
ConsumerAffairs Reviews
- We require contact information to ensure our reviewers are real.
- Our moderators read all reviews to verify quality and helpfulness.
- We use intelligent software that helps us maintain the integrity of reviews.
About ConsumerAffairs
ConsumerAffairs was founded in 1998 as a consumer news and advocacy site and has grown into a platform dedicated to service journalism and helping our readers make big purchasing decisions and connect with trusted companies to meet their needs. Our original reporting covers groundbreaking research, recall information, company profiles and tens of thousands of pages of customer reviews.
Visit www.consumeraffairs.comConsumerAffairs Reviews
Filter by Rating
- (921)
- (79)
- (41)
- (67)
- (323)
Popular Mentions
- 4,946,968 reviews on ConsumerAffairs are verified.
- We require contact information to ensure our reviewers are real.
- We use intelligent software that helps us maintain the integrity of reviews.
- Our moderators read all reviews to verify quality and helpfulness.
Top reviews
- Top reviews
- Recent
- Oldest
- Most helpful
A link has directed you to this review. Its location on this page may change next time you visit.
- 4,946,968 reviews on ConsumerAffairs are verified.
- We require contact information to ensure our reviewers are real.
- We use intelligent software that helps us maintain the integrity of reviews.
- Our moderators read all reviews to verify quality and helpfulness.
Reviewed May 23, 2011
The recent email publication saying Credit Card Act is doing its job may be true in the U.S., but in Canada we are paying the backlash. Chase has increased the APR on two of my store cards from 18.99% to 29.99%. But the worst is AMEX, 2 years ago my rate was 11.9%, then it increased to 14.9%, then this year to 17.9%. All on existing balances, I have no missed payments.
Reviewed May 22, 2011
I'm wondering who's doing the "typing"? There are so many typos (typos surrounded with ***). It's annoying to read!
Reviewed May 14, 2011
I am appalled that you wouldn't recall the Power IQ curling iron from Sally's Beauty Supply after receiving all the complaints about this product. Unfortunately, I had to find out the hard way when more than 2" of my beautiful hair was burnt off and stuck to the iron this morning.
Why haven't you done your job and taken it off the shelves? Where is the class action lawsuit against them to prevent this from happening to some unsuspecting woman or young school-aged girl who might panic as their hair is being burnt to a crisp? I had to smell my burnt hair all day at work as I had to suffer the embarrassment of explaining to my co-workers what happened to my hair. Really?
Reviewed May 12, 2011
Well, **. Here you go again, putting the duck-billed, porn-faced woman atop a page of complaints on Satellite TV systems. I'm done with you. I am unsubscribed and so will everyone I can contact.
Reviewed May 10, 2011
Why the ** do you use a photo of a woman with a semi-porn look on a page of consumer reviews? Quit this crap or I'm unsubscribing.
Reviewed May 5, 2011
I am tired of reading complaints of people regarding the way in-home sales people have acted. The problem is that instead of complaining about the individual, they complain about the company--Kirby. All Kirby salespeople are self-employed, independent contractors. To complain about the entire company because of an individuals actions only hurts the abilities of thousands of other polite, respectful, non high-pressure sales people that are doing nothing more than trying to provide for their families. If I had a bad experience with a counter person at a fast food place, does that mean that I should blame the entire chain? I do not work for Kirby but I do know a lot of the people who do. They are just like anyone else who wake up everyday and go to work.
Reviewed April 17, 2011
Your site is great for people to get together and complain about their stuff; however, maybe it should be more informative as to how to protect oneself in the first place. People get on here and make a complaint about their Dell, that they failed to purchase an extended warranty on, and others say, "Oh, Dell is a ** company. Just look at all of these complaints!" How about an informative article on how companies actually rate for product or customer service.
When people do a search for Dell complaints, of course they are going to get a bunch of Dell complaints. Do you think they realize that to the left are links to HP complaints and Compaq complaints? No. If people could spend less time complaining and more time informing themselves on how any industry is trying to make money work, they could turn off their electronics during storms, quit dropping their screens on the ground, buy extended warranties, get homeowner policies, and help themselves.
This website just allows them to continue their pity party and remain uninformed. Of course there are going to be others with similar issues! They are electronics for goodness sakes, and they do fail! If people want something that will never fail, buy a rock. Keep it on a shelf and never carry it around so that it does not get lost. Then the rock will always be able to be a rock, doing what it is supposed to do.
Reviewed April 15, 2011
Your website that talks about scam movers has Google ads all over the place sending them to scam movers, aggregators that have no responsibility to the customers. This could result in people suing you, since you are supposed to be a consumer-based website helping them. When, in fact, the ads on your page are detrimental to them. You can check all of this out at ** on the record. Your website is causing harm to people that are using your website as a reference to protect them from rogue movers.
Reviewed April 7, 2011
Why would you compare other emergency response companies to Life Alert when they were not the innovator of this type of service? Do your homework and you will find out that Lifeline was the innovator in 1974, invented by Dr. Andrew Dibner. All others have copied Lifeline and still do.
Rosalie -- Thank you for the input. We'll take this feedback into consideration when writing future stories.
Reviewed April 3, 2011
In the article posted on 4/01/2011 about high fat food, fast food and coffee by Mark **, I find it difficult to understand his results. The last sentence in the second paragraph, copied here, is very confusing. I wish I knew what he meant when he wrote, "compared to what they were when participants had not ingested the fat and caffeinated coffee." Please read the succeeding paragraphs as copied from the said article:
"You can't clear blood sugars. The results tell us that saturated fat interferes with the body's ability to clear sugars from the blood and, when combined with caffeinated coffee, the impact can be even worse," said Marie **, a PhD student who conducted the study with U of G professors Lindsay ** and Terry **. "Having sugar remain in our blood for long periods is unhealthy because it can take a toll on our body's organs."
The study on a select group of healthy men found that drinking a high-fat cocktail spiked blood sugar levels an average of 32%. But the results showed blood sugar levels increased by 65% compared to what they were when participants had not ingested the fat and caffeinated coffee."
Reviewed April 2, 2011
What the ** is your problem? Why is there a duck-billed platypus woman at the top of your complaints page? Go to hell. I am done. Your website and organization are low brow and **. I am done.
Reviewed March 30, 2011
Why the hell is there a photo of the duck billed "sexy" women on your complaint page now?
Reviewed March 17, 2011
Your website states that small claims appeals in Florida are review of law and not fact. It states that the requirement is 30 days. Just coming from an appeal lawyer, I found out that the opposite is true that facts are heard, and it's 30 days to apply for appeal. But then, it takes 70 days to write brief, 20 days for response, another 20 days for response, and then another 20 days for follow up response.
Reviewed March 11, 2011
It is my experience and feeling that Zac ** and consumeraffairs.com are exploiting Amazon Mechanical Turk Workers in their efforts to revamp the consumeraffairs.com website. Initially offering to pay them $.25 to compare the format of 10 pages of online content, then rejecting correct work to avoid paying for services rendered by the Workers.
Currently, they have dropped the pay to $.13 per 10 pages (the same amount of work) as seen here: ** . This is an injustice and quite surprising to see such a reputable company practicing predatory work tactics on American & Canadian workers of Amazon Mechanical Turk.
We are a proud user of Mechanical Turk and believe that Amazon has created an invaluable tool to parse out simple tasks such as the comparison of one web page to another and this tool enables us to pay workers on a "per-task basis" rather than hourly. You can easily learn more about Amazon Mechanical Turk here (www.mturk.com/mturk/welcome) and why this is a great solution for both companies and workers alike.
