Current Events in February 2012

As you prepare to file your 2011 federal tax return, you must first decide which form to use. While every taxpayer may use Form 1040, there are advantages to using Form 1040EZ, also known as “the short form,” if you qualify.

The advantage lies in the ease of filling it out. It doesn't require as much information and can be completed in a shorter amount of time.

Because it's so simple, you may be able to fill it out yourself, saving the cost of a tax preparer. If you pay to have your taxes prepared anyway, it will take less time and should cost less than a regular Form 1040 return.

Generally, you may use the short form if you are single, or married filing jointly; you do not claim any dependents; and you do not claim any adjustments to your income.

While there are benefits to Form 1040EZ, the Internal Revenue Service points out there can be disadvantages too. Some tax benefits can only be accessed by using Form 1040 or Form 1040A, so if you fall in certain categories, it may pay you to go to the extra time and expense of using those forms.

For example, you might be able to claim a bigger refund under the Earned Income Credit (EIC) if you file using Form 1040 or Form 1040A. This tax year, the maximum adjusted gross income you can have and still get the credit has increased.

Form 1040EZ is best used when you have salary from one or more jobs, taxable interest that is less than $1,500, or unemployment compensation. You may also claim the EIC using the short form, but the credit is computed on a separate worksheet.  

Health experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are sounding the alarm over sodium. Almost all Americans, they say, consume more of it in their diets than they should.

Too much sodium increases a person's risk for high blood pressure. High blood pressure often leads to heart disease, stroke, and other vascular diseases.

Most consumers don't coat their food with salt and therefore, are not aware of how much sodium they are consuming. Most of our daily sodium intake comes from processed foods and meals served in restaurants.

What are the biggest sources of excess sodium? The CDC counts 10.

• Bread and rolls
• Luncheon meat
• Pizza
• Poultry
• Soup
• Cheeseburgers and other sandwiches
• Cheese
• Pasta dishes
• Meat dishes such as meat loaf
• Snack foods such as chips and popcorn

Bread can be a killer

Some foods that are consumed several times a day, such as bread, add up to a lot of sodium even though each serving is not high in sodium.

“Too much sodium raises blood pressure, which is a major risk factor for heart disease and stroke,” said CDC Director Thomas R. Frieden, M.D., M.P.H. “These diseases kill more than 800,000 Americans each year and contribute an estimated $273 billion in health care costs.”

The report notes that the average person consumes about 3,300 milligrams of sodium per day, not including any salt added at the table. That's twice the recommended daily limit for about 50 percent of the population.

The recommendation is 1,500 milligrams per day for people aged 51 and older, and anyone with high blood pressure, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease, and African Americans. The CDC has a special section of its website that can help you reduce sodium in your diet.

The 60 Plus Association, a conservative advocacy group, is asking the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to block the proposed merger between Express Scripts, Inc. (ESI) and Medco Health Solutions, two pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) that administer prescription benefits for many health plans, including some Medicare Part D plans.

In a letter to the FTC, the group outlined its concerns about the impact of an approved merger on seniors, in particular.

"Seniors tend to have more chronic conditions and take more medication than other age groups, and are especially sensitive to changes in the pharmaceutical-drug sector of the health market," the letter states. "When seniors lose access to community pharmacies because they are no longer part of a PBM network or go out of business, or when they are forced into a mail-order program, their health and safety is at risk.”

Concerns about impact

Seniors rely on local pharmacists for information, advice and counseling about their medications and possible side effects and drug interactions. Without this one-on-one counseling from a trusted pharmacist, some seniors will experience adverse drug reactions and health complications."

60 Plus said it is concerned that more seniors will be forced into the mail-order programs and lose access to local pharmacies, on whom they rely for information and advice. Some are already expressing frustration.

“I am a caregiver of my parents, who do not have or understand the Internet yet Medco wants them to go online to pay their bill so their much needed medication will not be held up any longer than necessary,” Gail, of Milwaukee, Wis., told ConsumerAffairs.com. It seems Medco will not send out any meds if their balance reaches $100? What? Excuse me? Never have they ever been behind in any kind of payment ever! Dad is fresh out of the hospital, after a three month stint from a bout of pancreatitis. That was when the doctors weren't sure he'd survive, yet, as stubborn as he is, he is still with us, but not through any help or concern of Medco.”

Too much control?

If the merger is approved, 60 Plus says the combined ESI/Medco will control prescription drug benefits for more than 100 million Americans, and more than 50 percent of several important components of the pharmacy market, including specialty pharmaceuticals and mail-order. The group calls that “monopolistic control,” and says it will eventually result in higher prices for all consumers.

