Current Events in June 2014

Facebook's new Slingshot mobile app, just released today, is supposed to rival Snapchat, which is why Slingshot imitates Snapchat's impermanence: whatever messages you send via Snapchat will disappear a few seconds after they're seen, making it more like an ordinary, low-tech, non-recorded conversation.

Presumably, anything you send via Slingshot will soon vanish too. But Slingshot offers an odd new wrinkle: forced reciprocity. In Slingshot, if someone sends you a video or photo, you know it's there but are not allowed to see it until you send one of your own.

Slingshot's developers explained their rationale in their blog post announcing the release:

With Slingshot, we wanted to build something where everybody is a creator and nobody is just a spectator. When everyone participates, there’s less pressure, more creativity and even the little things in life can turn into awesome shared experiences. …

To get started on Slingshot, shoot a photo or video. It can be what you’re up to, who you’re with or a quick selfie. Add some text and color, then sling it to a bunch of friends. Here’s the deal: friends won’t be able to see your shot until they sling something back to you. They can then reply with a reaction—or simply swipe your shot away. 

If any Slingshot developers are reading this, here's a free profit-building tip: you'd get millions of eager customers signing on to your service in nanoseconds, if you tweak your software enough that the whole forced-reciprocity thing applies not to video messages from friends, but email messages from spammers — you can't see any spam unless you send the spammers a message first.

Back in the day, consumers organized boycotts on behalf of embattled minorities, environmental issues and so forth.

The boycott of the Montgomery, Ala., city bus system helped get the civil rights movement rolling, and the grape boycott gave farm workers a leg up.

But consumer boycotts have lost a lot of steam since then. Take the Washington Redskins. For years, fans, non-fans and assorted do-gooders have earnestly and, later, angrily called on the National Football League team to change its name. Attempts to organize boycotts haven't made it out of the end zone. 

Just a few weeks ago, the United Church of Christ's Mid-Atlantic Conference announced a boycott of the team and called on other churches in the D.C. area to do the same. The answer, so far, has been a resounding silence.

Billionaire team owner Dan Snyder has angrily refused, saying he would "never" change the name and claiming that Native Americans don't find the term "redskins" offensive.

The term, of course, refers to the body parts of Native Americans that were collected by federal troops during the Indian Wars that raged for more than a century during the settlement of the American West.

Native Americans may have had a derogatory term for the scalps they sometimes collected from white people but, if so, it's not in common usage and certainly isn't used in interstate commerce. 

The PTO speaks

Amidst all the back-and-forth, five Native Americans filed a petition with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office asking that the team's trademarks be vacated on the grounds that they are "disparaging."

The PTO agreed and has canceled the team's 6 trademarks.

"We decide, based on the evidence properly before us, that these registrations must be cancelled because they were disparaging to Native Americans at the respective times they were registered, in violation of Section 2(a)  of the Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a)."

Most likely, we haven't heard the last of this. The PTO issued a similar ruling back in 1992 and it was reversed after the Redskins' lawyers appealed.

Some Redskins fans took to social media claiming the PTO ruling infringed Snyder's free speech rights. However, the ruling means only that the federal government no longer grants ownership of the term "Redskins" to the team.

Theoretically, the team could continue to use the name without trademark protection but it would then be unable to claim royalties from the sale of sweatshirts, caps, beer mugs and other spoils of war.

SunTrust Mortgage would provide $500 million in loss-mitigation relief to underwater borrowers, pay $40 million to approximately 48,000 consumers who lost their homes to foreclosure and $10 million to the federal government under a proposed court order filed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and attorneys general in 49 states and the District of Columbia

The order addresses what are termed “systemic mortgage servicing misconduct," including robo-signing and illegal foreclosure practices.

In a parallel mortgage lending filing announced by DOJ, SunTrust must also pay a $418 million penalty.

“Deceptive and illegal mortgage servicing practices have pushed families into foreclosure and devastated communities across the nation,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. The action, he said, “will help homeowners and consumers harmed by SunTrust’s unlawful foreclosure practices.”

SunTrust is a mortgage lender and servicer headquartered in Richmond, Va., and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Atlanta-based SunTrust Banks, Inc.

As a mortgage servicer, it is responsible for collecting payments from the mortgage borrower on behalf of the owner of the loan. It handles customer service, collections, loan modifications, and foreclosures.