As of this email, ConsumerAffairs.com has rejected exactly one worker's submission through Amazon Mechanical Turk. The reason we rejected this work is because the worker filled out more than 400 HITS (the terminology used in Mechanical Turk to demarcate a task) with blank responses. Based on our analysis of the work we received from more than 700 workers, we concluded that this was an effort to "spam" the system and collect money for no work. Amazon's Mechanical Turk system does not tell us the actual name of workers, but since Alex says we rejected his work it leads us to believe that Alex is this worker. Sorry Alex, we don't pay people for doing nothing.
Sincerely,Zac Carman
Reviewed March 10, 2011
Teach your announcer how to pronounce 'cadmium'; it is not caddaminium.
We're very sorry that the word was mispronounced. We will work on this in the future.
Reviewed March 10, 2011
Nothing but negativity. Why would anyone create a website for everyone to complain to? All it does is create a way for business competition to slam a perfectly good and ethical business or company. This makes no sense to me whatsoever. Most of the complaints here are likely made by competing companies and are nothing more than slanderous lies.
I should start a website (and I can) that bashes consumeraffairs.com and all the bull crap that is contained within. If someone has a complaint, they should file it with the BBB and be done with it. And if they are going to post negative things about a company or business, they should back it up with receipts and pictures that prove the problem even exists! I could go on and on about this, but what good would it do? All these so that you can profit from your so-called attorneys. I'm sure that you get a kick-back from these guys, eh?
Reviewed March 8, 2011
This isn't about some company; it is your new format. I don't like it at all. I wish you had left well enough alone. This is just my opinion - a review of the site.
Reviewed March 3, 2011
I regularly listen to Coast to Coast AM. Once or twice an hour is a message from consumeraffairs.com. They have been playing the same messages over and over, again and again since December. Here it is, March, and the messages still talk about preparing for holiday parties, what to get kids for Christmas, etc. This is extremely annoying. Don't you have any new information to share?
Randy, thank you for bringing this to out attention. We launched a daily radio spot about 90 days ago and have grown to more than 70 affiliates in a short time and here's the page that has all the daily spots: www.consumeraffairs.com/radio. However, overuse of an old spot is a problem that we'd like to resolve.
The information you gave us was not complete enough for us to identify the radio station that is the culprit. However, in our form, you asked us not to follow-up with you about this issue. We'd love to get additional information so we can ensure that the affiliate is using our content appropriately. Please email us at info@consumeraffairs.com and we will quickly work to get the situation resolved.
Reviewed Feb. 28, 2011
This website is exhaustive and impossible to use for research. I was looking for a specific problem report. I had to wade through thousands of reports. I'm not sure what your purpose is. However, your site was not at all useful. I wanted specific information on reports of problems with solenoid fuel injector "2007 Jeep Compass". If you can provide the information, I will be most grateful.
Gwen -- thank you for your comment. We are working on improving usability right now and hopefully this will address the problems you had researching your 2007 Jeep Company. We've gone through our data and the best place to look for information is here: https://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/jeep.htm.
We don't seem to have any comments that specifically reference a "solenoid fuel injector," but there was a comment by Michael of Woodstock GA on December 7, 2007 regarding a fuel injector problem he had with his Jeep. As you probably noticed, our user comments are ordered by date, so just scroll down to December of 2007 to read Michael's comment.
Hope that helps!
Reviewed Feb. 19, 2011
The change in your website is horrible. Not easy to read as it's all garbled with ads from the tracker Google. I'm very disappointed with the changes. Not user-friendly. Won't be back. I used to enjoy reading the articles in the last format.
We're very sorry to hear that. The changes are supposed to make the site less cluttered and easier to read. It's a work in progress, so perhaps it will be more to your liking as additional changes are made. Thanks for sharing your opinion.
Reviewed Jan. 25, 2011
I looked on your website to find if there were any reports on Life Alert and other emergency programs. I find it very strange that the only company you have bad reports about is Life Alert. You give a whole page to that company but have nothing else. I was told that one of the companies that sponsor your website is indeed in competition to Life Alert. When one clicks on the "Life Alert" on top of the page, one is taken to a bunch of other companies, but not Life Alert. This is obviously a very biased website and one that should be taken with a pinch of salt and no truth.
I have subsequently gone with Life Alert and everything they promised me as a service they have lived up to. Dr. Everett ** is a doctor with an incredible reputation and a former surgeon general of the U.S.A. I would rather listen to him than any of the hogwash on your website. I, of course, know that you will never print this. After all, why print the truth?
Life Alert is the only company about which we've received multiple complaints. Simple as that.
Reviewed Jan. 24, 2011
Your article about Starbucks' new "Trenta" size is misleading to consumers. I am a regular Starbucks customer who has been enjoying Trenta drinks at Starbucks in Atlanta since July. The Trenta is only available for Iced Tea and Iced Coffee beverages, meaning they have very few calories (less than 10) unless you add sugar and cream. The only way to get 600 calories in a Trenta Iced Coffee would be to fill it up entirely with half and half, and that's not coffee. Also, since these are iced drinks, there is ice and a lot of it, meaning that Trenta drinks do not have 915 ml of coffee as you described, but probably more like 550 ml.
How can you post an article with such little truth and call yourselves consumer advocates? Get your facts straight. You aren't supposed to be part of the problem.
As our article says, a Trenta-sized drink could contain 600 more calories than a more traditional size. People do put sugar and milk or half-and-half in iced coffee and tea drinks, so any you look at it a bigger drink is going to contain more calories than a smaller one, ice content notwithstanding. Our article does not reflect our personal views but those of the experts quoted. We're sorry if their conclusion is not to your liking.
Reviewed Jan. 20, 2011
My complaint is actually about your website. Ironically, it appears that some of the scams you preach against are being practiced on the site. Specifically, some of the "Google" ads seem to be scams (e.g. timeshares, credit repair, etc.) I know they're not your ads, but running in your report gives you some responsibility. People trust you, so they believe the ads. Related to this note is the fact that your disclaimers are really too small to read, especially for seniors.
Reviewed Jan. 19, 2011
I read your article and you are right on the money! Thank you for such a great story! I have been a Senior Master Technician since 2003 and as of last December, I had to leave Ford for the flat rate rip off. Where I used to make $50K a year, it has dropped dramatically over the years. It has become so bad now that Ford can't even bring work. When a technician is not working, we are not paid. So if only 15 hours of work comes through the door over the week, that's all we get. Not to mention that I had the highest certification from Ford and Toyota at the same time.
Reviewed Jan. 17, 2011
Why have I not heard of this website before? It is fantastic! ! Sorry, but I could not find another contact link on this site to send you folks my comment. I will pass info about ConsumerAffairs.com to others. If you have not done so already, you really need to market this site.
Thanks for the high-five. We're working hard to make the site better -- look for improvements coming in short order.
Reviewed Jan. 13, 2011
Sorry I'm using this complaint form, but I don't see any other way to contact you.
I love your website. I'm always quoting your reports to friends. But I miss the complaint stories you used to post on your home page before the redesign. You know, there would always be two new complaint stories from consumers--these were interesting. Please bring them back to your front page!
Jerry, this is great feedback. We're working on a number of improvements to the website and we'll take this into consideration.
Reviewed Jan. 5, 2011
I am disappointed in the one-sided nature of the article published on your website at the following link: https://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2008/01/p2p_hill.html. Your information presents the parents side of the story quite clearly, but there are two sides to every story and then there is the truth. I am disappointed that this article masquerades as journalism when so little research has been done on what the other side had to say. Sensationalistic, libelous, and ineffective reporting.
People to People had ample and repeated opportunity to speak with our reporter but repeatedly declined to do so. You do not point out any factual errors in the story, so we can only assume you did not find any. There are not just two "sides to a story," by the way. Sometimes there are more, sometimes less. In this case, all of the information that was publicly available is fully reported in our story. What else do you expect us to do? Make something up?