"For seniors, the ESI/Medco merger will mean higher prescription prices, fewer choices in pharmacy care, and lower-quality health services than are currently available," said Jim Martin, 60 Plus Association Chairman. "This merger is anti-competitive, anti-consumer and anti-senior, and should not be allowed to proceed."

Noting that it is politically conservative and supports free enterprise, 60 Plus nonetheless says is also supports consumer choice and the well-being of seniors. The ESI/Medco merger, it says, would give two players in the PBM industry an unfair advantage in market share and setting prices. The result: higher prices, loss of pharmacy choices and lower-quality services for seniors.

A big hurdle to getting a college education is finding a way to pay for it. It also helps if you choose the right school. Where do you turn to for advice?

Wichita State University has launched a free online course for prospective students that teaches personal financial management topics for students who are new to college and or considering college. 

Choosing the right college

Part one of the course helps students and families make wise decisions about which college to attend and how to pay for it. Lisa, of Owensboro, Ky., might have benefited from such a course.

“I had talked to an advisor that sugar coated everything to do with University of Phoenix,” Lisa told ConsumerAffairs.com. “Once I started taking the classes on line, if I needed help, the instructors weren't there to help. I had a sick granddaughter I was raising. It got to the point where I couldn't get on line to take the classes. I've ended up with $11000 in student loans.”

Luana, of Newark, N.J., enrolled in a for-profit college to pursue an associates degree, when a community college would have been a fraction of the cost.

“I was happy looking forward to get my associates degree with a technical course and avoided the idea of going to a regular county college for the same credits,” Luana said. “Turns out, no institution accepts my credit and at 24 I have to start over, from scratch, as if I had just graduated high school and attend a county college which is something I should have done from the get-go and saved $35,000 tuition that I paid to attend Gibbs College.”

Using money wisely

Part two of the free website helps students wisely manage money while in college and beyond. The course includes "game-ification" features and also allows users to post status updates about their progress in the course to Facebook and Twitter.

Money for the website comes from the federally funded College Access Challenge Grant, the purpose of which is to promote college completion by providing financial literacy education.

"Given the growing public concern with the cost of attending college and the fact that financial difficulties force many students to discontinue their studies, financial literacy education is critical to national efforts to educate more students," said Keith Pickus, interim provost at Wichita State.

Financial literacy is key

Liz Weston, a nationally syndicated personal finance columnist, agrees that financial literacy is necessary for a student's future. She says a college education is an essential first step for a person who wants to build a secure future.

"But the value of that degree is undermined when students and their families go too far into debt to get it," Weston said. "Students and their families need to make smart choices about getting an education they can afford. Students also need to make sure they manage their money wisely while they're in college so they don't graduate with piles of credit card or other debt. Financial literacy courses can help people make good decisions in college and afterward."

Amidst all the talk and campaign promises about clean energy, not to mention federal grants and tax breaks for hybrid cars, solar plants and wind farms, compressed natural gas (CNG) has been proving itself a workable alternative in one state where it's been widely adopted.

For a variety of local reasons, Oklahoma has become the poster child for CNG, which is available at many of the truck stops, service stations and convenience stores in the state. 

"A retailer today in Oklahoma can sell CNG for $1.39 a gallon," said Norman Herrera, Chesapeake Energy's director of market development, according to Convenience Store News. "The gasoline price may be $3.50. CNG compares really favorably to gasoline."

Environmentalists aren't sold on natural gas because it is a fossil fuel and the environmental cost of extracting it can be high. But it's clean-burning and cheap for those who are able to use it.

No cars

But the biggest barrier to widespread adoption of CNG to fuel consumers' cars is its limited availability in much of the country, followed by a lack of cars equipped to burn it. Though it's increasingly used by buses, trucks and other fleet vehicles, CNG is not yet a common option on passenger cars.

The Chevrolet Express and GMC Savana vans accept natural gas and are affordable, with price tags starting at $24,985 and $28,940, respectively. But consumers may not be interested in purchasing vans that look like commercial vehicles.

General Motors will produce a natural gas-accepting Chevy Silverado later this year, Herrera said.  It will be equipped to handle both gasoline and CNG. The sticker price is not yet known.

Honda's Civic NG has been available for 13 years and gets an estimated 27/38 mpg rating.  But only 13,000 have been sold in all 13 years. Many of those are used by meter maids and other fleet users.

Few options

So, for now, consumers searching for higher mileage and lower fuel costs have a choice: they can buy one of the few CNG-equipped vehicles or convert their own car to run on CNG.  Then there's the problem of finding CNG pumps. For that, you may have to get a job as a meter maid.

Or maybe you'd sooner move to Oklahoma.

