Current Events in February 2017

After posting their first decline in four weeks last week, mortgage applications are headed higher.

The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) reports applications were up 2.3% for the week ending February 3, with the Refinance Index rising 2.0%. As a share of overall applications, refinancings fell to 47.9% -- the lowest level since June 2009.

The adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) share of activity increased to 6.9% of total applications; the FHA share dipped to 11.9% from 12.1% the week before; the VA share rose to 12.7% from 12.4%; and the USDA share was unchanged at 0.9%.

Contract interest rates

• The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages (FRMs) with conforming loan balances ($424,000 or less) was down four basis points -- to 4.35% from 4.39% -- with points unchanged at 0.34 (including the origination fee) for 80% loan-to-value ratio (LTV) loans. The effective rate decreased from last week.
• The average contract interest rate for 30-year FRMs with jumbo loan balances (greater than $424,000) dropped from 4.32% to 4.27%, with points decreasing to 0.31 from 0.34 (including the origination fee) for 80% LTV loans. The effective rate decreased from last week.
• The average contract interest rate for 30-year FRMs backed by the FHA slipped one basis point to 4.16%, with points increasing to 0.37 from 0.35 (including the origination fee) for 80% LTV loans. The effective rate remained unchanged from last week.
• The average contract interest rate for 15-year FRMs fell to 3.55% from 3.61%, with points increasing to 0.34 from 0.33 (including the origination fee) for 80% LTV loans. The effective rate decreased from last week.
• The average contract interest rate for 5/1 ARMs rose six basis points to 3.39%, with points decreasing to 0.18 from 0.22 (including the origination fee) for 80% LTV loans. The effective rate increased from last week.

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

Ford Motor Company is recalling 17 model year 2016 Focus and C-Max vehicles.

The floor pan may have improperly welded left-hand apron joints which may reduce the front-end structural integrity of the vehicle, increasing the risk of injury in the event of a crash.

What to do

Ford will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the apron joints, repairing the vehicle, as necessary, free of charge. The recall is expected to begin March 6, 2017.

Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 17S03.

Sony Electronics of San Diego, Calif., is expanding its June 2016 recall of Panasonic battery packs used in Sony Electronics laptop computers.

Another 700 battery packs are being recalled. About 1,700 were previously recalled.

The lithium-ion battery packs can overheat, posing burn and fire hazards.

No incidents or injuries have been reported.

This expanded recall involves Panasonic lithium-ion battery packs installed in 18 models of Sony’s VAIO Series laptop computers.

The Panasonic battery packs were manufactured with the laptop and battery packs were sold separately or installed by Sony as part of a repair.

Panasonic battery packs included in this recall have model number VGP-BPS26 and part numbers 1-853-237-11 and 1-853-237-21 printed on the back of the battery pack.

Recalled model numbers for the Sony VAIO laptop computer are:

Battery packs previously identified as not affected by the June 2016 recall are included in this expanded announcement.

The battery packs, manufactured in China, were sold at Best Buy, Sony retail stores, other consumer electronic stores nationwide and online at www.store.sony.com and other websites from February 2013, through October 2013, for between $550 and $1,000 as part of Sony VAIO laptops and for about $170 for battery packs sold separately.

What to do

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled battery packs, power off the laptop, remove the battery and follow instructions to obtain a free replacement. Until a replacement battery pack is received, consumers should use the laptop by plugging in AC power only.

Consumers may contact Sony Electronics toll-free at 888-476-6988 from 8 a.m. to 12 a.m. (ET) Monday through Friday or 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. (ET) Saturday and Sunday, or online at www.sony.com, click on “Support” and then “Support Alerts” for more information.

Ford Motor Company is recalling 6,792 model year 2017 F-150 trucks equipped with an eight-inch productivity screen.

The vehicles' instrument cluster may lose power after the initial vehicle start-up in cold ambient temperatures. Several gauges, including the transmission gear position indicator, may not illuminate.

As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicles Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 102, "Transmission shift position sequence, starter interlock, and transmission braking effect."

If the transmission gear position indicator fails to illuminate, the driver may be unable to tell the transmission shift position, increasing the risk of a crash or injury from unintended vehicle movement.

