphones if you are traveling with someone who can help you navigate.
• Bring a Bluetooth or other wireless hands-free device so you can use your phone safely while driving.
• If a problem with the rental car experience occurs, be sure to report it to the company. Many customers never report their problems, so the company doesn't have the opportunity to resolve them.

With their photos of President Obama and the American flag, Grant Connect's ads were convincing in their claim that everyday Americans could reap millions of dollars in free government grants.

All it took was a small charge to the consumer's credit card and the invaluable, can't-miss, sure-thing information would be on its way.

The Federal Trade Commission yesterday won a $29.8 million judgment against the remaining defendants behind the deceptive scheme.  An earlier order slapped a similar settlement on other defendants. 

The court's order also permanently bans the defendants from promoting a variety of products and services similar to those they deceptively pitched to consumers around the country.

The FTC charged the defendants with deceiving consumers by making misleading and unsubstantiated claims about bogus products and services, including one that supposedly would help them get free government grants.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada found that the defendants marketed their grant products, including Grant Connect, using pictures of President Obama and the American flag to bolster the impression that billions of dollars in free government grants were available quickly and easily for personal needs.

Other fine products

The court also found that the defendants:

1) deceptively marketed dietary supplements using claims unsupported by scientific research;

2) failed to adequately disclose that their credit offers were merely memberships to a shopping club;

3) made unsupported claims that consumers could earn thousands of dollars per month with a work-from-home business opportunity;

4) failed to adequately disclose that consumers who bought their products or services would be enrolled in continuity plans with significant monthly fees, often for a variety of unrelated products;

5) used fake testimonials to promote their products; and

6) debited consumers' bank accounts on a recurring basis without obtaining consumers' permission.

The latest court order announced today bans the remaining defendants from marketing or selling:

• grant-related products and services;
• credit-related products;
• work-from-home and business opportunities; and
• dietary supplements and nutraceuticals.

It also bans the defendants from using:

• continuity programs and negative option marketing, in which consumers have to opt out of receiving products to prevent being charged on a recurring basis;
• testimonials in connection with any product or service; and
• preauthorized electronic fund transfers that charge consumers' debit accounts.

The court order announced today grants the FTC's motion for summary judgment against defendants Kyle Kimoto; Michael Henriksen; Steven R. Henriksen; Tasha Jn Paul; Rachel A. Cook; James J. Gray; Randy D. O'Connell; Acai, Inc.; Allclear Communications, Inc.; Consolidated Merchant Solutions, LLC; Dragon Group, Inc.; Elite Benefits, Inc.; Global Fulfillment, Inc.; Global Gold, Inc.; Global Gold Limited; Grant Connect, LLC; Healthy Allure, Inc.; Horizon Holdings, LLC; MSC Online, Inc.; O'Connell Gray, LLC; OS Marketing Group, LLC; Paid To Process, Inc.; Premier Plus Member, Inc.; Total Health, Inc.; and Vcomm, Inc.

Earlier this year, the FTC settled similar charges against several other defendants in the case. Under those settlements, Juliette Kimoto, Johnnie Smith, and four companies Kimoto owned were barred from marketing certain products and services similar to those that they allegedly offered to consumers. The settlements also imposed a $29.8 million judgment against them that was partially suspended. 

The Fiat 500 is certainly an odd-looking little car, but that's OK.  Lots of other cars are kind of weird-looking today.  But just how well Fiat's return to the U.S. after a 30-year absence is going ... well, that's a little hard to judge just now. 

Fiat continues to insist that things are just purring along but reports from auto industry insiders might make one wonder about that.  The United auto Workers Union says Chrysler has suspended production of the 1.4-liter engine that powers the U.S. version of the 500.

Automotive News reported that Fiat has a 184-day supply of the Fiat 500 coupes and cabrios but the trade paper said a Chrysler spokesman disputed that and said the company had a 140-day supply at the end of October and was “very pleased” with sales progress to date.

Reports say some dealers have sold as few as 49 cars since opening in March while others have sold as many as 370.  Sales are said to be strongest in California and the Southeast, and weakest in the Midwest.

CEO Sergio Marchionne had initially predicted annual sales of the Fiat 500 in North America of 50,000 units but through October, Fiat sold just 15,826 units of the 500 in the United States, Automotive News said.