Séverine Sabia, Ph.D., of University College London, and colleagues used the Whitehall II cohort study, which is based on employees of the British Civil Service. The authors examined the association between smoking history and cognitive decline in the transition from midlife to old age. Data were obtained from 5,099 men and 2,137 women in the Whitehall II study, with a mean (average) age of 56 years at the first cognitive assessment.

In the current study, researchers analyzed data using six assessments of smoking status over 25 years and three cognitive assessments over 10 years.

The authors note their analysis presents four key findings. They suggest smoking in men is associated with more rapid cognitive decline and that men who continued to smoke over the follow-up experienced greater decline in all cognitive tests.

May be underestimated

In addition, men who quit smoking in the 10 years preceding the first cognitive measure were still at risk of greater cognitive decline, especially in executive function (an umbrella term for various complex cognitive processes involved in achieving a particular goal). However, long-term ex-smokers did not show faster cognitive decline.

"Finally, our results show that the association between smoking and cognition, particularly at older ages, is likely to be underestimated owing to higher risk of death and dropout among smokers," the authors comment.

The authors also note that their results show no association between smoking and cognitive decline in women, although the underlying reasons remain unclear. They suggest one explanation for the sex difference they observed might be the greater quantity of tobacco smoked by men. 

Seafood Solutions Inc., a California corporation, was sentenced in federal court in Los Angeles to pay $1 million in fines and community service payments for its role in the false labeling of frozen fish fillets.

The corporation was fined $700,000 and ordered to make a community service donation of $300,000 to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.   The money is to be used to fund projects related to methodologies, databases and other research into the identification of marine organisms.

In addition, the company was sentenced to three years of probation, was ordered to forfeit all remaining inventory of the falsely labeled fish and to develop and implement a corporate compliance plan.

The sentence stemmed from the conviction of Seafood Solutions on July 25, 2011, on a single count of trafficking in fish knowing that the fish had been transported and sold in violation of the U.S. Lacey Act.  Specifically, the fish was Pangasius hypophthalmus, a species in the catfish family that were misleadingly labeled as “Paradise Grouper” and “Falcon Baie Grouper.”   Seafood Solutions was one of three defendants named in the same charging document.

According to the plea agreements, in approximately June 2004, Seafood Solutions began to sell a fish it declared to customs as “ponga.”   The fish being imported as ponga was Pangasius hypophthalmus, a species in the catfish family.   The fish was then sold under the brand names, and in boxes labeled in part as, “Paradise Grouper” and “Falcon Baie Grouper.”

Soy isoflavone supplements did not decrease breast cancer cell proliferation in a randomized clinical trial, according to a study published in Cancer Prevention Research.

Lead researcher Seema A. Khan, M.D., professor of surgery at the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, said the results of this study are consistent with the findings of previous studies that were designed to test cancer prevention benefits of dietary supplements.

"Simply put, supplements are not food. Although soy-based foods appear to have a protective effect, we are not seeing the same effect with supplementation using isolated components of soy, so the continued testing of soy supplements is likely not worthwhile," said Khan.

Khan said that beta-carotene and selenium supplementation have also been shown to lack benefit in lung cancer prevention studies.

Complex foods

"Foods are very complex and there are likely traveling companions that we haven't identified that are protecting against cancer," said Khan.

For the current study, Khan and colleagues randomly assigned 98 women to receive a mixed soy isoflavones supplement or placebo. Isoflavones are components of soy foods that were expected to have anti-estrogen activity.

These women had more than 4,000 breast cancer epithelial cells identified by fine needle aspiration biopsy. At six months, researchers evaluated the levels of Ki-67, an established protein marker of cancer cell growth. In the overall population, no difference was seen after six months in either group.

However, among pre-menopausal women, the level of Ki-67 increased from 1.71 to 2.18, suggesting a negative effect of the supplementation.

"This was a small finding, but one that should suggest caution," said Khan.

Unheard-of just twenty years ago, online dating is now a billion-dollar industry and one of the most common ways for singles to meet potential partners. There are now hundreds of dating sites, all promising to help their clients meet the person of their dreams.

While some people find happiness with an online romance, many more do not.

“My sister paid for a three-month membership for me as birthday gift,” Mary, of Denver, Colo., told ConsumerAffairs.com. “I was contacted by a gentleman from another state who really put on the pressure for me to meet him in a grocery store parking lot. I felt extremely unsafe, so I discontinued the conversation. The next day, the account he used came up as a woman from another state.”

In a report to be published in Psychological Science in the Public Interest, a team of researchers takes a look at online dating sites, identifying the ways in which online dating may benefit or undermine singles’ romantic outcomes.

Beware of pitfalls

Lead author Eli Finkel, Associate Professor of Social Psychology at Northwestern University, says that online dating is a “marvelous addition to the ways in which singles can meet potential romantic partners,” but he warns that users need to be aware of its many pitfalls. Falling victim to a scam is one of those pitfalls.