Loads of evidence

The CFPB, DOJ, HUD, and state attorneys general say they uncovered substantial evidence that SunTrust was engaged in systemic mortgage servicing misconduct. According to the complaint filed in the federal district court in the District of Columbia, the company’s illegal practices put thousands of people at risk of losing their homes. Specifically, the complaint alleges that SunTrust:

• failed to promptly and accurately apply payments made by borrowers, and charged unauthorized fees for default-related services.
• failed to provide accurate information about loan modification and other loss-mitigation services, failed to properly process borrowers’ applications and calculate their eligibility for loan modifications, and provided false or misleading reasons for denying loan modifications.
• provided false or misleading information to consumers about the status of foreclosure proceedings where the borrower was in good faith actively pursuing a loss mitigation alternative also offered by SunTrust. The company also robo-signed foreclosure documents, including preparing and filing affidavits whose signers had not actually reviewed any information to verify the claims.

J. of Atlanta, Ga., is fed up with the treatment he says he received at the hands of SunTrust.

“The SunTrust Mortgage 'loan modification' process is a joke,” he writes in a ConsumerAffairs post. “Complete incompetence across the board. Bottom line is this: SunTrust doesn't give a ** about anything but getting their money.” He claims the loan modification department and the foreclosure department “are two separate departments and the left hand has no idea what the right hand is doing and vice versa.”

Enforcement action

The proposed court order, filed in federal district court in the District of Columbia, would require SunTrust to correct its practices and provide relief to harmed consumers. Under the terms of the order, SunTrust must:

• provide more than $500 million in loss mitigation relief to consumers, including reducing the principal on mortgages for borrowers who are at risk of default and reducing mortgage interest rates for homeowners who are current but underwater on their mortgages. If SunTrust fails to meet this requirement, it must pay a cash penalty equal to at least 125 percent of the shortfall.
• refund $40 million to consumers whose loans it serviced who lost their homes to foreclosure between Jan. 1, 2008, to Dec. 31, 2013. All consumers who submit valid claims will receive an equal share of the $40 million. Borrowers who receive payments will not have to release any claims and will be free to seek additional relief in the courts. Eligible consumers can expect to hear from the settlement administrator about potential payments later this year.
• pay $10 million to cover losses it caused to the Federal Housing Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Rural Housing Service.
• establish additional homeowner protections, including protections for consumers in bankruptcy. Like other servicers, SunTrust is subject to the CFPB’s new mortgage servicing rules that took effect on January 10, 2014.

The agreement only covers SunTrust’s violations before the new rules took effect, and does not prevent the CFPB from pursuing civil enforcement actions against SunTrust for violations of these rules.

The settlement administrator will be in touch with eligible consumers who lost their homes to foreclosure between Jan. 1, 2008 and Dec. 31, 2013.  

Last week, when word first came out about the security breach at P. F. Chang's, the company confirmed that hackers had successfully stolen customers' credit and debit card data, but the time and extent of the breach was not known.

Chang's still has not come forth with more details, but according to security blogger Brian Krebs, new information from various card-issuing banks suggests that the breach started on or around Sept. 18, 2013, and continued through until June 11, the day after the U.S. Secret Service first told Chang's about the breach.

It's still not known exactly how many customers were affected, but Krebs said:

Assuming the breach affected all 211 P.F. Chang’s locations in the United States (a safe assumption since P.F. Chang’s recently switched to manual “knucklebuster” carbon-copy card imprinters at all locations), the nine-month breach is likely to have impacted more than 7 million cards.

If you have eaten at a P. F. Chang's and paid via debit or credit card anytime between last September and last week, be warned: there's a high risk your information is currently in the hands of whoever hacked into Chang's. Keep a sharper-than-usual eye on your accounts, and it might be a good idea to just go ahead and get new numbers on those accounts now, rather than wait to see if some hacker uses them to profit at your expense.

Mortgage applications are yo-yoing again, falling during the week of June 13, following an increase the week before.

Data from the Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) Weekly Mortgage Applications Survey show applications plunged 9.2% during the week, and that the Refinance Index was down 13%.

The latter decline pushed the refinance share of mortgage activity down 2% -- to 52% of total applications. The adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) share of activity was unchanged at 8% of total applications.

“Interest rates increased relative to the previous week, as incoming economic data continues to suggest a pickup in the pace of growth,” said Mike Fratantoni, MBA’s Chief Economist. “Although the average rate for the week was up only a few basis points, the increase was matched by a large drop in refinance volume, and purchase application volume also declined.