Reviewed Jan. 4, 2011
I just noticed that my name is on here when I worked for Meritage Homes. There was a realtor name Ted ** (forgot how to spell the name sorry). He submitted an offer and when we agreed on the counter offer, he asked at the last minute to include other costs. Basically, he tried to re-negoitate after all parties have agreed. This is what killed the deal. He later complains that he lost his commission as the buyer hired another realtor shortly afterward because of how he spoke down to her. It had nothing to do with me.
Reviewed Jan. 3, 2011
Went to the Consumer Affairs web site to search problems with GE refrigerators. I assumed menus across the top on two levels were to navigate the web site. Also, reading down the page, I cannot tell what is real and what is a Google advertisement.
There is a clearly labeled search box at the top of each page. All advertisements are clearly labeled as such.
Reviewed Jan. 3, 2011
What happened? Your new format no longer permits the easy e-mailing of articles to others who may be interested in the contents. I love your website and have recommended it to many others, however, you must realize that there are those of us out there who do not tweet or use Facebook (the only 2 options you now list). Please bring back the e-mail option. Thanks.
Reviewed Dec. 23, 2010
ConsumerAffairs, a respected consumer information site that I rely on for my work (***) has recently overhauled its website. In the process, valuable user tools have disappeared, including the "print format" and "email this" tools for news items.
The result is that users of ConsumerAffairs.Com are unable to easily print out its news items, and unable to email them to colleagues and friends. These changes represent a distinctly user-unfriendly website modification. I suspect I'm only one of many users who have been troubled by them and would like to see the former website's features restored.
We have made extensive changes to our site to improve the overall reader experience. The "print this" and "mail this" feature was used by a tiny percentage of site visitors. Any page may still be printed and emailed with just an additional step or two so we don't feel this is an undue imposition.
Reviewed Oct. 28, 2010
Your web site doesn’t work. I purchased a subscription, tried to sign in and it just keeps sending me back to the purchase a subscription page.
Brian, you're at the wrong place. We don't sell subscriptions. Our newsletters are free.
Reviewed Oct. 4, 2010
I am a tax professional at TaxNet Financial and one of my clients posted a complaint with Consumer Affairs under https://www.consumeraffairs.com/finance/taxnet-financial-services.html (Jeff of Batavia, IL, January 19, 2010). On Jan. 7, I saw TaxNet financial online and they offered fast tax refund services. I contacted them by email and they sent me forms to fax back to them, which I did on Jan 9. They assigned someone to my account named Lloyd. I didn’t hear back from them, so I called them on Jan. 13. Lloyd then did my taxes. He told me the fees and that the money would be in my bank on Jan. 15. On the 15th, there was no deposit. So, I called him and was given a story about how Jackson Hewitt losing their tax return funding had delayed everyone’s refund money. He then assured me it would be in my bank on the 19th. Now it’s the 19th and there is no deposit. I have been trying to call them, but no one answers. They don’t return emails or voicemails. I think I have been scammed. I want to know if they filed my return but I can’t reach them.
I spoke with Jeff from Batavia and he did receive his funds on the 19th. In fact, a loan was funded to him on the 15th via ACH. His bank did not post the funds to his account until the 19th at midnight. Monday the 18th was MLK Day Holiday, so his bank posted ACH the next business day (excludes weekends and holidays). I am a legitimate tax professional CPA and this "scam" wording implies he was ripped off. This is not the case. How can I respond to this charge? Jeff was told by me that the bank would fund his loan if he was approved on the 15th and it was. His bank didn't post the funds until the following business day. This has been resolved. Is there a complaint resolution department here similar to the BBB?
Reviewed Oct. 4, 2010
On Jan. 7 I saw tax net financial online and they offered fast tax refund services. I contacted them by email and they sent me forms to fax back to them, which I did on Jan 9.They assigned someone to my account named Lloyd. I didn’t hear back from them, so I called them on Jan 13. Lloyd then did my taxes, told me the fees and told me the money would be in my bank on Jan 15. On the 15th there was no deposit, so I called him and was given a story about how Jackson ** losing their tax return funding had delayed everyone’s refund money. He then assured me it would be in my bank on the 19th. Now it’s the 19th and no deposit. I have been trying to call them, but no one answers, they don’t return emails or voice mails. I think I have been scammed. I want to know if they filed my return but I can’t reach them.
Reviewed Sept. 28, 2010
I am an Attorney at Law, an officer of the Court. You posted false, malicious, derogatory comments about me that is causing me serious economic injury. I will hold the owners of consumeraffairs.com personally liable for my serious economic injuries and consequential damages. I will also contact your sponsors and aggressively persuade them not to be affiliated with your website. As an officer of the court, I command you to remove the derogatory posting about me forthwith.
Reviewed Sept. 26, 2010
It appears the big-box banks own your site as well. It's well documented that Bank of America is in the top 5 for receiving consumer complaints, yet you have edited everything from 2009 on. And this place is supposed to be objective? I can't take anything on this site seriously.
Our complaint pages occasionally get "stuck." If that has happened to BofA, we'll try to get it fixed. Thanks for pointing it out.
Reviewed Aug. 29, 2010
I find the slide-up ads on the **** newsletter pages to be extremely annoying. When they first started, I could click and they would go away. Now, when I try and click, they have to expand first but then in every page that I continue to navigate, they show up again. My peripheral vision is extremely sensitive and these so-called ads distract from reading the body of the newsletter item.
If you click on the "x" in the upper right corner, the ad closes.
Reviewed Aug. 22, 2010
Pop-ups, cookies, beacons, unpermitted or unauthorized downloads and monitoring of my machine and data. Extreme annoyance at loss of privacy and security.
Please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for information on these topics.
Reviewed Aug. 10, 2010
I was doing some research on extended warranties, and came across your page on ** and hypocritically, on your complaints page there was an ad for **. How can you, ethically take money from the very same company you are posting complaints about? Seems a conflict of interest to me, and at the very least calls your credibility into question. This brings about lack of trust in your website.
Like most major media, our site is supported by advertising. There are no subscription fees or membership dues. It's important for consumers to realize that advertising is separate from editorial content; we do not endorse or recommend companies that advertise on our site.Please note that many ads are keyword-driven. This means you may often see an ad for the very product or service that is being reviewed on the page you're viewing.Advertising makes free content possible. Thanks for your understanding.
Reviewed June 24, 2010
The Consumer Affairs is once again taking the responsibly of raising children away from the parents. When the Consumer Affairs says McD can't give toys in their Happy Meals, all you are doing is saying that parents are not responsible enough to raise their own children. McD isn't the problem. Stop starting up unnecessary lawsuits that don't accomplish anything positive. McD isn't the only company giving out toys with their child meals. Look at Burger King and Taco Bell. Please spend your time doing something to help the people and stop trying to control how people raise their children. There is no doubt in my mind that your meddling in this kind of thing only gives parents an out when they don't get involved with their children anymore. They feel why they should be concerned when you already have taken everything over for them. Your interfering with this kind of thing doesn't do anything good for mankind. The only thing that is accomplished is that we have more people suing big companies to support them without them getting involved in the lives of their children.
Ed's comments should be directed to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. We reported the Center's action but did not instigate it or endorse it.
Reviewed June 24, 2010
How dare you be so presumptuous that you can think you represent me or the other millions of people who care less about your opinion of toys with the kids’ meals? This will not stop anyone from purchasing the meal: it will only cause disappointment to what is enjoyment for children. Your agency has become a disappointment and consumer annoyance; you should remember who the consumer is and disregard the feelings of small groups that do not matter anyway. You have misrepresented me and the average American consumer. You are attempting to deprive millions of children from an enjoyment.