Scammers increasingly use online dating sites to establish an emotional link with someone, often spending weeks cultivating the relationship before requesting money.

“I have been scammed by someone on Match.com,” said Stephanie, of Covington, Va. “I met this 'man' online. I never met him in person, but fell for his lies completely and was scammed out of thousands of dollars.”

Some online dating sites claim that they possess an exclusive formula, a so-called “matching algorithm,” that can match singles with partners who are especially compatible with them. But, after systematically reviewing the evidence, the authors conclude that such claims are unsubstantiated and likely false.

No compelling evidence

“To date, there is no compelling evidence that any online dating matching algorithm actually works,” Finkel said. “If dating sites want to claim that their matching algorithm is scientifically valid, they need to adhere to the standards of science, which is something they have uniformly failed to do. In fact, our report concludes that it is unlikely that their algorithms can work, even in principle, given the limitations of the sorts of matching procedures that these sites use.”

eHarmony.com promotes its personality questionnaire, designed to match couples for compatibility. But it, too, has its share of doubters.

“The matches weren't based on the profile and there were a lot of days when there were no matches at all,” Nanette, of Scottsdale, Ariz., said.

Harry Reis, another of the five co-authors of the study and professor of psychology at the University of Rochester, says any dating site's scientific claims “should be given little credence.” At the same time, though, he thinks the concept just needs more work.

Just a few tweaks?

“Online dating is definitely a new and much needed twist on relationships,” Reis said. “The Internet holds great promise for helping adults form healthy and supportive romantic partnerships, and those relationships are one of the best predictors of emotional and physical health.”

Given the potentially serious consequences of intervening in people’s romantic lives, the authors said they hope that their report will push companies to build a more rigorous scientific foundation for online dating services. It recommends the creation of a panel that would grade the scientific credibility of each online dating site.

“Thus far, the industry certainly does not get an A for effort,” said Finkel. “For years, the online dating industry has ignored actual relationship science in favor of unsubstantiated claims and buzzwords, like ‘matching algorithms,’ that merely sound scientific.”

The 64-page analysis reviews more than 400 psychology studies and public interest surveys, painting what the authors call a full and fascinating picture of an industry that, according to one industry estimate, attracted 25 million unique users around the world in April 2011 alone. The report was commissioned by the Association for Psychological Science.

The Federal Trade Commission has warned marketers of six mobile applications that provide background screening apps that they may be violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

The FTC warned the apps marketers that, if they have reason to believe the background reports they provide are being used for employment screening, housing, credit, or other similar purposes, they must comply with the FCRA.

The agency did not reveal the names of the apps or their marketers.

According to the FTC, some of the apps include criminal record histories, which bear on an individual's character and general reputation and are precisely the type of information that is typically used in employment and tenant screening.

"If you have reason to believe that your background reports are being used for employment or other FCRA purposes, you and your customers who are using your reports for such purposes must comply with the FCRA," the letters say.

The FCRA is designed to protect the privacy of consumer report information and ensure that the information supplied by consumer reporting agencies is accurate. Consumer reports are communications that include information on an individual's character, reputation, or personal characteristics and are used or expected to be used for purposes such as employment, housing or credit.

Under the FCRA, operations that assemble or evaluate information to provide to third parties qualify as consumer reporting agencies, or CRAs. Mobile apps that supply such information may qualify as CRAs under the Act.

CRAs must take reasonable steps to ensure the user of each report has a 'permissible purpose' to use the report; take reasonable steps to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of the information conveyed in its reports; and provide users of its reports with information about their obligations under the FCRA.

In the case of consumer reports provided for employment purposes, for example, CRAs must provide employers with information regarding their obligation to provide notice to employees and applicants of any adverse action taken on the basis of a consumer report.

According to the letters, the agency has made no determination whether the companies are violating the FCRA, but encourages them to review their apps and their policies and procedures to be sure they comply with the FCRA.

Redbox has DVDs for rent. Verizon has plenty of bandwidth. Put the two companies together and you have a competitor to Netflix, which provides DVD rentals and streaming video on demand.

The two companies are joining forces to form a company that will rent DVDs and stream video, just as Netflix does. Verizon will own 65 percent of the venture while Coinstar, parent of Redbox, will own 35 percent. The announcement came in a conference call Monday by Biob Mudge, president of Verizon consumer and mass business markets.

"Verizon is embracing streaming, a platform that many view as a disruptive force in our industry, as a great opportunity for innovation and leadership," Bob Mudge, president of Verizon consumer and mass business markets, said during the call. "By teaming with Redbox, we deliver the kind of consumer-empowering service that customers expect from companies like ours."