Abarth debut

Fiat is hoping that this week’s unveiling of the Fiat 500 Abarth at the Los Angeles auto show will arouse new passions in potential Fiat owners.  The Abarth features a turbocharged 160-hp version of the 1.4-liter.

Southern Californians can get the first look at the Abarth at the 2011 Los Angeles Auto Show  November 18-27.

The 500 Abarth will be powered by a turbocharged 1.4-liter engine and will, as you’d expect, feature a stiffened suspension and upgraded brakes, FiatOwner.org reported. Exact U.S. specs aren’t yet known but the European version churns out 135 horsepower with 221 pound-feet or torque — a massive amount of torque for such a small car.

Still waiting for your Facebook page to open?  You must be on one of those old slow networks -- you know, like the Internet.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today takes the wraps off a new data network that is to the existing Internet as plain old Elmer's glue is to the Super Super Glue immortalized by Danny DeVito in "Matilda."

The new network is at least ten times faster than commercial Internet providers. It connects thousands of researchers using three of the world’s top supercomputing centers in California, Illinois and Tennessee. 

The new network is being officially turned on today in Seattle at the  opening of SC11, the premier international conference on high performance computing, networking, storage and analysis.

“With the establishment of this high speed network, the United States is once again blazing a path for the future of Internet innovations,” said Secretary of Energy Steven Chu. “Initially, this breakthrough will make sharing information between our labs much more efficient and pave the way for new discoveries, but it also holds the potential to change and improve our lives much like the original commercialization of the Internet did in the mid-90s.”

The project, known as the Advanced Networking Initiative (ANI), was funded with $62 million from the 2009 economic stimulus law and is intended for research use, but could lead to widespread commercial use of similar technology.

100 Gbps

The network now delivers data at 100 Gigabits per second (Gbps), making it one of the fastest systems in the world. It is the first step in the nationwide upgrade to the DOE’s existing Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) and will serve as a pilot for future deployment of 100 Gbps Ethernet in research and commercial networks.

The initiative plans to accelerate by several years the commercialization of 100 Gbps networking technologies and uses new optical technology to reduce the number of routers used, as well as the associated equipment and maintenance costs.

The World Wide Web has its origins with high-energy physicists at CERN who needed a better, faster way to share their data. Physicists in the United States, including Energy Department laboratories like Fermilab and the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, were also among the earliest pioneers.

If this network drives innovation that finds its way into widespread commercial use, it will be an example of history repeating itself.  The need to share scientific data and linking computer networks together will likely drive the next generation of high speed Internet connection technology.

What's 100 Gbps?

While the technology is advancing rapidly, the fastest commercial Internet providers use fiberoptic cables that enable a network to deliver about 10 gigabits per second. But that capacity must be split up among many consumers in the area, so a residential consumer might actually experience high speed Internet service in the range of 10 megabits per second.

A megabit is one thousandth of a gigabit, so that's .01 gbps.

In some areas, consumers on a more expensive service plan might get roughly .05 gbps. A 3G cell phone provides roughly 2Mbps for downloading data.  A 100 Gbps network connection is therefore able to receive data about 50,000 times faster than your iPhone.

Here's another way to look at it: In the roughly one hour it takes a typical home Internet connection to download an HD movie, the Department's network could download, for example, 20 years of data from the Hubble space telescope.

At that speed, even Facebook pages might actually render in just a few seconds.

As you may have heard, some retailers are pushing the boundaries of “Black Friday,” the kick-off to the holiday shopping season, back into Thanksgiving Day itself.

Traditionally, stores opened their doors at 5 a.m. or so Friday morning to the crowds of consumers lined up for advertised “door buster” specials. But in recent years many big box retailers have opened their doors earlier than their advertised opening times, causing consumers to begin arriving even earlier, often spending the night in the parking lot.

Is all of this getting out of hand? Apparently some Target employees think so. Target, along with Best Buy, Macy's, and Kohls will be opening at midnight on Friday morning.

Target employees revolt

Anthony Hardwick, an Omaha, Neb. Target employee, has started an online petition against the early opening and has collected nearly 37,000 signatures, he says. Hardwick told reporters he is scheduled for a 10-hour shift that day.