What to do

Ford will notify owners, and dealers will reprogram the instrument cluster, free of charge. The recall was expected to begin February 7, 2017.

Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 17C01.

BMW has agreed to pay about $477 million to settle a class action that alleged the automaker put delicate electronic components in the bottom of the trunk, where they were often damaged by water leaks.

The lawsuit covers about 318,000 5 Series cars from the 2004-2010 model years. Owners may receive up to $1,500 for prior repairs. Only cars less than 10 years old with fewer than 120,000 miles are eligible.

In the suit, lead plaintiff George Catalano said that in June 2012, his 2007 BMW 530xi wagon shut down on a four-lane divided highway after flashing dashboard lights warned of a "complete electrical failure."

He had the car towed to a BMW dealership, where an examination found nearly two inches of water had accumulated in the spare-tire well of the car, partly as a result of water that had infiltrated into the area from clogged sunroof drain tubes.

Spilled water bottle

Other consumers reported similar problems.

Sandra of Orange, California, said in a ConsumerAffairs review that electrical problems in her car were finally traced to a spilled water bottle in the trunk, which BMW used as an excuse to avoid repairing the car under warranty. 

"I cannot use the trunk for everyday grocery shopping for fear that something will leak and cause the wires to burn again, thereby creating the chance of a possible fire hazard," Sandra said. "Even if there is not a fire due to the burnt wires, there is the possibility of the car shutting down, creating an accident which could cause injury to myself or another party."

Other consumers complained that the problem caused repeated instrument failures.

"I bought a 2007 525i BMW a little bit over a year ago and this is the second time during the last four months that the tire pressure monitor (TPM) sensor goes bad," said Juan of The Woodlands, Texas. "Due to water intrusion in the trunk it causes for the TPM sensor to get water damaged. By browsing the internet I am now aware that this is a common malfunction for the TPM monitoring sensor on the 525i model."

Owners argued in the suit that the automaker knew of the problem as early as 2004 based on complaints, warranty claims, and technical service bulletins filed with the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. BMW has denied wrongdoing.

The settlement must still be approved by U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest.

In the wake of the financial crisis, millions of consumers became "unbanked," meaning they had no bank account.

Some became "unbanked" by choice, but many were either dropped by their banks or could no longer afford the fees associated with bank accounts.

These consumers often turned to prepaid debit cards as an alternative. These cards provided easy access to cash and an ability to pay bills online. But just like banks, these cards were often loaded with fees, including hefty overdraft fees.

In October, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) finalized rules to increase consumer protections for prepaid card users. The rules require prepaid card issuers to provide many of the same protections to consumers that credit card companies provide. They also require issuers to give consumers clear information about fees before an account is opened.

Lawmaker claims rules hurt consumers

Now, seven Republican members of the U.S. Senate are seeking to block implementation of those rules. Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.) is the primary sponsor of the legislation, claiming the rules are actually hurting consumers who use prepaid cards.

“If the CFPB wants to continue to impose rules and regulations that impact every American’s financial well-being, it must answer to the American people,” said Perdue, a member of the Senate Banking Committee. “As a business guy, I have experienced first-hand the impact overregulation has on growth and innovation. This rule is entirely too broad and would cripple the electronic payment marketplace which Georgians and millions of consumers across the country depend on.”

But the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) contends that isn't the case at all. It claims the primary beneficiary of the CFPB rules rollback would be a prepaid card company called NetSpend (an Authorized Partner), whose parent company, TSYS, is based in Perdue's state.

More overdraft fees

NCLC contends a successful repeal of the rules would result in Netspend (an Authorized Partner) collecting $80 million a year in overdraft fees while blocking the expanded fraud protections.

“It is outrageous that Congress may block basic fraud protections on prepaid cards so that NetSpend (an Authorized Partner) can keep gouging struggling families with overdraft fees that have no place on prepaid cards,” said Lauren Saunders, associate director of the NCLC.

Sauders says the move is a continuation of the GOP's campaign against the CFPB, which was established under Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation. GOP lawmakers say the CFPB is not accountable as other government agencies are and has repeatedly overstepped its bounds.