Details under wraps

While putting the announcement out there, Mudge provided little in the way of details, saying the service won't start until mid-2012 and he doesn't want to give competitors any advantage with detailed information.

For example, it's not clear how the venture would be monetized. Redbox currently charges consumers a fee per DVD rented from its network of vending machines at retail locations. Verizon provides video service through Fios, it's fiber optic system.

Netflix charges its members an $8 monthly fee, for either its DVD rentals or its streaming service. Presumably, any joint venture aimed at competing with Netflix would have a similar price structure.

Devil's in the details

While Verizon Fios has access to plentiful video content, it would have to work out separate arrangements with distributors before it could make the programming available on a streaming service. Last year Netflix lost it's contract with Starz Entertainment, which declined to renew its agreement, saying Netflix did not charge consumers enough for the content. The company also supplies content to cable and satellite services, which charge much more than Netflix.

Netflix appears to have recovered much of its mojo after a trouble-plagued second half of 2011. The company announced it was splitting its DVD rental and streaming businesses, in effect raising the price by 60 percent for members who wanted to continue access to both. It also announced it was splitting into two separate companies – one to be called Qwickster – only to walk that back under consumer protest.

As a result, Netflix stock plummeted from $304 a share to $74. The stock is now back to $128.

Debt collector NCO Financial Systems, Inc. (NCOF) has agreed to change certain collections practices as part of a settlement announced today by Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine and 18 other states. The settlement resolves concerns about NCOF's debt collection practices.

"We believe this is a fair settlement that will help uphold consumers' rights under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act," Attorney General DeWine said. "NCOF is agreeing to provide restitution for eligible consumers, to provide stronger notifications to credit reporting agencies and consumers, and to implement policies to ensure compliance with federal and state law."

Since 2008, Ohio has led a multi-state working group that investigated allegations of misleading and deceptive debt collection practices by NCOF.

In the settlement, NCOF agrees to:

• Comply with the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act, and all applicable state laws.
• For debts reported to the credit reporting agencies, notify the credit reporting agencies within 30 calendar days of (1) any verbal or written consumer dispute or (2) receiving the results of an investigation into the accuracy or completeness of previously reported information.
• Provide notice to consumers about their debt collection rights under federal and state law.
• Monitor compliance, including training and monitoring its representatives and independent contractors, creating written policies and procedures for handling consumer complaints, and submitting compliance reports to the states every 6 months for 18 months.

Additionally, consumer restitution will be available for three years following the effective date of the agreements. NCOF will set aside $950,000, or $50,000 for each of the 19 participating states, for consumers who have valid claims that meet one of the following criteria:

• Consumer paid NCOF a third party debt that the consumer did not owe; 
• Consumer overpaid interest on a third party debt that was not supported by the underlying agreement between the debtor and the original holder of the debt or as otherwise permitted by law; or 
• Consumer paid more on a third party debt than the amount NCOF agreed to settle the account. 

NCOF also has agreed to pay $575,000 for the states' consumer protection enforcement efforts. As the lead of the group, Ohio will receive $76,562.50 of the payment.

Joining Ohio in the multi-state working group were the following states: Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, and Wisconsin.

Looking for a reason to upgrade your old cell phone to a smartphone? Here's one. A marketing survey suggests smartphone owners are smarter shoppers.

The study, by Perception Research Services International (PRS), found that 83 percent of smartphone owners use the devices while shopping. And not just for big ticket items like you would expect. The study found 49 percent of smartphone users use them to check prices while grocery shopping.

Price comparisons

The study found that smartphone owners use their phones during the decision making process, comparing prices, gathering product information, searching for sales/coupons or reading reviews/opinions. About one-third make actual purchases with their phones.

Importantly, Hispanics and African-Americans are more apt than Caucasians to use their smartphones while shopping.

Younger users

Further, smartphone owners, who use their phones to shop tend to be under 35 years old, are employed full-time and are better educated than the average consumer.

"Marketers would do well to ensure that they understand the role of smartphones and digital content – relative to packaging and POS materials – in the shopping process within their categories," said Jonathan Asher, Executive Vice President at PRS. "They need to ensure that all their communications are complementing each other and working together. And retailers should now consider how they set their shelves and create merchandising that is smartphone-friendly."

If you watched last night's Super Bowl, you saw some pretty clever car commercials. But before you rush off to a dealership, understand that even the slickest, funniest most appealing car advertisements can be misleading.

It's not that the commercials give you information that is not true -- but rather, it's the information they don't give you.

"Advertisers have every right to create excitement for their product, but to be a smart shopper you need to understand and interpret the language of hype," said Philip Reed, senior consumer advice editor at automotive site Edmunds.com. "Once you've translated an ad into 'consumerspeak,' you'll know if the vehicle featured is a good deal for you."