Retail employees might be forgiven for dreading an early start to Black Friday, when it can be said they could literally be risking their lives. On Black Friday 2008, a 34-year old part-time clerk at a Long Island, N.Y., Walmart was trampeled to death by a crowd he was trying to contain as they ripped doors off their hinges and rushed into the store. Walmart was later fined $7,000 for the death.

While Black Friday shopping is a tradition for many consumers, are there really that many savings? While big box retailers routinely advertise low prices on laptop computers, flat screen TVs, and other expensive items, stores usually only have a few of these items in stock. They go to the customers willing to stand the longest outside the door and then fight their way to the counter in the opening minutes.

Consumer complaints

Last year, Vicki, of Gallup, N.M., said she and her husband went to Walmart at 6:30 a.m. on Black Friday to buy a new flat screen TV.

“Forty-eight hours earlier I called and talked to the electronics department and was told that we would be given a voucher,” Vicki reported last year. “When we got there the TVs were sold out and the vouchers were never given out.”

That elicited this response from another Black Friday shopper, Anthony, of Pembrook Pines, Fla.

“That is what the spectacle of Black Friday is about,” Anthony told ConsumerAffairs.com. “Everyone lines up for doorbusters, and the ads themselves say there are extremely limited quantities! I have been 'BF'ing' for over seven years, and everyone I've run into always knows the deal: first come, first served, and if you want to guarantee a purchase, be among the first five in line.”

Adrenaline rush

In Anthony's view, Black Friday is an adventurous adrenaline rush in which you may or may not capture the object of your desire. The thrill of the pursuit is as important as any bargain. Less adventurous consumers should probably take that into consideration.

After all, Black Friday is followed by “Cyber Monday,” when online retailers offer bargains to those who shop online. While consumers aren't guaranteed of getting every low-priced item they want, they can at least shop in the comfort of their home, and not risk life and limb in the aisles of a store in the middle of the night.

Oregon businesses and organizations got telemarketing calls from The Publishing Group claiming it was raising money for military veterans, first responders and drug abuse prevention programs. Oregon Attorney General John Kroger says the company actually provided no benefit to those groups.

The company tried to sell advertising in its publications, telling businesses that if they bought an ad, they would be helping veterans or supporting police and firefighter organizations. It turns out, Kroger says, the company has no publications but does operate a number of websites.

"Raising money by falsely claiming to help veterans is unconscionable," Kroger said.

The Publishing Group, Inc., based in North Carolina, agreed to pay $6,000 and faces significantly higher fines if it violates the agreement filed in Multnomah County, Ore., Circuit Court.

Calls and inquiries about the fundraiser triggered an investigation by the Oregon Department of Justice's Charitable Activities Section. Kroger said the probe determined that The Publishing Group falsely claimed that advertising purchases would benefit local volunteer fire departments, a children's safety "stop drop and roll" program, drug abuse prevention programs, law enforcement, fire, and emergency services.

The company also sold online ads based on the false representation one of its websites is "an information exchange for professional law enforcement agencies" and "disseminates useful and educational information pertaining to all phases of police protection."

In fact, says Kroger, the company has no affiliation with any public safety groups or similar charitable organizations.

Purchasing bedding sounds like a simple task. You pick out the mattress you want and either take it with you or have it delivered. But Rose, of Petaluma, Calif., finds it a bit more frustrating.

“I ordered a firm mattress from Sears,” Rose told ConsumerAffairs.com. “They delivered a plush mattress. I called and after two hours of being transferred, put on hold, and disconnected they said they would exchange it for a firm one. About a week later, they again tried to deliver the same incorrect mattress. I refused the delivery and called back.

It was then Rose said she learned the mattress she wanted was out of stock. She was offered a more expensive one at at 20 percent discount and free delivery.

“I grudgingly accepted their offer,” Rose said. “A few days later, when reviewing my credit card statements, I saw that they are charging me the full price of the more expensive mattress. When I called to complain, they told me that they could not offer me free delivery, so that would cost an extra $90. I cancelled the order, and will find a mattress somewhere else.”

It's not just mattress purchases that draw these kinds of complaints. Often consumers purchasing other types of furniture, at a variety of stores, run into similar problems.

Here today, gone tomorrow

Leslie, of Lake Charles, La., says she was enrolled in an LA Weight Loss Center program that entitled her to meals in the form of energy bars. She says her husband usually picked up her food for her.