Fratantoni adds that some lenders continue to report that they have pre-approved borrowers who have been unable to find a property given the tight inventory in certain markets.

Contract interest rates

• The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages (FRMs) with conforming loan balances ($417,000 or less) rose to 4.36% from 4.34%, with points increasing to 0.24 from 0.16 (including the origination fee) for 80% loan-to-value ratio (LTV) loans. The effective rate increased from last week.
• The average contract interest rate for 30-year FRMs with jumbo loan balances (greater than $417,000) was up 5 basis points -- from 4.27% to 4.32% -- with points decreasing to 0.09 from 0.12 (including the origination fee) for 80% LTV loans. The effective rate increased from last week.
• The average contract interest rate for 30-year FRMs backed by the FHA increased to 4.07% from 4.06%, with points dropping to -0.39 from -0.03 (including the origination fee) for 80% LTV loans. The effective rate decreased from last week.
• The average contract interest rate for 15-year FRMs rose 7 basis points -- to 3.50%, with points decreasing to 0.16 from 0.22 (including the origination fee) for 80$ LTV loans. The effective rate increased from last week.
• The average contract interest rate for 5/1 ARMs moved up to 3.20% from 3.18%, with points falling to 0.27 from 0.35 (including the origination fee) for 80% LTV loans. The effective rate was unchanged from last week.

The survey covers over 75 percent of all U.S. retail residential mortgage applications.

General Motors is recalling 33 model year 2014 Chevrolet Corvette vehicles manufactured April 23, 2014, to April 25, 2014.

The Sensing and Diagnostic Module (SDM) in the affected vehicles may experience an internal short circuit, resulting in the deactivation of the air bags and seat belt pretensioners. If the SDM short circuits, the air bags may not deploy and the seat belt pretensioners may not activate in the event of a crash, increasing the risk of occupant injury.

GM will notify owners, and dealers will replace the SDM, free of charge. The manufacturer has not yet provided a notification schedule.

Owners may contact General Motors customer service at 1-800-222-1020. GM's number for this recall is 14219.

General Motors is recalling 31,520 model year 2012 Buick Verano vehicles manufactured December 2, 2011 to July, 16, 2012; Chevrolet Cruze vehicles manufactured December 7, 2011 to July 25, 2012; Chevrolet Sonic vehicles manufactured December 5, 2011 to August 2, 2012; and Chevrolet Camaro vehicles manufactured December 1, 2011 to June 11, 2012.

The driver side frontal air bag has a shorting bar which may intermittently contact the air bag terminals.

If the bar and terminals are contacting each other at the time of a crash necessitating deployment of the driver's frontal air bag, that air bag will not deploy, increasing the driver's risk of injury.

GM will notify owners, and dealers will replace the steering wheel air bag coil, free of charge. The manufacturer has not yet provided a notification schedule.

Chevrolet owners may contact GM at 1-800-222-1020. Buick owners may contact GM at 1-800-521-7300.  

Before 1961 Cuba was a favorite American vacation spot in the Caribbean, with white sandy beaches and a rich Latin culture. The Cuban Revolution and the Cold War put an end to that.

Not long after Fidel Castro came to power the United States imposed an economic embargo on the island nation, just a short flight from Miami. Not only were goods and services blocked from passing back and forth, so were people.

But in recent years, both Cuba and the U.S. have quietly moved to ease travel restrictions. Today, it's possible for just about any American citizen who wants to travel to Cuba to do so. But what you can do once you get there can be limited.

Trips now common

According to The New York Times nearly a half million Americans now make the trip to Cuba each year, with the blessing of the U.S. government. But the government has very strict rules covering the itinerary.

Americans with a close relative living in Cuba have the most travel leeway. While other travelers need specific travel licenses from the Treasury Department, Americans who have proved a familial relationship with someone on the island can travel on a general license. Once there they can do pretty much as they please – even go to the beach.

Not so for other travelers. But if you work for or belong to a church or religious organization represented in Cuba, and can document that you are traveling to engage in religious activities, you can get permission to go.

By the same token, if your employment or academic involvement requires you to travel to Cuba for research, you may receive a license for travel. But the travel has to be all work and no play.

Educational trips

For everyone else there is a category of travel known as “people-to-people” tours, a legal loophole to the travel ban. To meet the legal guidelines these trips must be purely educational in nature and no, you won't be hitting the beach.