But Saunders say CFPB has been an effective consumer watchdog that has returned nearly $12 billion to consumers since it was established.

You may recall last year when Philadelphia became one of the first cities to enact a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages. Advocates lined up behind the bill in the hope that it would help fight obesity and fund initiatives like pre-kindergarten education.

Opponents derided the tax as being unconstitutional and in flagrant violation of the law. In September, the American Beverage Association, business owners, and some residents lashed out against the proposed bill, stating that the tax unfairly duplicated the effects of 6% sales tax that consumers already had to pay for sugar-sweetened beverages.

However, the bill remained fixed – and on January 1 it went into effect. Now, some lawmakers are lining up against the bill again. The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that three dozen legislators have filed a brief calling for the tax to be overturned, stating that it ultimately could have a negative impact on the state’s budget.

“The Philadelphia Sweetened Beverage Tax is an impermissible sales tax no matter how it is couched and, if allowed to stand, sets a dangerous precedent. The trial court erred when it upheld the tax,” the brief states.

Dangerous implications

The 13-page brief states that the tax should be stricken down because it (1) violates the Sterling Act, (2) violates the Uniformity Clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution, and (3) undermines the state’s ability to fund important services.

The Sterling Act states that no tax or levy can be collected on a product that is already subject to a state tax. Those who drafted the soda tax claim that it doesn’t violate the law because it is imposed at the distribution level and is fundamentally different from a sales tax. However, the opposed lawmakers say that the argument is a matter of semantics, and that the extra cost is simply passed down to consumers anyway.

Lawmakers say the Uniformity Clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution is breached because the tax doesn’t apply equally to all beverage products. Since the tax is applied based on the volume of a product, and not its value, the mark-up on some high-volume products is much greater than low-volume, expensive brands. The brief provides examples of diet tonic water being taxed at 78% of its value, while a six-pack of Red Bull is only taxed at 6%.

Finally, lawmakers say that the tax undermines public policy because it effectively hurts the state’s ability to collect money. The brief argues that the tax would allow government entities across Pennsylvania to similarly avoid the Sterling Act’s structure, and consumers would either stop buying some products altogether or travel out of state to buy them. Without the additional sales tax revenue, the lawmakers say that important services and appropriations could be put at risk, and the passing of an annual state budget could be delayed.

Mixed opinions

Philadelphia mayor James Kenney’s administration initially dismissed the brief, saying that the 36 lawmakers don’t represent the majority of the legislature. Philadelphia city spokesman Mike Dunn released a statement saying that the brief “does nothing but parrot arguments by the American Beverage Association that were previously rejected by the Court of Common Pleas.”

However, the lawmakers who did sign the brief state that the tax has dangerous implications. Sen. Anthony H. Williams explains that although the tax was designed with good intentions, it is unfairly burdening poorer members of the community and might force smaller retailers out of business.

“It is having a very, very negative impact on the community that they thought they were going to help. . . The execution of [using a beverage tax] is an experiment that needs to be stopped and rethought. This tax is falling upon the poor,” he said.

City spokeswoman Lauren Hitt denied the claim, saying that the beverage industry had taken advantage of poor communities for decades. She argues that the tax will help change this dynamic by helping to fund important programs like pre-kindergarten education.

A New Jersey company that offers advances to people awaiting settlements in lawsuits is itself being sued. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and the New York Attorney General allege that RD Legal Funding, LLC, scammed 9/11 first responders and NFL football players out of millions of dollars.

“It is unconscionable that RD Legal scammed 9/11 heroes and NFL concussion victims out of millions of dollars,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “We allege that this company and its owner lined their pockets with funds intended to cover medical care and other critical expenses for people who are sick and sidelined. Our lawsuit seeks to end this illegal scheme and get money back to those entitled to receive it.”

Besides RD Funding, the suit names two related companies and their owner, Roni Dersovitz.

The suit alleges that RD Funding deceived 9/11 first responders with cancer and other illnesses and football players with brain injuries out of millions of dollars by luring them into costly advances on settlement payouts with lies about the terms of the deals. The suit seeks to put an end to the company’s illegal practices, obtain relief for the victims, and impose penalties.