Dino should contact the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the organization that is objecting to toys in kids' meals.
Reviewed June 10, 2010
While I was reading one of my complaints on your website, I couldn’t help to notice this huge advertisement for the same company people are offering their complaint about! MetLife LTD? You are getting paid by them to advertise on a page containing complaints about there services! I’m hoping that one day sites like yours that use people in hardship for nominal gain will some day be shut down!
Like most major media, our site is supported by advertising. There are no subscription fees or membership dues. It's important for consumers to realize that advertising is separate from editorial content; we do not endorse or recommend companies that advertise on our site.Please note that many ads are keyword-driven. This means you may often see an ad for the very product or service that is being reviewed on the page you're viewing.Advertising makes free content possible. Thanks for your understanding.
Reviewed May 27, 2010
I have come across a second page with bad information. This is for the recall of Murray Lawn Tractor Fuel Tank. The 800 number that is shown, 1-800, results in an intercept indicating that you should call ** for more information. The investigation on the web indicates that this is a pay service to the tune of $4.99 a minute with no guarantee of success. You should also note on your site that this is a pay service, or remove the number. Thanks.
We have removed the number. It was part of a recall notice from 2004. Companies are not required to maintain their 800 numbers in perpetuity so it's a good idea to be cautious when calling numbers from a Web page that is more than a year or so old.
Reviewed May 14, 2010
You put up an invalid complaint about our company. The city was spelled wrong, the fees were incorrect and we never serviced anyone by that name or history. We always comply with any complaints and this is very wrong. I will turn you in if you do not contact me and remove the complaint.
Since Emily did not give us any contact information, it's not going to be easy for us to do that. She can respond to the complaint by following the instructions on the Company Response Form and her response will be considered for publication.
Reviewed May 12, 2010
I received the biggest, most blatant shock today when I came onto the internet to review my business. There in all its glory is my complaint about my experience with Humana Prescription Insurance Co. I had no idea that my verbatim info would appear on the world wide web! Please help me by deleting this info. Medicare is aware that you have published this. Please respond ASAP before I seek legal advice for my protection.
Read more: http://consumeraffairs.com/info_request.htm#ixzz0niuD1Oxx
Our complaint form clearly states: ". Your complaints and comments may be published, shared with the news media and reviewed by attorneys at no cost to you." It shouldn't come as a surprise, therefore, that her complaint was published.
Reviewed May 7, 2010
I am the owner of domain name ionicsaltlamps.com. I just want to let you know that my business has gotten extremely damaged simply because of the bad reputation of a supplier whose salt lamps got recalled. Every time any buyer searches for ionic salt lamps on Google, my website appears, but right under it, your post about the recall of "ionic salt lamps" appear as well which are of another seller of salt lamps. You are hurting my name and my business by doing that. If you have not been able to understand my plea here, please feel free to call me or give me a number to call and I will explain what I am trying to request you to do. Kindly get this post off here; it’s hurting my business even more because of the bad economy, or get the name ionic salt lamps out of your post there. It’s my company name. My domain is registered as ionicsaltlamps.com and people who search think that I am the bad guy. Please consider this very valid request. I await for your response.
Our story is based on a news release from the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. It concerns the recall of dangerous lamps which can create a fire hazard for consumers. Any similarity to Kamran's product is coincidental. Our job is to spread the word about the safety hazard, not to help Kamran promote his business.
Reviewed May 4, 2010
This website is basically just a base for slander. You should check facts before you post bogus complaints.
This is a site where consumers can share their experiences. It would be beyond impossible for us to check the facts in every single submission. Reader beware!
Reviewed May 4, 2010
This site and tons of other probably respectful sites have these side ads that everyone is complaining about here that they were scammed. Why do you allow this to happen? Please explain! I always check things for the curiosity in me. I have found many web sites like yours that have ads just like these people are complaining about.
Like most major media, our site is supported by advertising. There are no subscription fees or membership dues. It's important for consumers to realize that advertising is separate from editorial content; we do not endorse or recommend companies that advertise on our site.Please note that many ads are keyword-driven. This means you may often see an ad for the very product or service that is being reviewed on the page you're viewing.Advertising makes free content possible. Thanks for your understanding.
Reviewed April 16, 2010
It appears that this website takes money in return for advertising from the very people who we complain about. In this case I am referring to Hobbytron. At the top of the complaint column about Hobbytron, there is a link to get to their store! Am I wrong consumeraffairs.com?
Consumers have a right to air their views, just as businesses have a right to advertise. This is explained in great detail in our FAQ.
Reviewed April 1, 2010
I enjoyed my first use of the site and got the impression it was for consumer advocacy but then noticed the ads around the edges that sounded like the scams reported on. Are the advertisers screened?
Advertising on our site comes almost entirely from ad networks -- Google, Advertising.com, ADSDAQ, etc. There are tens of thousands of advertising clients represented and it would be impossible for us to screen them. We rely on the networks to do that.
Reviewed March 5, 2010
Your story referencing our legal battles with Oklahoma in 2004 is still very inaccurate. We are still in business and now have over 11,000 satisfied clients. All have given between $5,000 - $1,000,000.00 to international schemes with no government assistance to date. The suit with Oklahoma was not due to anything but supposed DNC violations. All residents of Oklahoma received mailings prior to contact which excluded us from having to register. We settled because it was cheaper to do so, not because we were afraid of losing the suit.
Your site is supposed to provide accurate information to inform readers on important topics. In this case your article is entirely inaccurate and most likely preventing some Americans from pursuing proper assistance. ID theft and international schemes currently lead the crime sector in the USA now. If you want an accurate, updated story, I am willing to provide one.
Our story accurately describes the actions taken by the Oklahoma Attorney General and the response of Corey McCormick's company. Consumer Benefits Group.
Reviewed March 2, 2010
I just read your article titled "Spot Delivery Puts The Dealer in The Driver's Seat." It is wrong because it is the dealer itself who is the creditor as required by the Truth in Lending Act. I am a consumer lawyer who does nothing other than sue motor vehicle dealers for so-called spot delivery. The attorney from Miami who you quoted is in a firm which in one of my cases years ago represented a car dealer. What he says about the dealer not wanting to wait for its money is entirely misleading and wrong. When the dealer tries to assign its contract to a third party, the dealer is not requesting a loan for the buyer. It is requesting a loan for itself so it doesn't have to service the installment contract itself. If you read any installment contract issuing from a dealer, it unambiguously discloses that it is the dealer alone who is the creditor.
Reviewed Feb. 18, 2010
There are so many inaccuracies and false statements in your article about the recall of these Chinese Tires. You need to remove this immediately. Feel free to contact me at anytime to either correct this article. Just for starters, the only company to actually recall tires was Foreign Tire Sales. None of the other companies were ever required to conduct a recall. You make it sound like they were involved. The U.S. Government ordered FTS to recall tires and also ordered him to stop making false allegations about his competitors. He did the recall and he stopped. You need to get this off the web and stop your falsehoods.
Our story is accurate.
Reviewed Feb. 2, 2010
Imagine my surprise when I went to this website to read articles about how terrible TurboTax is and find the there are two TurboTax advertisements at the top of the page. No credibility!
Credibility is determined by a site's editorial content. Did you see any unfairly positive or negative treatment of TurboTax? No? Then, obviously, advertising decisions are not influencing our editorial decisions.
We state clearly in numerous places throughout that site that -- like nearly all Web publishers -- we do not endorse the products advertised on our site. Ads are placed by outside networks and are not under our control. Is there a simpler way to say this?