“Then one day he went to pick some up and the office had closed and reopened to a Medifast clinic, with all the same workers, Leslie said. “No notice, no nothing. He was given a number to call regarding the boxes of bars still owed to me. In total I am owed 67 boxes of bars at $23 per box valued at $1541.00. I've called the number and spoken with a receptionist numerous times. Always being promised a call back but never receiving one. My local office, now Medifast, states that they are completely out of the equation and that I am at the mercy of whomever took over the files. Any help anyone can give me would be greatly appreciated.”

LA Weight Loss Centers are individually franchised businesses, so it sounds like Leslie's LA Weight Loss Center sold out to a company that changed it to Medifast Clinic. If that's the case, it's a real question who owes Leslie some food or a refund. To sort it all out we suggest she contact her state attorney general's office. In the past, some states have taken action against health clubs that suddenly closed their doors after members had already paid in advance. This sounds like a similar situation.

Not who you think it is

Robert, of Roseville, Minn., was upset when he received a mailing telling him “The manufacturer's warranty for your KitchenAid Dishwasher has expired. Act now to get an incredible price on a KitchenAid Extended Service Plan!"

“They stated that this was sent in error but refused to send anything in writing verifying the this mailing was incorrect. If the unit fails will they make a mistake again and say I have no warranty,” Robert asked?

It's very likely Robert was not dealing with KitchenAid, but a third party outfit that markets extended service plans. Whatever reason they declined to sell him an extended contract on his dishwasher, he's probably better off.

Two major banks have agreed to pay millions of dollars to the National Credit Union Association (NCUA) to help cover the losses of five failed wholesale credit unions. Citigroup has agreed to pay NCUA $20.5 million and Deutsche Bank Securities agreed to pay $145 million. Neither bank admitted guilt.

NCUA is the first regulatory agency to recover losses on behalf of failed financial institutions that resulted from investments in these securities. NCUA will use the net proceeds from this settlement to reduce assessments being charged to credit unions to pay for the losses

“Citigroup is among the first major underwriters to come forward with a settlement proposal, and we appreciate their efforts to resolve potential claims so that we can avoid the expense and delay of litigation,” said NCUA Board Chairman Debbie Matz. “NCUA to date has received a total of $165.5 million in settlement proceeds. ... NCUA will continue to fulfill our statutory responsibility to secure maximum recoveries for credit unions and ensure that consumers remain protected.”

Losses from wholesale credit union failures are paid from the Temporary Corporate Credit Union Stabilization Fund. Expenditures from this fund must be repaid through assessments against all federally insured credit unions. Thus, recoveries such as this settlement reduce the amount of future assessments on credit unions.

$3.3 billion in losses

Since 2009, NCUA has assessed credit unions $3.3 billion to pay for losses associated with the five corporate credit union failures. Given the current settlement proceeds, projections for remaining assessments range between $1.8 billion and $6.1 billion that must be paid by 2021.

Corporate credit unions are wholesale credit unions that provide services to retail credit unions, which in turn serve consumers. Consumer credit unions rely on corporate credit unions for services such as check clearing, electronic payments and investments.

In addition to this settlement, NCUA has taken other actions to mitigate losses to credit unions from the five corporate failures. Among the actions taken:

• After placing those five corporate credit unions into liquidation, NCUA re-securitized the problematic mortgage-backed securities and sold them in the marketplace with a government-backed guarantee. This action garnered approximately $28.3 billion in proceeds.

• NCUA filed four lawsuits against other securities firms alleging violations of federal and state securities laws and misrepresentations in the sale of hundreds of securities.

• NCUA established a temporary share guarantee for deposits at corporate credit unions.

• NCUA established bridge corporate credit unions in conservatorship to ensure the services provided to consumer credit unions continued during the resolution and transition period.

• NCUA successfully worked with members of the bridges to transition critical corporate credit union services to new entities.

The U. S. Department of Transportation (DOT) today fined American Eagle Airlines $900,000 for lengthy tarmac delays that took place at Chicago O’Hare International Airport on May 29, 2011. 

This is the first fine for a violation of the department’s rule, which took effect in April 2010, setting a three-hour limit for tarmac delays on domestic flights.  It also represents the largest penalty to be paid by an airline in a consumer protection case not involving civil rights violations.

“We put the tarmac rule in place to protect passengers, and we take any violation very seriously,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.  “We will work to ensure that airlines and airports coordinate their resources and plans to avoid keeping passengers delayed on the tarmac.” 