“The alleged actions by RD Legal -- scamming 9/11 heroes and former NFL players struggling with severe injuries -- are simply shameful," said New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman. "RD Legal used deceptive tactics to charge unlawfully high interest rates for advances on settlement and compensation funds, allowing them to profit off the backs of these unsuspecting individuals.” 

"Swooped in"

RD Legal targeted police, firefighters, paramedics, and others who were first responders to the World Trade Center attack on September 11, 2001. Many of these first responders suffer from cancers and other respiratory illnesses related to their exposure to dust and debris at the attack site, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and memory loss.

They were awarded money from the Zadroga Fund, established by Congress to assist with needs including mounting medical costs and lost income because of their inability to work. RD Legal also targeted former NFL players who have been diagnosed with neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease and were entitled to payments from the settlement in a class action lawsuit.

The suit alleges that RD Legal contacted these consumers after they were awarded their money but before they received most of it. RD Legal then swooped in with a “deal,” offering the victims an upfront payment of some of the money they had not yet received which would be paid back when they received the balance of the payout.

Through confusing contracts, RD Legal misrepresented to consumers their obligation to repay these expensive transactions, often collecting from the consumer more than twice what RD Legal had advanced months earlier, the suit charges. It alleges that RD Legal’s actions cost victims, many of whom suffered long-term physical or cognitive harm, millions of dollars.

The costs of Medicare are quickly rising and are likely to rise even more in the years ahead as more Baby Boomers are enrolled. It has many lawmakers and policymakers looking for ways to cut costs.

Researchers at University of California San Diego School of Medicine have a suggestion: take a hard look at how Medicare Advantage plans are funded.

In a report published in the journal Health Affairs, the researchers contend that Medicare could over-pay Medicare Advantage plans by $200 billion over 10 years.

When you sign up for Medicare, you have the option of going with Original Medicare or enrolling in a Medicare Advantage plan. These Medicare Advantage plans are provided by private health insurance companies that contract with Medicare to lump all services -- Part A, Part B, and Part D prescription drug coverage -- into one policy. Advantage plans can also cover things that Medicare doesn't.

Payment method is the problem

Medicare pays Medicare Advantage providers, but the UC researchers say how they are paid is the source of the problem. When an individual enrolls in Medicare Advantage, Medicare pays an amount into the plan based on how much medical service the individual is likely to need.

The problem is, there is really no way to know. The researchers say Medicare Advantage plan administrators "have strong incentives to find and report as many diagnoses as they can," meaning they get more money from Medicare. This is called “coding intensity.”

The researchers point to a recent study that found no evidence that Medicare Advantage policyholders use any more medical services than people enrolled in Original Medicare. Unless this payment system changes, the researchers argue, Medicare could overpay Medicare Advantage plans by $200 billion over the next decade.

Protect taxpayers

Principal investigator Richard Kronick says Congress and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) should establish a payment system that protects taxpayers from strategies used by Medicare Advantage plans to boost their revenue.

“The projected $200 billion in over-payments over the next ten years is stunningly large in absolute dollar terms," he said. "To provide some perspective, federal support for community health centers is approximately $5 billion per year.”

Kronick says more than 30% of people on Medicare have opted for a Medicare Advantage program. To reduce the cost to the taxpayer, he says the payment system should be adjusted to make no distinction in the health of those in Medicare Advantage plans and those on Original Medicare.

Popular culture's recent emphasis on healthy eating has had an effect -- mostly good. People know they should eat more healthy foods and avoid loading up on the unhealthy type.

They even have a pretty good idea of what's good for you and what isn't. But when it comes to actually eating the good and avoiding the bad, a new survey suggests that's where it gets tricky.

When polling firm ORC International conducted a survey for a supplements maker, it found 60% of Americans said they believed they were eating a healthy diet.

But when the survey takers delved into just what Americans were eating, they discovered that 62% were eating just one to two servings of fruits and vegetables daily, despite USDA recommendations of eating five or more servings daily.

Only 6% hitting the goal

In fact, only 6% of consumers in the survey said they met the USDA recommendation of five or more servings of fruits and vegetables a day.