Reviewed Jan. 31, 2010
I wrote a long description of my complaint against Quicken Loans and it was not put on the site. I assume that which is on the site is picked and, thus, does not represent the full breath of the problem they pose against consumers. When I contacted BBB they took the side of Quicken Loans and have given them an A+ rating! Who knows how many people may have been saved my experience if my contribution had also been included? Names need to be named and shady policies revealed in your site.
Although we try, we are not able to post every single comment we receive. We do have many complaints about Quicken Loans, so it's not as though the topic is not addressed.
Reviewed Jan. 18, 2010
After reading Jon H.'s write up regarding the class action suit against BMW, I was in shock. I can not believe it made it on the web site. Does anyone proof read or check for accuracy? RPM, revelations per minute? Revelations? Oh yes, I see the light now. How about revolutions per minute?
Turbo acceleration lag? Turbo lag. "Turbo lag, a little-known but potentially dangerous phenomenon, describes a delay between the time a turbocharged car's accelerator is depressed and the time its engine develops enough power to properly accelerate. Turbo lag presents an especially serious risk if it occurs on a highway on-ramp or other area where traffic is moving quickly."
That paragraph attributes the problems that come from reduced power mode or limp mode to turbo lag and does not accurately describe turbo lag.
Jay is correct. It should be "revolutions" instead of "revelations." We're sticking with our usage re: turbo lag.
Reviewed Jan. 17, 2010
I was just checking out a review of the Go Phone. What I see is a bunch of Google advertising pushing other telecom services. It appears that ****is some kind of shill website, masquerading as some neutral party. Consumer Affairs makes it sound like to be some government entity. You guys are so bogus! And what's this about ‘Do I want an attorney to contact me about my complaint?’ Selling leads, are we? For shame!
Michael should make up his mind. Are we masquerading as a government entity or acting as "some kind of shill?" We make no secret that our site is supported by advertising; that is why it's free to our readers. We plainly state that we are not affiliated with any government agency. And finally, no, we do not sell leads. As is patiently explained in our FAQ and elsewhere, complaints are reviewed by class-action attorneys at no charge to the complainant.
Reviewed Jan. 15, 2010
Unsubscribe me immediately. How dare you put an "unsubscribe" button on your emails only to have it pop up and say you can't do it and I have to take the time to find you URL and write this note? You think my time is not important? Unsubscribe me now. Why didn't you provide a link or better yet do what reputable companies do and make your unsubscribe button work?
We have no idea what Mary is talking about. Our unsubscribe button works.

Reviewed Dec. 30, 2009
Just wanted to say hooray for you in the lawsuit by Nemet Chevy. That was dismissed by the courts. I remember the article about the dex cool antifreeze is supposed to last 100,000 miles and people's cars were getting destroyed. I had the antifreeze changed in my car only 3-1/2 years old. If I hadn't read about it, I would have had a damaged engine. Again, I say hooray for you, good for you. Sometimes, the courts lean towards the common man. The car's engine and radiator now is okay.
Thank you very much!
Reviewed Dec. 21, 2009
I find it amazing that your excellent article regarding so-called free credit reports is surrounded with adverts for the very companies you warn people about. Very disappointed.
We are an ad-supported site, which is why our site is free to consumers. Nearly all of our ads from come ad networks, which are responsible for their content. This is explained in detail in our FAQ -- https://www.consumeraffairs.com/consumerism/faq.html#criticized
Reviewed Dec. 14, 2009
That item about a class action suit against MetroPCS simply because not all countries are free is so bogus! ( ** ) Of course not all countries are free! Show me a cell phone provider that says all calls to all countries are free.
The list of countries included in the plan is plainly listed on both the MetroPCS website and is given out in the dealers and stores. MetroPCS is aggressive about offering the lowest cellular rates in the USA. I love them! I hope this class action suit fails big time.

Reviewed Nov. 30, 2009
Just a comment about your article saying people call you all kinds of names (grinches). Well, I'm thankful for your daily news letter. If not I would have a damaged 04 Chevy caused by the so-called lifetime anti-freeze and had it changed ASAP. Thanks again. I really think you people are like an internet ombudsman. I tell other people about you and been told that is a very good informative news letter. Just keep doing what you do. Don't back down to no one.
Thank you!
Reviewed Nov. 25, 2009
It is very disheartening that you allow these complaints to be filed without first investigating and receiving a release from the person filing a complaint so that we can release all relevant information required to respond to their complaint. In today’s legal environment, consumers have privacy rights even when they make slanderous and false statements about a company. Lenders are higher restricted in the information that they can release and the consumer is protected by several federal statutes that prevent us from responding to the consumers complaints even when they are grossly misrepresenting the situation and omitting several important facts.
It does not appear that your company wants to present a fair and balance platform. One such as BBB does where the company has an opportunity to respond to the consumer’s complaints/concerns and the consumer has waived there right to privacy prior the publication of the consumers complaint in a total biased fashioned.
We offer numerous ways for companies to respond to consumers. You can find details on our Company Response Page -- https://www.consumeraffairs.com/respond.html
Reviewed Nov. 25, 2009
This is regarding the article "Consumers May Soon See Fewer Scam Ads" and the website publisher's note about the ads inserted "on the fly". First of all, these on the fly insertion must be banned. Second, just by brief observation: many of these ads stay on the website sponsored links list for a considerable time even if they "rotate". Third: even a non-expert can observe that the 'architecture' of many of these scam sites is identical (suggesting one source). Fourth: even a non-expert can "google" the phrase "non-working mom makes $87.76 an hour" (or something like that) and get a list of hundreds ads out there. The list can be very long. I think no one of the internet players is eager to put a stop on these ads. As a consequence, people who have not read the fine prints on the ads get billed more than $100 per month until cancellation plus the time and nerve cells lost in the process.
Reviewed Nov. 20, 2009
I read the article today about Listeria being found in Eggo waffles. The article was written by Lisa Wade McCormick. Although I do applaud your group looking into public safety, it is obvious that this is a wreckless piece of journalism. You may want to search some background information about Listeria in foods and Listeria testing. You might find that listeria can be fairly common.
Also, most food companies will pull a product any time they get a Listeria read from their quality assurance testing. The Listeria test shows a responsible action by the food manufacturer and not a cause for the shortage in the product. I would feel that Lisa should issue an apology to Eggo.
A "wreckless piece of journalism?" We agree but reckless? Hardly. McCormick did nothing but report the facts, including a statement from Kellogg's. Listeria may be "fairly common" but it is not supposed to be in the food supply.
Reviewed Nov. 17, 2009
I have reviewed the article published by ConsumerAffairs.com and feel somewhat angered by the fact that they titled the article Debt Relief Network when the company they are admonishing is actually called My Debt Relief Network. The implication is that my company is the culprit providing questionable service. I think it would be beneficial for your organization to publish a new article clarifying the name of the company with the bad reviews, re-publishing the same article with the correct company name in the title or pulling the critical article altogether. This is costing me business, I do not appreciate this slander. Please correct the company name. My company name is Debt Relief Network, Inc., a Florida Corporation.
Reviewed Nov. 16, 2009
No damage to me with this other than a virtual slap in the face on the same page that the complaints are posted about Purely White. You run an advert for them and their co-conspirators, chosen move on your part.
Like most major media, our site is supported by advertising. There are no subscription fees or membership dues. It's important for consumers to realize that advertising is separate from editorial content; we do not endorse or recommend companies that advertise on our site.Please note that many ads are keyword-driven. This means you may often see an ad for the very product or service that is being reviewed on the page you're viewing.Advertising makes free content possible. Thanks for your understanding.