Under DOT rules, U.S. airlines operating aircraft with 30 or more passenger seats are prohibited from allowing their domestic flights to remain on the tarmac for more than three hours at large-, medium-, small- and non-hub U.S. airports without giving passengers an opportunity to deplane. 

Exceptions to the time limits are allowed only for safety, security or air traffic control-related reasons.   The rules require carriers to include the three-hour provision in their tarmac delay contingency plan commitments to passengers.

15 flights

On May 29, 2011, American Eagle had tarmac delays of more than three hours on 15 flights arriving at O’Hare.  Those 15 flights had tarmac delays of up to 225 minutes, which was 45 minutes beyond the limit. 

A total of 608 passengers were aboard the affected flights.  An investigation by DOT’s Aviation Enforcement Office concluded that while the airline had a procedure in place to bring passengers subject to a tarmac delay back to the gate, the carrier was late in implementing its procedure, resulting in violations of the rule.

Under the consent order, which reflects a settlement by DOT’s Aviation Enforcement Office with the carrier, American Eagle is ordered to cease and desist from future violations of the tarmac delay rule and is assessed a $900,000 civil penalty. 

A total of $650,000 must be paid within 30 days, and up to $250,000 can be credited for refunds, vouchers, and frequent flyer mile awards provided to the passengers on the 15 flights on May 29, as well as to passengers on future flights that experience lengthy tarmac delays of less than three hours.

Big improvement

Between May 2010 and April 2011,  the first 12 months after the three-hour limit was in effect, the larger U.S. airlines required to file tarmac delays reported 20 tarmac delays of more than three hours, none of which was more than four hours long.  In contrast, during the 12 months before the rule took effect, these carriers had 693 tarmac delays of more than three hours, and 105 of the delays were longer than four hours.

Under an expansion of the tarmac delay rule that took effect Aug. 23, 2011, international flights at covered U.S. airports are now prohibited from remaining on the tarmac for more than four hours without permitting passengers the opportunity to deplane, subject to the same safety, security and air traffic control-related exceptions as the rule for domestic flights.

Bidding by airlines for the authority to take off and land at New York LaGuardia and Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport begins today, under the terms of a decision by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) that will allow Delta Air Lines, Inc. and US Airways, Inc. to exchange some of their operating authorities at the two airports.

On Oct. 7, DOT approved a request by the carriers under which Delta would trade 42 daily slot pairs at Reagan National for 132 US Airways daily slot pairs at LaGuardia. 

The Department placed a number of conditions on the trade designed to promote competition and protect consumers, including a requirement that the carriers divest themselves of eight pairs of daily slots at Reagan National and 16 pairs at LaGuardia. A “slot” refers to a carrier’s authority to take off or land at an airport where flight operations are limited by the Federal Aviation Administration.  A slot pair, or two slots, is required for a takeoff and landing.

“The conditions we placed on the slot transfer, including the auction, will help airlines with little or no service at LaGuardia and Reagan National gain a competitive foothold at these airports,” U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said. 

Only carriers operating less than five percent of the slots at LaGuardia or Reagan National, either with their own aircraft or through a code-sharing agreement, will be eligible to bid for the divested slots at that airport.  In order to ensure that a purchaser will be able to provide meaningful new competition, all eight slot pairs at Reagan National will be sold in a single bundle, and the 16 pairs at LaGuardia will be sold in two bundles of eight slot pairs each.

You think retailers are doing you a favor be reinstating layaway programs?  Senator Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) doesn't think so.

Schumer says fees associated with holiday shopping layaway programs  can exceed even the highest interest rates charged by credit card companies.

Citing the prospect of layaway fees that are the equivalent of an 81% credit card APR for a $100 purchase, Schumer called on the Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA) and the National Retail Federation (NRF) to work with member stores to clearly and prominently display the sky-high interest rate equivalent of the fees these programs charge so that consumers are better informed about the total price they’re paying.

“These layaway programs are nothing more than hideaways for sky-high interest rates that consumers would never tolerate with a credit card,” said Schumer. “The holiday season is supposed to be about giving and not taking, but these layaway programs are taking advantage of people and charging them outrageous interest rates, under the guise of making it easier and more affordable to shop.”