According to Reed, the five most common marketing ruses found in automotive ads are:

1. Showing the top trim, but advertising the base price. In TV ads it's common to see a fully loaded, top-trim model of a vehicle on the screen while the price of a base model is being displayed. You might assume that you could buy the car pictured at the price presented. Wrong. The small print should clarify this, if you can manage to read it.
   
2. Preposterous MPG. A hot-looking sport coupe is tearing up the landscape when the text flies across the TV screen: "40 mpg!" Granted, this car is capable of getting 40 mpg on the highway, provided you drive like a fuel-efficiency-focused hypermiler. But you won't get anywhere near that mileage if you're driving full-throttle like the guy in the ad.
   
3. Lease Payments Too Good to Be True. You're innocently checking the box scores in the newspaper when you see a luxury car ad promoting lease payments for only $199 a month. If you left for the dealership right away, you might not notice the small print saying that $4,999 is required to start this lease.
   
4. The Phantom Special. A local newspaper ad features the phrase "One at this price," which is a tip-off to what insiders call an "ad car." It's usually the purple one with crank windows and no A/C — cheap, but not necessarily in a good way. If you go to the dealership and ask to test drive the one-only car, it's likely A) "Already been sold," B) "Out on a test-drive" or C) "In the back of the lot, and I'd have to move 50 cars to get to it." The "good" news, of course, is that they have lots of other cars for sale. The bad news is that those cars are a lot more expensive.
   
5. Rebates for Everyone — But Not You. You see an ad for the car of your dreams, listed at a price that barely squeaks into your budget. So you run down to the dealership only to find out that to get to the reduced price the dealership factored in a military rebate, college-graduate rebate, brand "loyalty bonus" or other discounts and rebates that are not available to folks like you.

Then, there are those fabulous financing deals.

"Zero percent financing is only for qualified buyers," Reed said. "If you don't have excellent credit, those advertising messages don't apply to you."

Edmunds.com analysts estimate that only about one in four car buyers qualify for the lowest interest rate offered.

Every day consumers go up against companies who seem to have the upper hand. But if you think you are right, it pays to challenge the company's position. Chris, of Solon, Iowa, is a good case in point. She said her family had coverage from State Farm Insurance for over 30 years when the company denied her claim.

"Recently we did a whole house remodel. Since contractors were in our house while we weren't there, personal items were stored at a relative's," Chris told ConsumerAffairs.com. "The personal items included my jewelry which was scheduled under a separate personal articles policy. When unpacking, I couldn't locate the jewelry."

Chris said she contacted State Farm, who said they couldn't cover the loss since it was over a year sine she had actually seen the jewelry. Case closed? Not for Chris.

"Only problem was the letter clearly stated that my policy considered the jewelry lost upon discovery," Chris said. "This meant that the date of loss was the day when I unboxed everything and realized that the jewelry was missing, not the last known time I saw my jewelry which was the date State Farm considered the items lost. I contacted the state insurance commissioner. State Farm was reprimanded by the insurance commissioner and ordered to pay my claim."

The moral of the story is to contact state or local officials when you think a company is wrong. It could turn out you're right.

Misstep?

First, J.C. Penney alienated many customers with its TV commercial featuring screaming women. The commercials were designed to promote the retailer's new pricing policy, doing away with periodic sales in favor of "everyday low pricing." But Steve, of Ooltewah, Tenn., says "not so fast."

"Just a note to let you know that after being a satisfied J.C. Penney customer for over 40 years, I am through," Chris said. "Your new pricing policy is deceptive. For example, the t-shirts I purchased for $9.99 at Christmas are now $12 each. I noticed similar pricing situations. Great for JCP, not so good for me."

J.C. Penney's makeover is the brainchild of new CEO Ron Johnson, a former executive at Target and Apple. Industry analysts generally applaud his moves, but we can't help noting that a lot of consumers are unhappy.

No more Primatene Mist

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has responsibility for protecting consumers from dangerous, unapproved drugs. But one consumer, Christopher, from Virginia, is not happy the FDA has removed Primatene Mist from the market.

"The FDA has left millions of asthma suffers in limbo over the removal of Primatene Mist and no one cares," Christopher said. "People are having all kinds of problems; in and out of hospitals; attacks; can't afford the high priced replacements that don't work. We need someone to help now."

The FDA removed Primatene Mist from the market December 31 because it contains chlorofluorocarbons as a propellant.  The agency earlier removed prescription-strength albuterol inhalers.   

Environmental organizations portray themselves as being single-minded in their quest to defend the natural environment against harm from human development, but the reality is often far more complex, as recent disclosures about the Sierra Club make clear.