Reviewed Nov. 11, 2009
I'm reading an article about Water4Gas, using hydrogen to boost mileage. Do you know how ** you sound? I am proof that they work. I've had one in my car for 7 months and I get 75mpg, highway, and 55mpg in the city. I've even started a business of selling and installing these units. Even all of my customers are reporting 50 to 75 percent increase in mileage. All your company is, is just another government controlled agency backed by big oil or the scientist are that **. I will forward this info to as many websites and news channels as possible stating that Consumer Affairs makes allegations to persuade the general public's thinking depending on who is funding them!
The company responds: Well, since Daniel has now gone into business selling Water4Gas units, that certainly makes him an unbiased expert doesn't it? And as for our website being "another government controlled agency backed by big oil", that's news to us. But if Daniel knows how we can get our snouts into the tax trough, we'd be glad to hear it.
Reviewed Nov. 1, 2009
The article “Bank of America, Chase Rush to Cut Fees as Congress Gets Restless; Consumer Anger Forcing Congress to Get Tough on High Bank Fees, Charges” by James ** dated September 23, 2009 on ConsumerAffairs.com is really wrong now that, 2 months later, Congress passed the Credit Card Reform Act, which takes effect in February 2010. The interest rates are being jacked up now by all the major issuers to keep the interest rates at 29.99% and up when the new law takes effect. Perhaps Congress should amend the bill to require these companies retroactively adjust the fees and interest rates levels they charged a few months ago. Write Obama, your senators and representatives in the House. This has resulted to pain and suffering.
Reviewed Oct. 29, 2009
If users cannot read the owner's manual and pay attention to the manufacturer's recommendations, then don't ride an atv or sxs. Cars, guns, and power tools are the same. Parents don't allow their 12-year-old to drive the family car, so why would it be OK to let them drive an sxs or atv? The ridiculous lawsuits and public posturing are a silly reaction to poor parental supervision masquerading as a safety issue.
Give your collective heads a shake and look at the real issue. Supervision, education, and protective equipment for all new atv and sxs users. Sue the real responsible parties, the people who hand over the keys to an atv or sxs to inexperienced, unprotected, and underage users who then carry 2, 3, or more passengers, all of which are against the manufacturer's warnings.
Reviewed Oct. 26, 2009
Mr. Truman ** published an article in your publication regarding Consumer Product Safety Comission's intent to begin the process of further regulating ATVs and RUVs. In the article Mr. Truman states several times that "ATVs cause injury or death". ATVs do not cause anything. The cause of people getting hurt is always people. I know of no machine that is manufactured with the intelligence to have malicious intent. In virtually every case involving injury or death, deliberate decisions by the operators to ignore the manufacturers recommendations regarding age limits, safety gear, and proper safe operation resulted in the injury or death.
Using the the type of thinking Mr. Truman uses means we, as a society, have to "idiot proof" everything. Why not educate the idiots? By the way, during the same time periods, hundreds of thousands of people were killed or injured in automobile crashes. Notice I did not use the term "accident" or blame the vehicles. Then Mr. Truman tries to inflict his political agenda by taking a shot at the GOP who wisely refrained from initiating more laws we do not need. Let's try enforcing the laws and rules we do have.
Put the blame for injury and death where it belongs, on the parents of the children who let their kids operate machines not meant for children, and on the adult operators who fail to follow the manufacturers safety recommendations. Finally a question. Does Mr. Truman have any direct experience operating or owning ATVs? If as I suspect he doesn't, then please restrict his liberal left wing drivel to things he has direct knowledge of.
The company responds: The story refers to government agencies finding -- quote -- "serious injuries caused by ATVs." Truman ** has no opinion on the subject one way or the other. It's not our job to assign blame to parents, regulators or anyone else. As for the Bush Administration, our subhead accurately said "Industry held off regulations during the Bush years " This is not an opinion, it's a fact, one that perhaps Randall should appreciate our noting.
Reviewed Oct. 26, 2009
In the October 25th edition of your "Consumer News & Alerts," I was reading "Cybercriminals scare users into installing dangerous software," and when I clicked on the links "Internet Users" and "Identity Theft," advertisements popped up--one for Verizon and one for Credit Reports. I was not able to get the additional information that was supposed to be available. I had to click on the "close window (X)" to get rid of the advertisement. I'm surprised and disappointed that your site would allow that to happen when a reader is looking for additional information related to the subject.
We have eliminated this kind of pop-up advertising from our sytem.
Reviewed Oct. 23, 2009
Advertising on your website is the same company that was in the article. My stomach hurt from laughing. You are advertising for the same company I looked up for being bogus.
Reviewed Oct. 22, 2009
Do you check out those that advertise with you? As I looked through different websites, one thing stands out and that is that companies that claim you can make money working through Google and other such site are scams. To have them on your site makes people think they are for real. If you want to give the impression you are looking out for the consumer, we figure the advertisers with you are safe or at least honest. Thank you.
This is not a safe assumption. The ads on our site come from the same ad networks that populate most of the sites on the Web and should not be considered with more or less trustworthy than those you find elsewhere.
Reviewed Oct. 19, 2009
All consumers has become is a blog for consumers to list their complaints! Another do nothing company! Lack of true follow up from consumers.
Reviewed Oct. 15, 2009
I recently read an article on your site pertaining to VW/Audi ignition coils failing. In this article, you mentioned a situation involving Audi from the mid 80's regarding a symptom propagated by Ralph Nader known as unintended acceleration. I have been working on Audis in the US for well over a decade and have never witnessed anything of the sort. Furthermore, it was proven that the so-called unintended acceleration was actually due to the driver unknowingly pressing the accelerator pedal when attempting to depress the brake. A company should not be blamed for something if the consumer does not understand how to operate the equipment. Do your research and stop perpetuating information that was actually proven invalid. If the American public would actually pay attention to driving, they would not find things like this to be a problem.
Reviewed Oct. 14, 2009
I have a complaint about whoever you are. I contacted you this morning and due to distractions was unable to complete my complaint about AT&T. Believe me, my complaint has very little to do with the whiney problem of talking to someone there. It's the overcharging and entrapment of customers into plans they don't want and making it hellish to get out of. Oops, I should never have called in the first place.
In any case, I do not wish you to publish that letter unless someone contacts vis-a-vis the entire situation. I don't care about "others sharing my pain." Are you kidding? I want my situation adjusted equitably. I will go to the Attorney General of the State because I've had to do it before. Please yank someone else's cord. My complaint with your organization, whomever you are, is do you think I'm impressed that you send me two flipping emails that do not allow my response. You have mastered the trades, eh? Who's investigating you?
Not quite certain what the issue is here. Sorry.
Reviewed Oct. 7, 2009
This site is a site created by lawyers just to create business for themselves. You don't get a company's side of any of your complaints.
Sorry to disappoint you but this site is created and operated by journalists. News stories generally include statements from companies if they are willing to talk. The consumer complaints and comments are, by definition, from consumers. Companies do have a chance to respond through the "Response Form" link at the bottom of each page.
Reviewed Sept. 24, 2009
I submitted a Consumer Affairs complaint form on 9/14/09. I wanted to let you know that I used the sample letter How To Resolve a complaint, sent certified return receipt copy to the Daily News, since they claimed they had no record of my request to stop delivery. Today, I received a call back from Susan **, a manager who informed me that they are going to clear my account and I don't have to worry about my credit be ruined. Thank you for your assistance.
Thanks for the follow-up!
Reviewed Sept. 22, 2009
Consumeraffairs.com has posted a complaint about my business. The complaint was false and there is no way to defend the false statement made against my company. Consumeraffairs.com has a company response form and encourages those responses, but I do not see a place on their website that company responses are available for viewing. It also states not to make responses directly to the false complaint.