Christmas layaway programs allow shoppers to enter into a payment plan with stores in order to make holiday purchases by making an initial down payment and paying a service fee, then paying the rest of the bill over a period of time, picking up the item when the bill is paid in full.

These programs, however, charge fees that when calculated as an interest rate, would far exceed even the highest rates charged by credit card companies – and in many cases would violate state usury laws, Schumer said.

At Toys ‘R’ Us for example, consumers will pay the equivalent of at least an 81% annual percentage rate (APR) for a $100 purchase they put on layaway today, the New York Democrat charged. Because stores refer to these charges as ‘fees’ instead of interest rates, it is difficult for consumers to compare the effective cost of layaway programs to the cost of using a credit card.

The national average APR for a credit card in the United States is currently 14.99%, according to Creditcards.com. The highest average APR for those with bad credit is 24.96%. Layaway programs almost always end up costing consumers far more than that, Schumer charged.

To add insult to injury, when a customer wants to cancel a layaway purchase, retailers often do not refund service fees and also charge additional cancellation fees of $10 or more, Schumer said.

FTC action possible

Schumer said that these "sky-high fees" should be prominently disclosed in their APR equivalent so consumers can easily determine the most cost-effective method of making large purchases.

Schumer also made clear if retailers fail to act, he would ask the Federal Trade Commission to look into whether the programs are deceptive and misleading.

Schumer provided a breakdown of the layaway programs being introduced at three major retailers in the United States and what the equivalent APR would be for three popular gift purchases this year:

Walmart:The layaway program offered by Walmart requires a $5 service fee for a payment plan, a 10% down payment, and requires final payment and pickup by December 16. Walmart also has a layaway cancellation fee of $10.

·      A shopper who purchases a $69 Let’s Rock Elmo doll today will pay fees equivalent to interest payments for a credit card with a 105% APR

·      A shopper who purchases a $99 Leapfrog Leap Pad today will pay fees equivalent to interest payments for a credit card with a 71% APR

·      A shopper who purchases a $199 NOOK Color today will pay fees equivalent to interest payments for a credit card with a 34% APR

Sears: The layaway program offered by Sears requires a $5 service fee, 20% or $20 down payment (whichever is higher), and requires final payment by Christmas. Sears also has a cancellation fee of $15.

·      A shopper who purchases a $69 Let’s Rock Elmo doll today at Sears will pay fees equivalent to interest payments for a credit card with a 136% APR

·      A shopper who purchases a $99 Leapfrog Leap Pad today at Sears will pay fees equivalent to interest payments for a credit card with a 81% APR

·      A shopper who purchases a $199 NOOK Color today at Sears will pay fees equivalent to interest payments for a credit card with a 39% APR

Toys ‘R’ Us: The layaway program offered by Toys ‘R’ Us requires a $5 service fee, a 20% down payment, and requires final payment/pickup by Christmas. Toys ‘R’ Us also has a cancellation fee of $10.

·      A shopper who purchases a $69 Let’s Rock Elmo doll today at Toys ‘R’ Us will pay fees equivalent to interest payments for a credit card with a 120% APR

·      A shopper who purchases a $99 Leapfrog Leap Pad today at Toys ‘R’ Us will pay fees equivalent to interest payments for a credit card with a 81% APR

·      A shopper who purchases a $199 NOOK Color at Toys ‘R’ Us will pay fees equivalent to interest payments for a credit card with a 39% APR

"A responsibility" 

“Retailers have a responsibility to be forthright about the fees associated with layaway and should prominently display them in terms the consumer understands, so they can make informed decisions about the best way to pay for holiday shopping this year,” Schumer said.

In his letter to retailers, Schumer called on the major retail associations to work with their member stores to ensure that they prominently display the APR equivalent of the fees at the point of sale and provide consumers with comparisons.

Schumer noted if they don’t voluntarily implement such a program, he would ask the FTC to open an investigation into whether the fee structure is deceptive and misleading.  Schumer said that these layaway programs often deceive consumers by referring to the program in terms of fees instead of interest rates, making it difficult to compare to interest rates consumers are familiar with on their credit card.

If you've purchased bags of coffee from Starbucks in less than one-pound quantities, you've probably been charged more than you thought.

The Massachusetts Department of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation found that Starbucks stores in the Bay State routinely tacked on a $1.50 fee to the price of the coffee when customers bought less than one pound.