These tours connect American travelers to “everyday” Cuban people – artisans, entrepreneurs and ordinary Cuban citizens. You might visit Ernest Hemingway's home.

The closest you'll get to the beach is the Bay of Pigs, where U.S.-back Cuban exiles tried to invade the country in 1961.

Since people-to-people tours provide the only way for almost anyone to visit Cuba, they are enjoying explosive growth. A number of travel agencies now specialize in these trips.

Licensed providers

International Expeditions (IE) is one such travel company offering licensed people-to-people tours to Cuba. Its brochure promises an “unfiltered” view of the Island.

“While traversing the countryside and sipping coffee in small cafés, IE guests encounter working-class locals eager to share, learn and ensure lives and options are transformed,” the company says.

YMT Vacations is another provider of people-to-people travel packages packages to Cuba. It recently announced its 2015 departure dates.

“We are excited to announce the 2015 departure dates for our best-selling Cuba program which features a myriad of people-to-people experiences,” said company president Jerre Fuqua. “Over the past 2 years, YMT has been pleased to be among the select group of tour operators licensed to offer travel to Cuba.”

Fugua says since launching in 2012, YMT has taken nearly 2,000 travelers to Cuba. The company says it will offer weekly departure dates beginning in January 2015.

Tour costs vary. YMT says its 8-day Cuban tour starts at $1999 per person and includes hotel accommodations in Havana and Cayo Santa Maria.

Last month the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed charges against several individuals and the companies they control for unsupported advertising claims about a green coffee extract product they marketed for $50 a bottle.

The controversy also swept up a popular TV doctor, with the result that Dr. Mehmet Oz, host of The Dr. Oz Show, made a rather uncomfortable appearance before a Senate Committee Tuesday, looking into deceptive claims about natural remedies and weight loss products.

Oz has no financial stake in the companies in question or in any other firms producing or marketing green coffee extract. However, his passionate endorsement of the product on a 2012 program, seen in the clip below, was used by a number of different marketers to promote these products.

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO), chair of the Senate Consumer Protection subcommittee, who called the hearing, sternly took Oz to task, especially when he said he believed the extract was, in fact, helpful.

False hope

“The scientific community is almost monolithic against you in terms of the efficacy of the three products that you call miracles,” she said. “When you call a product a miracle, and it's something you can buy, and it's something that gives people false hope, I don't understand why you need to go there.”

Oz admitted that he sometimes went overboard with “flowery” language about some products on his show, but attributed it to “being passionate.” He hinted, without directly saying it, that passion was often required due to the nature of a daytime TV talk show.

“My job on the show is to be a cheerleader for the audience,” Oz told McCaskill. “When they don't think they have hope, when they don't think they can make it happen, I want to look everywhere, including alternative traditions, for any evidence that might be supportive of them.”

Defending his “passion” about green coffee extract, Oz said that, with the amount of information he has about it, he is still comfortable telling people that if they can buy a reputable version of it, it can help.

“But I don't sell it and it's not for long-term use,” he said.

3 suggestions

As for cleaning up the wild west of deceptive Internet advertising for bogus natural remedies and weight loss products, Oz offered three suggestions:

• Private sector should create and maintain a list of celebrities who have actually endorsed a product or have a financial stake in a product. The list would serve as a quick reference for web sites and ad networks to check claims before accepting ads.
• Set up whistle blower program to encourage employees of companies making and marketing these products to report illegal behavior.
• Establish a private sector funded bounty system, enlisting private citizens to monitor and expose scams.

While Oz appeared to charm other members of the Senate panel, McCaskill was unrelenting.

“No one is telling you not to use passion, but passion in connection with the words 'miracle pill' and 'weight loss' is a recipe for disaster in this environment, for people who are looking for an easy fix.” McCaskill said.

Take two pills, pet your dog and call me in the morning. What kind of prescription is that? It's not advice from Dr. Doolittle, but it could be advice from one of the top physicians in the country because Animal Assisted Therapy (AAT) seems to be getting the OK from the medical world.

A 2011 report from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Health Center for Health Statistics revealed that almost 60% of hospice care providers that provide complementary and alternative therapies offer pet therapy to patients. Animal therapy is the idea that animals can help humans cope with or recover from certain medical conditions.

Dr. Boris Levinson first introduced AAT back in the 1960's. He was treating a 9-year-old boy who was very difficult to reach but when Dr. Levinson let his dog Jingles in the room with him, the boy opened up.