It is unfortunate that people can make accusations that are untrue and consumeraffairs.com will publish them without validation. I am sure that the attorneys that review these complaints are only looking for remarks that would make consumeraffairs.com liable in a court of law. The damages caused by this false statement posted on consumeraffairs.com are potentially enormous. This false statement could be on the internet indefinitely.
We do accept company responses to complaints. There is a link to the response form at the bottom of each page.
Reviewed Sept. 20, 2009
I sincerely hate the vibrant in-text advertising that Consumer Affairs uses in their stories. Vibrant in-text advertising says they are not a pop-up but that is a lie. I didn't click on the word in the story, yet an annoying pop-up comes up and I have to stop reading the story and close their stupid pop-up box. I love consumeraffairs.com but my friends and I all agree the "vibrant in-text advertising" make it the most annoying website ever! Please reconsider the use of this type of advertising. I am making it my personal mission in life to stop "vibrant in-text advertising", that's how bad/much I hate it.
Reviewed Sept. 12, 2009
Your website page reports the scam concerning U.S. government grants. On the same page is an advertisement for the scam promoting how to get Canadian government grants. I thought this was kind of funny.
Reviewed Aug. 25, 2009
I recently read a post of a complaint about the service at Ingram Park Nissan. The review ended by saying Reynaldo should get an attorney to help with the problem. The post had been done by a man not named Reynaldo. Reynaldo was the salesman who was trying to ripoff the customer. Clearly, the reviewer had not read the article he was commenting on, thereby lessening the integrity of consumeraffairs.com. Anyone who reads the article will think consumeraffairs.com is run by brain dead ** who try to sound as if they know what they're talking about when in fact, they are clearly not. Consumeraffairs.com should sue themselves in order to weed out the ** who are making them look like a bunch of Texas A&M graduates.
Reviewed Aug. 17, 2009
I just want to thank you for your service. I've found your site invaluable in supplementing my internet search for a car. I read your site regularly. I loved your response. Brilliant. Thank you so much for your work and help!
Reviewed Aug. 16, 2009
Whatever editors you have writing the "we respond" comments are rude and arrogant. The first response I read each had sarcastic, personal attacks on posters. I won't be coming back to your website. I would estimate that it is mostly to your own advertisers.
In our early years, editors sometimes posted responses but we no longer do so.
Reviewed Aug. 10, 2009
I recently attempted to look for new cars for my mother until suddenly, I was stopped in my tracks. I came upon www.consumeraffairs.com. According to them, every single car from every single company available in the USA has massive engine failure. Even the brands that seemed to do very well in every other review that I read: Governmental, non-governmental, profit or non! None were as harsh and told as much truthfulness as consumeraffairs.com. Thank you for being a true American. I bought my mom a bike!
This is a site where consumers complain about problems, so it's not surprising you would find such postings. Bicycles have their problems too, of course.
Reviewed Aug. 2, 2009
Consumeraffairs.com is putting complaints about Kevin Trudeau on their website. If you look at the top of the page, you will notice they have an ad from Kevin. Let me show you how to spell Morons. M-O-R-O-N-S.
Reviewed July 30, 2009
Why do you have this advertisement (see copy below) on your site? It does say ad by Google, but you are supposed to be a consumer advocate organization and you are allowing this sort of advertising, which is meant to spy on others, invade their privacy, and hurt them. “Listen-In On Cell Calls, Read Text Messages, Cell Phone Spy Undetectable! Works With All Phones **.”
Reviewed July 25, 2009
When someone makes a complaint to the Better Business Bureau, the BBB gives that company an opportunity to respond to the complaint. If anyone in your organization went further than the eighth grade, maybe you would have thought of this as well. Maybe you were raised in a communist block country. The first complaint you have registered against Sun State Enclosures (dated 2003). A woman named Sheri sounding like an angry 2nd grader was also filed with the BBB and answered by Sun State, then dismissed! The second complaint concerning a man by the name of Stan (dated back to 2000), this man never even worked for Sun State Enclosures but an inquiry or I don't know a little investigation on your part would have been, I don't know fair! I'm real curious as to how many other companies you have frivolously slandered without the benefit of a rebuttal. Keep up the great work.
Reviewed July 13, 2009
You wrote a bizarre, one-sided report on new CPSC head Tenenbaum. In it, you point out that there was a series of safety recalls for products that could have injured kids (let's ignore the obvious fact that kids play with adult objects, rocks, etc. all day long which poses safety risks). These recalls were, of course, prior to the enactment of the CPSIA. The CPSIA benefits nobody but attorneys and government bureaucrats. I challenge you to examine the law and explain to me how the testing standards required by the law improve child safety.
Large companies will simply send samples from batches of thousands of toys to the Chinese testing facility down the street from the Chinese manufacturing facility to "prove" its safety. Then the same company can hide behind the CPSIA and say its testing conforms. Easy solution? Probably none, but one thought would be to realize that kids and adults are exposed to lead in many aspects of everyday life and work to reduce the levels. The CPSIA pushes for an extreme solution that will actually not benefit anyone but attorneys who will continue to litigate on these issues ad nauseam.
Common sense legislators from both sides of the aisle will admit (in private) that this law, like most, needs to be amended and fine-tuned. Let's be real here, thrift shops aren't killing kids, poor parenting is killing kids. If, as a nation, we take responsibility for the toys we give our kids by buying high quality toys (new or used) and monitoring how our kids play with them, we will save more lives than by adding bizarre and business-killing legislation. Thousands of small (read: mostly handcrafted and safe) toy and clothing manufacturers out of business. An estimate would be tough, but let's say they each had annual revenues of $75,000 (these are really small firms), then maybe a couple of hundred million in lost sales to these firms and with this associated tax revenue, etc.
Reviewed June 26, 2009
When I navigated to your site, I found a whole lot of JavaScript that is related to tracking cookies and other malware. I think that your site should not be using or hosting spyware that is well known as invasive. I blocked about six types of JavaScript on your site.
We don't host any malware. We are an advertising-supported site and rely on cookies and other common methods to track usage, measure which pages get the most hits, etc. It would be useless to run a Web site without being able to measure usage and thereby refine the content to match reader preferences. We don't collect or retain any personal information except that submitted by consumers using our complaint form.
Reviewed June 26, 2009
I read and understand that you do not endorse products and services that are posted by 3rd party advertisers. However, in your June 25th newsletter, you have Freedom Debt Relief listed as a New Rogue, yet when I clicked on it to read the comments, there was an ad for the same company!
It seems to me that when they obviously become a problem company - you should be removing those ads! This is your website and you should be taking a more active role in advertising content and remove any ads for known scam businesses! We need to stop known scams from advertising at all. The reason scams advertise now is because those selling advertising time will sell ad space to anyone willing to pay for it.
Reviewed May 30, 2009
I have been an internet user for many years and have become increasingly depressed by the amount of nonsensical, scurrilous and dishonest material published via this medium. Your website, ConsumerAffairs.com, established a new low in my depression level with the publication of a piece purporting to debunk the claims made by Ozzie Freedom on his Water4Gas website.
Starting with its title ("Run Your Car On Water" Scheme Could Leave Consumers All Wet), and continuing through its second line, (Scientists debunk 'scammish' gas-from-water claims), it is ludicrous in almost every statement it makes. This example is especially bad because the website claims to be a champion of the consumer whilst in reality seeming (by the publication of this piece) to be the tool of vested interests (viz the oil industry?).
Please restore a little of my faith in human nature by assuring me that this article is the result of honest gross incompetence on the part of its writer, rather than cynical disinformation.