The fee only affected customers who bought Starbucks coffee in packages to take home. It was not assessed on coffee served by the cup.

The fee is not the issue, state officials say. It's the fact that the fee is not disclosed. It doesn't even appear on the customer's receipt. Barbara Anthony, who heads up Massachusetts' Consumer Affairs division, says any store can charge an additional fee, as long as it's disclosed to the consumer.

Officials said an estimated 75,000 consumers paid the fee, and that it appeared to be a Starbucks policy nationwide. Starbucks agreed to stop charging the fee and is paying a $1,575 fine to the state of Massachusetts.

The $1.50 fee was uncovered when agents of the Massachusetts Division of Standards conducted a routine price survey. They found the fee being charged in Starbucks stores in Auburn, Andover, Bedford, Boston, Brookline, Chestnut Hill, Chicopee, Concord, Dedham, Framingham, Holyoke and Reading.  

Each holiday season more people seem to purchase gift cards. They're easy, come in a variety of prices, and let's face it, they're just a bit less tacky than wrapping up a $50 bill.

But gift cards have always produced their share of post-holiday complaints. Sometimes they don't work. Very often fees eat away at their value if not used right away.

“I received a $100 American Express gift card for my birthday,” Marion, of Tuscon, Ariz., told ConsumerAffairs.com. “Although we have repeatedly verified that the balance is correct, three attempts to use the card to make a purchase have all failed. We have called customer service numerous times. Eventually we were told that Amex would mail a new card. Now days have passed with no new card and no resolution.”

Still glitches

While there are still glitches with some cards, the government recently adopted new rules for bank gift cards address the issue of fees. Now, these cards that are issued by American Express, Visa, Mastercard and Discover can't expire for five years after purchase. If you add money to a bank gift card, the new money can't expire for an additional five years.

The new rules also do away with inactivity or dormancy fees on bank cards until at least 12 months after the card was activated.

The new rules, which were part of the CARD Act that took effect in 2010, generally cover retail gift cards, which can be used to buy goods or services at a single merchant or affiliated group of merchants, and network-branded gift cards, which are redeemable at any merchant that accepts the card brand.

When giving a gift card, make sure to include the store or bank-issued activation receipt. This receipt will become very useful should there be a problem with the gift card. Make sure the recipient holds on to the receipt until all of the money on the card has been used.

Scam magnet

Gift cards, almost from the beginning, have been subject to theft and fraud. In the early days, retailers often displayed gift cards in racks out in the store.

Scammers were able to write down the account numbers and use the cards before they were sold. Once a recipient tried to use that particular gift card, they would find that it was worthless.

After the holidays unwanted or unused gift cards will sometimes show up in online classifieds, like craigslist. Most sellers and buyers are legitimate, but some may be scammers.

If consumers buy a gift card in this fashion, they should go to the store where the card is redeemable with the gift card seller. This way both parties can verify the validity and amount of money on the card. It would be very easy for a scammer to ask for an upfront payment and then send you a worthless piece of plastic.

If consumers are selling a gift card, the seller should never send the buyer the gift card number and PIN to verify the balance. Once a buyer has the gift card number and PIN, he can spend money online without ever paying for it.

If you are doing the selling, accept cash only -- a check or money order could be fraudulent. And, never give out personally identifiable information such as your Social Security number, bank account information and credit card numbers.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) wants to know why a Chevy Volt caught fire in its garage.

The Volt had been purposely damaged in a side-impact crash test as part of routine safety testing.  After the crash, it was stored in a NHTSA garage in Wisconsin, where it caught fire three weeks later.

The fire poses new qustions about the safety of the lithium ion batteries used in the Volt and other hybrids and electrically-powered cars.

NHTSA initally downplayed the incident, saying there was no evidence the Volt was any more dangerous than any other car.  And General Motors sought to pin at least some of the blame on NHTSA, saying the battery had not been properly de-activated following the crash.

GM said it tried to replicate the incident but was unable to do so, and a GM spokesman insisted the Volt is safe.

"NHTSA does not believe electric vehicles are at a greater risk of fire than other vehicles," the agency said in a statement. "It is common sense that the different designs of electric vehicles will require different safety standards and precautions."

But the agency said it would conduct further tests, just to be sure.