With Jingles -- dubbed his "co-therapist" by Dr. Levinson -- he found he was able to gain the boy's trust, something that past therapists had failed to do.

Experts scoffed

In the early 60's the American Psychological Association was not overwhelmed with evidence that this therapy actually worked and scoffed at the idea.

A survey conducted by Levinson 10 years later found that of 319 psychologists, 16% used companion animals in their therapy sessions, indicating that people were warming to the idea of AAT.

It's not just dogs that are finding their way into therapy. An Ohio State University study earlier this year found that horses can be helpful in treating Alzheimer's patients. 

The study tested people with dementia and found that horses seemed to elevate moods which correlated to fewer incidents of negative behavior.

Could AAT replace drug treatment? A 2009 study from Layola University in Chicago found that adults who used AAT -- in the form of canine therapy -- while recovering from total joint-replacement surgery required 50% less pain medication.

There's a lot of buzz developing around tomorrow's release of Amazon's first-ever smartphone, including reports that AT&T will be the exclusive carrier for the new phone.

The Wall Street Journal reports today that AT&T will have a lock on the phone, at least initially. It is already the carrier that providers wireless service to Kindle tablets and e-readers.

The phone -- rumored to be called the Kindle Phone -- will be unveiled tomorrow (Wednesday) in Seattle but it has already been displayed to developers around the country, leading to early reports about what may turn out to be its most distinguishing feature -- a three-dimensional display that works without special glasses.

The Journal says the phone uses retina-tracking technology in four front-facing cameras that makes some images appear to be 3-D, sort of like a hologram.

The link-up could help AT&T pick up new subscribers, possibly giving it a boost at a time when major carriers are locked in a battle to steal customers from each other, having signed up just about everyone who's old enough to use a smartphone.

The Amazon phone faces a tough marketing challenge. Apple and Samsung are well-entrenched with more than 60% of the market. But analysts note that even if Amazon's phone doesn't set the world on fire, it will give Amazon a direct line to its customers.  

Amazon obviously hopes the device ties it even more tightly to its customer base by providing a home screen that displays whatever Amazon in its wisdom thinks each customer is likely to be looking for at any given moment -- anything from toothpaste to music to streaming video.

“Imagine a home screen of all Amazon apps -- that’s kind of what they are looking for,” said Carl Howe, an analyst at Boston-based Yankee Group, Bloomberg News reported.

Some cynics say you should watch out for foods that claims to be healthful. And now some researchers are saying the same thing. 

The use of health-related buzzwords like “antioxidant,” “gluten-free” and “whole grain” lull consumers into thinking packaged food products labeled with those words are healthier than they actually are, according to a new research study conducted by scholars at the University of Houston (UH).

That “false sense of health,” as well as a failure to understand the information presented in nutrition facts panels on packaged food, may be contributing to the obesity epidemic in the United States, said Temple Northup, an assistant professor at the Jack J. Valenti School of Communication at UH.

“Saying Cherry 7-Up contains antioxidants is misleading. Food marketers are exploiting consumer desires to be healthy by marketing products as nutritious when, in fact, they’re not,” said Northup. 

A study conducted by Northrup's team examined the degree to which consumers link marketing terms on food packaging with good health. It found that consumers tend to view food products labeled with health-related euphemisms as healthier than those without them. The research also showed that the nutrition facts panels printed on food packaging as required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration do little to counteract that buzzword marketing.

“Words like organic, antioxidant, natural and gluten-free imply some sort of healthy benefit,” Northup said. “When people stop to think about it, there’s nothing healthy about Antioxidant Cherry 7-Up – it’s mostly filled with high fructose syrup or sugar. But its name is giving you this clue that there is some sort of health benefit to something that is not healthy at all.”

“Food marketers say there are nutritional labels, so people can find out what’s healthy and what’s not,” he said. “Findings from this research study indicate people aren’t very good at reading nutritional labels even in situations where they are choosing between salmon and Spam. Approximately 20 percent picked Spam as the healthier option over salmon,” said Northup.

Northup hopes the results of this study will contribute to an increased dialogue on how food is marketed, guide development of specific media literacy and help people understand the effects of how food is marketed to consumers.

It's difficult to talk about what “consumers” want because that one word covers countless individuals who all want different things: this one wants low prices more than anything else, that one wants high quality, someone else makes a point to “Buy American” whenever possible.