"My experience consistently shows me that a large number of Americans live high-carb, high-sugar, caffeine-overloaded, stressed-out, no-exercise lives," said Dr. Tieraona Low Dog, M.D, an advocate of vitamin supplements in diets. "We may have good intentions when it comes to eating well, but the truth is that many of us fall short of an ideal diet."

In recent years, there have been conflicting studies when it comes to vitamin supplements. Government health experts writing at Nutrition.gov say it's best to meet nutritional needs by eating a variety of the right foods.

Supplements may be useful in some cases

"In some cases, vitamin/mineral supplements or fortified foods may be useful for providing nutrients that may otherwise be eaten in less than recommended amounts," they write. "If you are already eating the recommended amount of a nutrient, you may not get any further health benefit from taking a supplement. In some cases, supplements and fortified foods may actually cause you to exceed safe levels of intake of nutrients."

According to the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, a federal agency, a healthy eating plan is one that provides necessary nutrients while staying within a daily calorie goal. It reduces the risk of heart disease and other unhealthy conditions.

What specifically should be on a healthy plate? Nutritionists suggest vegetables, fruits, whole grains, and fat-free or low-fat dairy.

They also recommend plenty of protein from lean meats, poultry, fish, beans, eggs, and nuts. Consumers should also go easy on added salt and sugar and keep portion sizes reasonable.

Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing is recalling 72,847 model year 2016-2017 Tundras equipped with a resin rear step bumper and resin reinforcement brackets. Vehicles with chrome step bumpers are not affected.

In the event of an impact to the corner of the bumper, the resin bracket may be damaged but not be noticed.

If a person steps on the corner of the bumper that is damaged, a portion of the bumper may break away, increasing the risk of injury.

What to do

Toyota will notify owners, and dealers will replace the resin rear bumper reinforcement brackets with steel ones, and replace the rear bumper tread, free of charge. Remedy parts are not currently available.

Toyota will begin notifying owners of the recall on February 15, 2017. A second notice will be mailed when remedy parts are available.

Owners may contact Toyota customer service at 1-800-331-4331. Toyota's number for this recall is H0C.

General Motors is recalling 17,197 model year 2016-2017 Chevrolet Cruze vehicles.

A bracket used in the driver or front passenger seat-back recliner mechanism may have been incorrectly welded to the seat-back frame. As a result, in the event of a crash, the head-restraints may not function properly.

As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 202a, "Head Restraints."

The seat-backs for the front seats may break in a crash, increasing the risk of injury to the occupants.

What to do

GM will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the front passenger seats, replacing any with seat-back frames that are incorrectly welded, free of charge. The manufacturer has not yet provided a notification schedule.

Owners may contact Chevrolet customer service at 1-800-222-1020. GM's number for this recall is 17035.

Car safety groups are suing to overturn a Federal Trade Commission consent order that lets car dealers and manufacturers say that "certified" cars are "safe" and have passed a "rigorous inspection," even though safety recall repairs have not been done.

“We’re optimistic that the Court will rein in the FTC’s dangerous and irresponsible abuse of its authority. Instead of protecting consumers, the FTC is protecting unscrupulous auto dealers who engage in false and deceptive advertising about the safety of the cars they offer for sale to the public. This is a serious threat to used car buyers, their families, and all who share the roads,” said Rosemary Shahan, President of Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety, one of the organizations filing the legal action.

The FTC’s order set a de-facto standard for the auto industry that allows dealers to deceptively advertise cars with dangerous and potentially lethal safety defects that have killed and maimed people, the groups said. 

“Even if there is a 100% certainty that an unrepaired safety recall defect will immediately kill anyone who buys a so-called ‘certified’ car and their family, the FTC would allow car dealers to advertise that car as ‘safe’ and ‘repaired for safety,’” said Michael Brooks, Acting Director of the Center for Auto Safety. “Clearly the Court should intervene and force the FTC to reverse itself.”