Meanwhile, in a North Carolina garage, fire broke out while a Volt was being charged. Investigators said they were looking at the charging station, not at the Volt, as the possible cause of the fire.

An Atlanta law firm has filed a class action lawsuit against Aaron’s,  Inc., taking issue with the leasing practices at the rent-to-own company's 1,900 stores.

Aaron’s leases furniture, appliances, and electronics to consumers usually with the promise that, after a certain number of payments have been successfully completed, the consumer will own the items.

But the lawsuit filed by Webb, Klase & Lemond, LLC  alleges that Aaron’s has breached its lease agreements by refusing to provide pay-off information to consumers and through other improper practices.

The suit charges that the company has used unfair business practices, false advertising, and misrepresentations to induce customers to enter lease agreements that are not as favorable for the consumer as represented. The claims also include unjust enrichment. 

Usury laws

According to the suit, Aaron’s rent-to-own business model is in reality the extension of credit through consumer loans disguised as leases for the purchase of goods.

The suit alleges that the difference between the market value of the goods and the total amount of payments made by a consumer constitutes interest. State usury laws, such as the civil and criminal usury statutes in Georgia, impose a cap on the amount of interest that may be charged by a lender. The suit alleges that Aaron’s repeatedly violates these laws.

Further, the suit alleges that Aaron’s deceptively markets its well-known offer of “120-days same as cash.”

According to the complaint, this offer purports to allow consumers to buy their furniture, appliances, or electronics from Aaron’s for their market value so long as the consumer pays in full within four months.

The deception, as alleged in the suit, is that Aaron’s regularly and proactively attempts to prevent consumers from taking advantage of the 120-day offer by failing to provide them with their outstanding balance or pay-off amount in a timely and appropriate manner.

Bank customers often complain about bank overdraft fees, saying they don't understand why they were charged a fee when they should have had money in the account.

Colleen of Everett, Wash., says she ran into that very problem and, when she questioned US Bank about it, got a detailed explanation.

"I had $412.00 in my checking account," Colleen told ConsumerAffairs.com. "I went to a US Bank ATM on a Saturday and drew out $400.00, leaving $12 in my account."

The following Monday, Colleen says her husband asked her to make a $38 purchase for him, promising he would transfer $40 into her account that day to cover the charge.

"I made the purchase and when I got home my husband said he had forgot to do the transfer, so we logged onto our Internet banking and transferred the $40. It said the $38 was pending, so we thought we were in the clear."

Two fees, not one

But the next day, Colleen said she logged into her account and saw two overdraft fees, at $33 each. One fee was for the $400 withdrawal and one fee was for the $38 purchase.

"I could understand one fee but not two fees, as I did have $412.00 in my account," Colleen said.

So Colleen said she called the bank and got this explanation: the first fee was assessed as a result of Colleen's $400 withdrawal. Although it was listed as "pending," it reduced her available balance to $12. When she made the $38 purchase, it overdrew her account.

Colleen said she understands that fee and has no argument. But what about the second fee? She was told that when the $400 withdrawal went from pending to active, her account was already overdrawn, triggering a second overdraft fee.

Withdrawal counted twice

But Colleen argued that the $400 withdrawal is being counted twice; once as "pending," reducing her available balance to $12, and a second time, when she was already overdrawn. Despite her protests, she says the bank held firm.

Just last week a judge approved a $410 million settlement with Bank of America and depositors who claimed the bank processed debit card charges in a way to maximize fees. The bank insisted its process was proper, despite the settlement.

The obvious way to avoid this situation in the future is not to opt in to the bank's overdraft "protection." Under new rules consumers must choose to allow banks to cover their overdraft purchases and assess them a fee. It sounds like Colleen has opted in to US Bank's overdraft coverage.

If she had not, here's what would have happened: After Colleen withdrew the $400 from her account and then attempted to make the $38 purchase for her husband, her debit card would have been declined, because she only had $12 in her account. It might have been inconvenient but it would have saved her $66, since it would have prevented both overdraft fees.

Using checking as savings account

Another way to avoid this situation is to keep any savings in your checking account instead of a savings account. Savings accounts produce almost no interest, so keeping an extra $500 or $600 in your checking account will prevent overdraft fees.

You just have to be disciplined and not spend your savings. But it it saves you from $200 or more in overdraft fees each year, it's much better than earning $4 or $5 in interest.