Critics -- and many club members -- are fuming over the disclosure that the Sierra Club took more than $26 million from natural-gas giant Chesapeake Energy Corp. to help fund its campaign against coal-fired power plants at the same time that the Sierra Club was lining up to support large-scale solar power developments that endanger fragile desert ecosystems.

The gas-funding disclosure comes as environmentalists are turning their attention to hydraulic fracturing, the controversial natural-gas production method that Chesapeake and other gas producers are using to fuel the country's sudden hunger for gas.

The funding deal was disclosed last week by Time magazine. Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune then came forward to say that he had learned of the funding shortly after he took the job in 2010 and started working to end it.

"Turn away millions?" 

"Have you ever had to turn away millions of dollars? It sounds crazy, but here's why the Sierra Club chose to do exactly that," said Brune in an artfully-crafted blog posting, not explaining until a subsequent paragraph that Brune "turned away millions" only after the $26 million had already been received. 

Brune said nothing in his blog about why he didn't return the $26 million the club had already received.  Nor did he explain why he kept quiet about the deal he supposedly was working so hard to end. Meanwhile, the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) and other pro-coal organizations are stoking their public relations furnaces.

“They’ve cynically put people at risk for years to come with this campaign, and made themselves little more than tools of an energy industry competitor in the bargain," said UMWA President Cecil E. Roberts. "Let’s get real here: Just like any business, the gas companies are about selling gas, period. And they will gladly funnel cash to any organization that will help them do it."

Roberts said the disclosure destroys the Sierra Club's reputation as an independent environmental protection advoce.

“The Sierra Club used secret gas industry funding to actively work to suppress the building of hundreds of next-generation coal-fired power plants across the country, plants which would significantly reduce emissions of mercury and other harmful substances."

Solar plants

Coal industry payoffs aren't the only controversy facing the Sierra Club. In California and the Southwest, questions are being raised about massive solar power plants being built in desert areas, many with the approval of the Sierra Club and other environmental organizations whose own members decry the harm the huge solar installations will inflict on animal and plant life.

The Los Angeles Times reported Sunday that 21 million acres of public land is being used for solar plants in the American West and that conservation organizations have signed off on many of the projects in confidential documents even though many of the environmental protection measures promised by the plant developers are "complete nonsense," in the words of Larry LaPre, a Bureau of Land Management wildlife biologist. 

"What troubles me is that the public has bought the whole solar expansion hook, line and sinker because it's 'renewable,'" said former Mojave National Preserve superintendent Dennis Schramm, according to the Times. 

Not only the Sierra Club but also the Wilderness Society, Defenders of Wildlife and the National Resources Defense Council have been largely mute on the subject, trading their usual public protests for a role in planning the projects.  In some cases, the groups' national headquarters have ignored protests from local chapters.

The Times said the Sierra Club sent out a 42-page directive telling local chapters that the organization's national policy goals supersede local groups' objections.  

In an odd twist, federal agencies have raised more objections to the solar projects than environmental organizations. Even the Defense Department has expressed concerns about the glare from huge arrays of mirrors and the danger posed by 400-foot-high "power towers" in areas where the military conducts low-flying training missions.

Desert vegetation that takes 100 years or more to grow to maturity is being trimmed or removed to make room for the giant mirrors and tortoises are being relocated to areas where they may or may not survive.  Eagles and other giant predatory birds will be at risk of being burned by the mirrors.

Google and other investors in the huge projects are receiving tax credits and other incentives that greatly reduce their financial risk, while leaving taxpayers on the hook if the projects fail. 

In his soliloquy on the Sierra Club's $26 million windfall, Michael Brune repeats the mantra that is used to justify ripping up the fragile desert ecosystem by claiming it is a "clean" process: "Ultimately, the only safe, smart, and responsible way to address our nation's energy needs is to look beyond coal, oil, and gas, and focus on clean, efficient energy sources such as wind, solar, and geothermal."

But Jeffrey Lovich, a U.S. Geological Survey scientist, says no one knows what  effect the giant solar projects will have on desert wildlife: "This is an experiment on a grand scale. ... Science is racing to catch up," he told the Times.

Echoing reports that will be familiar to many readers, General Electric Co. is being sued by a consumer who says its front-loading washing machines have design defects that give a moldy and mildewy odor to clothes.

The complaint, filed in federal court in Newark, New Jersey, claims the washers fail to clean and rid themselves of byproducts of washing, fostering an atmosphere conducive to mold and mildew. The suit claims GE hid from consumers the need to run extra cycles of hot water or bleach to combat mold.

"I am unable to close the door of the washing machine, due to the overwhelming smell of mold that continues to increase," said Marcus of Dublin, Ohio, in a report to ConsumerAffairs.com. "The drain on the bottom is always full of water that has an awful odor. My wife is very allergic to mold and has had continued respiratory problems for the last several months. Our clothes and towels smell of mold and I am ready to put this washer out on the curb."