Greater risk

The consumer groups said the FTC’s consent order is already putting motorists at greater risk of death or injury, citing a recent report in the New York Times, 

“Until [the FTC entered into consent orders with GM, Lithia and Koons] every major car company had said that they forbade their dealers from selling certified used vehicles with any open recalls, including ones for Takata airbags. [But] with the FTC settlement for cover...Ford broke ranks, issuing an update to dealers on its ‘enhanced’ recall process and giving them permission to certify used vehicles that had open recalls after all," the groups allege in their petition seeking an appellate review of the lower court's approval of the consent order.

Citing the FTC’s Consent Order and the election of Donald Trump on an anti-regulation platform, the groups note that AutoNation (the largest new car dealership chain in the U.S.) reversed its policy of ensuring that all used cars are repaired prior to being sold to consumers, and now also allows its new car dealers to sell unrepaired recalled cars, including cars with Takata airbags that cannot be made safe because of severe shortages of repair parts.

Groups filing the action are Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety (CARS), the Center for Auto Safety, U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), MASSPIRG, CONNPIRG, and CALPIRG. 

“Certified” cars are supposedly subject to rigorous inspections, and dealers and manufacturers charge an average of approximately $1200 extra for them.  Consumers are led to believe the cars have not only been inspected, but that any significant problems have been repaired.

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Ajit Pai, with the support of Republican commissioner Michael O'Rielly, has moved to suspend the agency's probe of what are known as “zero rating” programs offered by wireless providers.

Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T had been under investigation due to charges that their individual streaming packages violated the Net Neutrality Rule. All three carriers have programs under which subscribers may stream data from certain sources without it counting against their data allowances.

“The Wireless Telecommunications Bureau is closing its investigation into wireless carriers' free-data offerings,” Pai said in a statement. “These free-data plans have proven to be popular among consumers, particularly low-income Americans, and have enhanced competition in the wireless marketplace. Going forward, the Federal Communications Commission will not focus on denying Americans free data.”

GOP commissioner Michael O'Rielly backed the move, saying the FCC should be supporting wireless providers in what he called “permissionless innovation.”

Just the first step

“While this is just a first step, these companies, and others, can now safely invest in and introduce highly popular products and services without fear of Commission intervention based on newly invented legal theories,” O'Rielly said.

But Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, currently the lone Democrat on the Commission, objected – not just to the speedy reversal of a pillar of Obama administration communication policy, but the manner in which it was done.

“It is a basic principle of administrative procedure that actions must be accompanied by reasons for that action, else that action is unlawful,” Clyburn said. “Yet that is exactly what multiple Bureaus have done today.”

Net Neutrality

Net Neutrality holds that internet service providers may not favor one type of content over another. The FCC was investigating all three companies to determine if their zero rating plans violated that principal.

The agency Friday sent letters to all three companies, informing them that the inquiry has been closed.

Amid a flurry of action Friday, the FCC also reversed another Obama administration move to allow nine internet providers to participate in a federal program to provide subsidized service to low-income households.

The consumer group Free Press joined Clyburn in criticizing both the action and the way it was carried out. Policy Director Matt Wood characterized Pai's initiatives as “strong-armed tactics.”

With all the turmoil surrounding President Trump's executive order blocking immigration from seven Middle Eastern countries, another controversial executive order got less attention.

But for consumers saving for retirement, it potentially holds significant impact.

The President last week signed an executive order rescinding the Fiduciary Rule, put in place by his predecessor. The rule would have required financial advisers and wealth managers to put the client's financial interests ahead of their own.

The rule was aimed at advisers who were believed to make recommendations that were often influenced by the fees and commissions they would receive, which were not always in the best financial interests of the client.

AARP voices concern

Among those sharply critical of the reversal is Nancy LeaMond, executive vice-president of AARP, who worries the executive order will negatively affect retirement planning for millions of consumers. She's particularly concerned about a provision that pushes back the compliance deadline of the conflict of interest rule.

"Many advisers already meet a fiduciary standard, and many more firms, brokers and agents have invested significant time and money to comply with the new rule," LeaMond said in a statement. "It is time that all Americans can count on retirement investment advice that is in their best interest, not the interest of Wall Street."

LeaMond said she worries that delaying the rule will cause consumers to continue to get conflicted advice. And the more consumers have to pay in fees and commissions, she says, the less they have for retirement.