There's also what's called the “responsible consumption” market, for consumers who want to be “socially responsible”: these are the items touted as being “organic,” “Earth-friendly,” “fair trade” or otherwise sensitive to various issues.

According to a study by the Boston Consulting Group, there are definite growth opportunities in the responsible consumption market:

Goods labeled organic, natural, ecological, and fair trade are no longer a niche in the food, personal-care, and household products sectors. These goods have entered mainstream retailers and become a large part of the market, with a broad base of consumers now purchasing them. In an otherwise stagnant industry, these “responsible consumption” (RC) products represent a major area of profitable growth.

Small niches

But so far, according to the BCG study, the bulk of that growth is happening in small niche businesses, as most of the major-brand companies ignore this new business opportunity:

Most of this growth, however, is going not to A brands—the major product brands—but to specialty brands and to both specialty and conventional retailers. Most A-brand manufacturers, in fact, have weak or nonexistent offerings in this area. Continued inaction may cost A brands one-third of their current consumers over the next few years.

So if you're a socially conscious consumer who wishes the market had more offerings in line with your preferences, the future looks bright for you. But if you're a stockholder in those A-brand companies, you might want to diversify your portfolio a bit.

On June 17, Democrats in Congress and the Senate have put forward a proposed piece of legislation which, if successful, would ban so-called “fast lanes” on the Internet.

In May, the FCC issued a rather confusing report claiming to support net neutrality, the idea that Internet providers must treat all content equally, so that viewers can see all websites at the same speed, rather than enjoy quick access to the websites of wealthy companies willing to pay fast lane fees while suffering slow, clunky service everywhere else.

Yet the FCC confusingly -- at least to some -- spoke in favor of net neutrality while simultaneously allowing ISP to offer “fast lanes” to companies willing to pay extra.

In response, Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Representative Doris Matsui of California proposed the Online Competition and Consumer Choice Act which, if passed, would ban ISPs from offering paid fast-lane services.

The Washington Post, which reported on the proposal Tuesday morning before it was actually introduced, noted:

Leahy and Matsui's proposed ban on fast lanes would apply only to the connections between consumers and their ISPs — the part of the Internet governed by the FCC's proposed net neutrality rules. The FCC's current proposal tacitly allows for the creation of a tiered Internet for content companies, though the commission has asked the public whether it should ban the practice as "commercially unreasonable."

Whether a bill proposed by two Democrats will get enough Republican and Democratic votes to actually pass into law remains to be seen.

New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman has wrested an agreement from several major retailers to bring unit pricing information to online supermarkets and drugstores nationwide. 

Within nine months, unit pricing will be available on the websites and mobile apps of Walmart, Costco, Walgreens, FreshDirect, CVS and Drugstore.com. Amazon refused to participate. 

‎Although Amazon displays unit pricing on some of its pages, it does not provide the information uniformly across its platforms. Furthermore, its subsidiaries do not currently display unit pricing.

Unfortunately for consumers, Amazon refused to agree to provide the information. The company claims it will extend unit pricing to its subsidiary Quidsi, which operates online stores like Soap.com, but refused to commit to that in a written agreement.

It also would not agree to extend unit pricing to pages where that information is absent, nor would it commit to continue providing unit pricing information to consumers in the future, Schneiderman's office said.

Robust protections

“As the internet becomes the shopping mall of the 21st century, we need to ensure that consumers have the same robust protections online that they do in brick-and-mortar stores,” said Schneiderman. “Making New York more affordable for the middle class includes empowering consumers to spend their money wisely. I commend these retailers for recognizing the need for transparency and promoting openness online."

Unit pricing benefits consumers by allowing them to quickly compare prices of different items regardless of quantity, manufacturer, packaging size or discounts. For example, a single product category, such as breakfast cereal, can feature a wide array of sizes and packaging combinations from a variety of competing brands.

The unit price combines those factors and gives the price per ounce, generally displayed next to the retail price, allowing consumers to make better and faster choices.

Nineteen states and the District of Columbia have some type of unit pricing requirement. New York law requires that large retail stores clearly display the price per unit of measurement for most types of food, cleaning and paper products, toiletries, pet food and over-the-counter medications.

Prior to this initiative, unit pricing information online was rare. Among large retailers, full availability of unit pricing was limited to online grocer Peapod.

After posting impressive gains in April and March, new home construction fell 6.5% in May.