“Items washed in the washing machines smell foul due to the mold problems,” claims the lawsuit by Stanley Fishman of West Orange, New Jersey, seeking group, or class-action, status. “GE also fails to disclose the extraordinary maintenance and associated expenses that its washing machines require to combat the accumulation of mold, mildew and biofilm.”

Patti of Cedar Creek, Texas, described in detail the measures she used to try to rid her GE front-loaded of mold:

"I bleached it once a week to try to keep it from growing. By 8 months, the mold smell was horrible. I peeled back the gasket and there was mold all around. From then on, I alternated with bleach and vinegar," she told ConsumerAffairs.com. "I called the warranty company and they said they never heard of such a problem and to just keep spraying it with bleach. Fast forward 3 years and bottles of bleach and vinegar later, the laundry room smells of mold as well as all of our clothing."

The complaint claims GE violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, breached express and implied warranties, and unjustly enriched itself. It seeks unspecified compensatory damages.

F&S Produce Company Inc., a Deerfield, N.J. establishment, is recalling approximately 389 pounds of Cobb and spinach salads. The salads contain eggs that are the subject of a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recall due to concerns about contamination with Listeria monocytogenes, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced today.

The following products are subject to recall:

• 10-oz. plastic containers of “Fresh Garden Highway Spinach Salad with Bacon”
• 10.75-oz plastic containers of “Fresh Garden Highway Cobb Salad”

The products subject to recall have a “Sell By” date through 2/8/2012, and bear the establishment number “Est. 39897” as well as the USDA mark of inspection The products were distributed to a warehouse in Pennsylvania for further distribution to retail locations.

The problem was discovered when F&S Produce Company Inc.was notified by one of its suppliers that hard-cooked eggs (a product inspected by the FDA) had tested positive for Listeria monocytogenes, and are being recalled by Michael Foods Egg Products Co. The salads contain the recalled eggs and are the subject of this FSIS recall. FSIS, FDA, and the company have received no reports of illnesses associated with consumption of these products. 

FSIS routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to verify that recalling firms notify their customers of the recall and that steps are taken to make certain that the product is no longer available to consumers.

Consumption of food contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes can cause listeriosis, an uncommon but potentially fatal disease. Healthy people rarely contract listeriosis. However, listeriosis can cause high fever, severe headache, neck stiffness and nausea.

Listeriosis can also cause miscarriages and stillbirths, as well as serious and sometimes fatal infections in those with weakened immune systems, such as infants, the elderly and persons with HIV infection or undergoing chemotherapy. Individuals concerned about an illness should contact a health care provider.

J.C. Penney has refused to fire Ellen DeGeneres as its spokesperson, turning aside demands from an anti-gay hate group, OneMillionMoms.com, which objected to the choice of Ms. DeGeneres.

In an emailed statement yesterday, J.C. Penney said it "stands behind its partnership with Ellen DeGeneres.”

“This week Americans spoke out in overwhelming support of LGBT people and J.C. Penney’s decision not to fire Ellen simply for who she happens to love,” said Herndon Graddick, Senior Director of Programs and Communications at GLAAD, a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) media advocacy and anti-defamation organization.

A ConsumerAffairs.com sentiment analysis of about 200,000 consumer comments on social media confirmed DeGeneres' popularity, with a net positive sentiment in the 70%-90% range over the last year.

“But while Ellen has the nation on her side, in 29 states today, Americans can still be legally fired just for being gay," Graddick said. "Our elected officials should use this incident as yet another example of the support for legal protections for all hard working employees.”

Today, Americans can be fired in 29 states because of their sexual orientation, and in 34 states because of their gender identity.

Anti-gay group

OneMillionMoms.com is a project of the American Family Association, which has been designated as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

"Degeneres is not a true representation of the type of families who shop at the retailer. The small percentage of customers they are attempting to satisfy will not offset their loss in sales by offending the majority," the group said on its Web site. "Funny that JC Penney thinks hiring an open homosexual spokesperson will help their business when most of its customers are traditional families."

A poll on the Los Angeles Times site shows 94% of readers polled agree that DeGeners should not only maintain her post as J.C. Penney’s spokesperson, but call her “a symbol of equality.”

"Ellen DeGeneres is one of the most fun and vibrant people in entertainment today, with great warmth and a down-to-earth attitude. The millions who watch her on television and follow her through social media relate to her and trust what she has to say," said Michael Francis, president of J. C. Penney Company, Inc., as he announced her appointment last week.

"Importantly, we share the same fundamental values as Ellen," Francis said. "We couldn't think of a better partner to help us put the fun back into the retail experience."

---

Sentiment analysis by NetBase