"AARP has worked for many years to make sure that middle class Americans get retirement investment advice that helps them save for a secure retirement without paying hidden or unnecessary charges," she said. "For years, financial advisers have been allowed to steer clients toward investments that charge higher fees and commissions costing retirement savers $17 billion each year. The Department of Labor's conflicts of interest rule, which is already in effect, requires retirement advisers to put their client's best interests ahead of their own – what is called a 'fiduciary standard.'"

What the rule's opponents say

Who could be against financial advisers putting the client's interests first? According to Forbes, opponents have argued that the rule, if it had been allowed to take effect as scheduled in April, would actually prove harmful to investors with small accounts and limit the advice they would receive.

Forbes' advice? Ask advisers and brokers specific questions about fees and commissions associated with any investment they present.

When offered a recommendation, ask the adviser to suggest a couple of alternatives that are similar. Make sure you are dealing with an actual adviser and not a salesperson. You can do that by asking the person you are dealing with how he or she is paid.

Just because the fiduciary rule was rescinded, Forbes says that doesn't mean individual investors can't try to replicate its goals by asking the right questions.

Persuading a picky eater to eat bitter greens, such as kale or brussels sprouts, can be an uphill battle. Kids are notoriously fickle when it comes to food, and vegetables are often a tough sell.

But parents can get kids used to vegetables by following some research-based advice from nutrition expert Richard Rosenkranz. For starters, make sure you are eating vegetables similar to the ones you are serving your baby or toddler.

Rosenkranz says this is important because babies as young as 6 months pick up on which eating behaviors are normal and abnormal. They take cues from their parents as to what is and isn’t desirable.

"Babies start to think, 'Why does he keep putting this stuff in front of me, but he never eats it?' We're being watched by our kids from very young ages,” said Rosenkranz, an associate professor of food, nutrition, dietetics, and health.

Start with sweeter veggies

Rosenkranz recommends gradually expanding kids’ palates by starting with sweeter vegetables, like corn and carrots. When introducing bitter vegetables, parents shouldn’t let their child’s facial expression determine what is served at future meals.

Repeated exposure and dietary variety is how infants learn, says Rosenkranz. So instead of being deterred by a grimace, he says parents should focus more on a child’s willingness to consume a food. An infants’ desire toward the food can be increased over time through repeated exposure.

For school-aged children, he recommends cutting and arranging fresh vegetables into smiley faces or animals. Simple tweaks, like using grape tomatoes for eyes, can make healthy food a little more fun. 

Encouraging healthy habits

Research has shown that when kids get involved in cooking and food preparation, they’re more likely to eat vegetables. Kids can begin picking out vegetables at the store, helping prepare veggies in the kitchen, or growing them in a garden as early as kindergarten, says Rosenkranz.

As children get older, parents should focus on helping them make decisions regarding food on their own. This can be done by allowing kids to choose which vegetables the family purchases or decide how those vegetables are cooked. 

"This way, we're helping them cultivate their own healthy habits because it's their independent decision," Rosenkranz said.

Two Australian men are in trouble after livestreaming a boxing bout on Facebook Live last Friday. The Foxtel cable channel says it is considering suing Darren Sharpe and Brett Hevers for broadcasting the Danny Green versus Anthony Mundine fight.

The lads were initially hailed as modern-day Robin Hoods by their mates, but Foxtel is threatening to send in its legal team to deliver a roundhouse punch that will deliver a message to other would-be content pilferers.

Foxtel said it considers it a "very serious" matter, noting that viewers who wanted to watch the match were required to pay $59.95 -- and that's just for personal viewing. To display the match in a pub or other public venue costs quite a bit more.

The problem of stolen content on Facebook Live isn't new. It's pretty easy to find sports, movies, and just about everything else on its Livemap, despite Facebook setting up a Rights Manager system that lets copyright holders request removal of illegally posted content.

"As more people watch and share live video on Facebook, we've taken steps to ensure that Rights Manager protects live video streams as well," a Facebook spokesperson said Sunday, Mashable reported. "Video publishers and media companies can also provide reference streams of live content so that we can check live video on Facebook against those reference streams in real time."