Figures released jointly by the U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development put privately-owned housing starts at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,001,000. Despite the May decline, the rate of construction is 9.4% above the year ago level.

Single-family housing starts in May were down 5.9% at a rate of 625,000, while the rate for units in buildings with five units or more was 366,000.

Building permits

Authorization by building permits of privately-owned housing units fell 6.4% from April -- to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 991,000. However, the rate for single family units were up 3.7% at 619,000. Authorizations of units in buildings with five units or more were at a rate of 347,000 in May.

The full report on new home construction is available on the Census Bureau website.

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing is recalling 10,462 model year 2013 Lexus GS 350 vehicles manufactured June 8, 2012, through December 26, 2012.

In the affected vehicles, the switch that senses the amount of pressure that the driver is applying to the brake pedal may fail. If the switch fails, the vehicle may begin braking without the driver's input, and without illuminating the brake lights, increasing the risk of a crash.

Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will replace the brake pedal support assembly which includes the brake pedal load sensing switch, free of charge.

Parts for the remedy are not currently available. Toyota will send owners an interim notification letter in late June 2014 to advise owners of the recall, and will mail owners a second letter when remedy parts are available.

Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331.

This month's tragic accident involving a vehicle carrying comedian Tracy Morgan and several others has focused new attention on an old problem; drowsy driving.

Morgan was critically injured and fellow comedian James McNair was killed when a Walmart tractor-trailer truck slammed into their limousine. The truck driver, it was later learned, had been without sleep for more than 24 hours.

The accident occurred on the New Jersey Turnpike in the early hours of June 7, in a state that has long taken a tough stand against drowsy driving. New Jersey was the first state to prohibit drowsy driving in 2003 with the passage of “Maggie’s Law.”

The law is based on the fact that being sleepy behind the wheel poses a danger because of impaired judgment, slower reaction time, impaired coordination and increased aggressiveness.

Felony charges

The truck driver in the Morgan accident has been charged with vehicular homicide and four counts of assault by auto.

The New Jersey law applies to all drivers but the trucking industry has its own set of rules that govern how much rest drivers must get, just as aviation regulations limit a pilot's time in the cockpit.

The high-profile New Jersey accident occurred amidst debate in Congress over changes to established hours-of-service rules for truck drivers. American Trucking Associations President and CEO Bill Graves says the proposed rule changes do not really address how much sleep truck drivers have to get.

“The hours-of-service rules – whether they are the current regulations, the pre-2013 rules, or the rules with changes we hope to see as a result of Congressional action – only place limits on driving and on-duty time and require that between work periods drivers take a minimum of 10 consecutive hours off-duty,” Graves said in a statement. They do not dictate what drivers do during that off-duty period. No rule can address what a driver does in his or her off-duty time.”

Current regulations

The current rule, put in place a year ago, requires truck drivers to take a half-hour break after being on duty for 8 hours and to take at least 34 consecutive hours off between work weeks. Those 34 hours must also contain two consecutive off periods between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m.

Graves says the industry supports changes to the current restrictions on use of the hours-of-service restart provision, which he says alters driver sleep patterns and puts more trucks on the road during more risky daylight hours.

He says fatigue is a factor in only 10% of truck crashes. But experts says it can be an important safety issue, not just for truck drivers but for anyone behind the wheel without adequate sleep.

Fatigue factor

“When you are sleep-deprived for more than 24 hours, you need stronger sensory stimulation to maintain alertness,” said Xue Ming, a sleep medicine doctor at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School in Newark.

Impairment might be hard to notice in some cases. Sensory input such as light, noise and touch keeps people alert. In a vehicle alone, late at night, there is less stimulation.

All to often, Ming says, the brain will drift into a full sleep state or a micro sleep, which can last from a fraction of a second up to 30 seconds.

“In this state, the person feels like he is awake – he might even still have his eyes open – but he is actually asleep,” she said.

As you might expect drivers are most prone to dozing off from 2 a.m. to 4 a.m. and 1 p.m. to 3 p.m., when their circadian rhythm – which regulates periods of sleepiness and wakefulness – declines.

Staying alert

Ming says there are several ways to remain alert when a driver starts to fade out. Take a 20-minute nap, down two cups of coffee or similar caffeinated beverage, brighten the dashboard or purchase a visor light box that simulates morning light for the passenger side, since light boosts alertness.

“But, if you are feeling really tired,” Ming says, “the best thing to do is park your car and call a cab.”