That may not be enough to satisfy Foxtel and other companies that spend huge amounts to stage live events that are then sold through on-demand channels, even though consumers are crying foul and raising money to help Sharpe and Hevers with their potential legal bills. Many fans took to Facebook to threaten that they would cancel their Foxtel subscriptions if the company goes through with its threats.

If you're old enough to read this, it's too late to do anything about it, but a new study finds that lifetime earnings are affected by the level of testosterone to which one is exposed in the womb, as determined by finger length. 

It might sound far-fetched, but the study by researchers from the Higher School of Economics uses prior research which has shown that many of the skills that lead to a successful life are linked to what is known as the 2D:4D ratio.

Yes, it is finger-length we're talking about, but this is not intended to be any kind of snide insinuation about the length of a certain set of presidential digits. The 2D:4D findings far predate the political rise of Donald Trump, famously called a "short-fingered vulgarian" by a New York magazine.

It's not gross finger length that's at issue, though, but rather relative finger length -- specifically the ratio of the index and ring fingers, considered a reliable reflection of the level of perinatal testosterone, the male hormone of the mother that acts on the development of the offspring during pregnancy.

To put it more simply, the longer the index finger, the higher the testosterone level. And as we know, higher testosterone is generally considered to equate to male behavior, "correlated with traits like risk-taking and aggressiveness," as the researchers put it. 

Linked to income

The latest study uses Russian data to show the link between the 2D:4D ratio and a person's income. The study was published in the journal Economics and Human Biology. Reserchers conducted a regression analysis of 1,600 men and women between the ages of 25 and 60, calculating their 2D:4D ratio which was described as a "specialized apparatus."

In addition, the respondents, whose identities remained anonymous, were asked a number of questions concerning income and salaries.

The results showed a negative correlation between the income and 2D:4D ratios of women. In other words, the higher the salary, the lower the ratio. The effect was negative even when taking into account salary predictors such as gender, age, education level, job position, and the position's economic sector.

Interestingly, the same association was found for men but only after taking into account their level of education. This could mean that "more masculine" men need to be tamed by education before being released into the job market if they want to do well.

More research is needed to finger the exact mechanism at work here, the researchers conceded.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the New Jersey Attorney General’s office have reached a $2.2 million settlement with smart TV manufacturer VIZIO, resolving a complaint that the company collected viewing data on 11 million consumers without their consent.

The complaint states that, as early as February 2014, VIZIO and one of its affiliates manufactured smart TVs that captured screen information and demographic data about consumers, including information on age, sex, income, and a variety of other metrics. Officials allege that VIZIO then took that information and sold it to third parties who used it to create targeted ads that reached consumers across their devices.

“[VIZIO] provided this viewing data to third parties, which used it to track and target advertising to individual consumers across devices. [It] engaged in these practices through a medium that consumers would not expect to be used for tracking, without consumers’ consent,” the complaint stated.

"Egregious invasion of privacy"

The complaint goes on to explain that the data tracking practices were unfair, deceptive, and in violation of the FTC Act and New Jersey protection laws, something that New Jersey Attorney General Christopher Porrino expounded on.

“New Jersey residents enjoying television in the privacy of their own homes had no idea that every show they watched, every movie they rented, every commercial they muted was being secretly tracked by the defendants who then exploited that personal information for corporate profit,” he said. “This kind of allegedly deceptive behavior is not only against the law; it is an egregious invasion of privacy that won’t be tolerated.”

The settlement requires VIZIO to pay $1.5 million to the FTC and $1 million to the New Jersey Division of Consumer Affairs, $300,000 of which has been suspended. The stipulated federal court order requires VIZIO to prominently disclose and obtain consent for its data collection and sharing practices, and stipulates that the company must delete all data collected before March 1, 2016.

The order expressly forbids the company from making future misrepresentations about the privacy, security, or confidentiality of any consumer information it collects. VIZIO has also agreed to implement a data privacy program, which will be evaluated biennially.

“This settlement not only holds the defendants accountable for their alleged deceptive practices, it requires them to destroy the data they gathered without consumers’ consent, and to revise their business practices to protect consumers from future privacy breaches,” said Porrino.

For more information, consumers can visit the FTC’s site here.