Reviewed May 29, 2009
ConsumerAffairs.com gave misleading information regarding water for gas in an article by Mr. David Wood. The article misleads the public when he says "Scientists debunk 'scammish' gas-from-water claims." Mr. Wood is spreading false information about water for gas. I installed a device based on the information Ozzie Freedom provided and my van went from 24 MPG highway to 31 MPG highway.
Reviewed May 12, 2009
Yikes! I noticed that Quicken Loans has an advertisement at the top of this site! How is such a thing possible? Don't you read the content that you put online?
Reviewed May 12, 2009
Excuse me if this is wrong place, but I couldn't find anywhere else to comment.
This is concerning 9 Secrets to Online Bargain Hunting by Cindy Waxer at Bankrate.com. Her article was great, but needed an addition, "Beware of snakes." Sometimes, saving a small amount may result in receiving a used or open box item. CDs and DVDs of pirated music are rampant. Amazon.com has a huge inventory and can find anything you are looking for at a good price. The addition of a list of Amazon-approved outside vendors at even cheaper prices makes this an excellent comparison site. If other online dealers offer large discounts from Amazon's prices, beware of the merchandise you are getting! Do your homework and make sure of what you are ordering. The web is not your hometown Macy's, where returns are easy. Otherwise, great work, Cindy Waxer, for an in-depth column.
Reviewed April 27, 2009
I love your web site and the articles are great! But the last few newsletters, every time I read an article and the mouse cursor gets near an underlined word, these advertisements from Vibrant keep popping up! And they won't go away! It is so hard to read and learn something when these ads keep popping up. Please fix this! I love your articles and by learning from them, I can help my customers where I work by answering their questions. And you also help me keep my family updated on recalls. You have saved my family from multiple chances of salmonella from sprouts, pot pies, Pan peanut butter, hamburger and pet food, lots of stuff. These ads are such a pain! Please fix them or get rid of them, something! Thanks for for your time in this. I really appreciate it!
Reviewed April 26, 2009
I find it funny that you are always attacking Nutro products, saying the FDA has filed complaints once again yet the FDA has filed nothing since the recalls of 07-08. Even in the letter from the FDA that you posted in your new link shows that the FDA denied your request for information (the first box marked with an x). For once, will you stop reporting on products (not just Nutro) if you don't have all the facts? It is making your site look like you are making things up just to get the public stirred up. I have used Nutro products on my pets since I was a child and have never had any problems. Even vets have said that there was more to these cases than what people were feeding their pets, yet you seem to leave that out of your reports. I think it is about time that you are investigated for once for all of your claims that seem to prove false and not just the companies that you rag on.
If you read our stories carefully, you will find that all assertions are attributed properly. The FDA refused to release public information because it said that doing so could interfere with an investigation. In the next breath, it said it wasn't investigating. It's up to you to decide what to believe.
Reviewed April 25, 2009
When will Consumer Affairs update the Nutro information? CNN has already reported there was never anything wrong with it, and that there never was an investigation? Why do you just pick out one company?
Reviewed April 24, 2009
You said that Nutro was under FDA investigation? Why? The FDA has confirmed to me that Nutro was not under investigation.
Reviewed April 23, 2009
I think that you put things on your site that you do not have facts to support. Consumeraffairs.com has reported Nutro is being investigated but no one can verify this. Maybe Consumer Affairs should be providing facts, not hearsay. You are confusing and frightening pet parents with no proof about these companies. In this economy, it is especially unfair to consumers and retailers to affect their confidence in premium pet products.
Read our story carefully and you will find numerous statements by pet owners and others that provide support for our assertions.
Reviewed April 23, 2009
You have falsely accused Nutro dog food and probably created some undue panic in the pet world. These are false statements on a consumer website, I guess you don't check for accuracy. That will surely hurt your presence as an authority in consumer advocacy. I, for one, will not be back or refer anyone to this site.
The word you're looking for is "undue."
Reviewed April 22, 2009
Your site is a farce. You should be ashamed. There is nothing there that benefits the consumer. Oh, and govermental, is that a word?
"Governmental" was a word the last time we checked.
Reviewed April 22, 2009
My complaint is not about the product but the blogs on this site! Mars has owned Nutro for almost two years now. This is not something new! There is no perfect food that's why we have hundreds of pet foods. Why do I not hear about all the recalls Old Roy and Special Kitty has had over the years? Is it because they are Wal-Mart's signature brand? I work in a retail pet store and have not had a return or complaint on Nutro Pet Foods in a long time.
Reviewed April 22, 2009
ABC News article says the Nutro article on your site is incorrect.
Reviewed April 22, 2009
I have fed all my dogs and cats Nutro products for over 20 years. They have all been healthy and lived to 17 yrs., 16 yrs. (dogs), 23, 24 and one is 20 (cats). I currently have 2 dogs and 3 cats eating only Nutro with absolutely no health problems or vet bills. I think that you need to have some positive tests of the food being bad, before you keep slandering premium products. You have no evidence and keep up your trashing of the food. Find some actual (true) research on food samples that are contaminated before you spread more lies.
Reviewed April 20, 2009
Why would you have ads for the very grant scams you warn about on your web page?
Reviewed April 7, 2009
Yes! My complaint is about your stupid captcha at the end of this page! I am legally blind and cannot read that idiotic thing! Let's find another way to verify someone's identity! So far it has taken me thirty minutes to send you this form. I am using dial-up!
Reviewed April 4, 2009
Your 4/2/09 article about eHarmony made the reference to Theodore Olson (a former Solicitor General who also represented President Bush in the infamous 2000 recount). This gives a negative implication about these men. Al Gore was the perpetrator of the damaging legal actions to try and steal the 2000 election so your article is guilty of serious misrepresentation of the facts of the matter. I can only assume you are promoting a political attitude by this misrepresentation. Your political action puts a cloud over your purported consumer advocacy.
Reviewed April 3, 2009
Your article regarding small claims and how to file in Arizona courts is completely flawed. The court does not mail out the complaint to the defendant, nor can we help an individual fill out their paperwork.
Reviewed March 30, 2009
I am a huge fan of Consumer Affairs, but I must disagree with the listing of New Rogues. Every week, there are some very good companies that are listed along with not so good companies. All companies make mistakes, and what is important is that the company is free from an unusual pattern of complaints. The BBB advises when considering complaint information, please take into account the company's size and volume of transactions, and understand that the nature of complaints and a firm's responses to them are often more important than the number of complaints.
Consumer Affairs should also consider such information and take it into account. To call a company a rogue just because it dropped the ball a couple of times unfairly classify some good companies in the same category of true rogues that routinely violate consumer rights. I hope you can differentiate between rogues and complaints. This is an important responsibility as a consumer advocate, and the consequence is that by throwing mud, you yourself could become a rogue (just look at politics).
Reviewed March 30, 2009
Online idiots become so-called experts in whichever subject and category they are posting. They just regurgitate information that they find online from illegitimate sources and are not held accountable for their postings.
Reviewed March 24, 2009
With all the consumer complaints on the website dealing with Capital One and you have a Capital One banner ad on top, don't you think it's rather brazen? It cheapens your site and makes you look like you're in bed with them. My hope is that websites like this actually do good, but I think it's just a place for people to vent.
Reviewed March 23, 2009
I was very disconcerted to find that every red link in the article - Credit Card Rates on the Rise; Fear of delinquency has banks increasing APRs - was NOT to another article with further information, BUT TO a commercial link selling me a new card or other service. Yikes, guys! My faith in your weekly letter had been severely compromised! Are you just another, albeit more subtle, scam site?
Reviewed March 11, 2009
I just want to applaud ConsumerAffairs.com for their reply to that insane idea of trying to gag medical patients from commenting online about their doctors. AWESOME JOB. Keep up the GREAT work, guys. It is MUCH appreciated (and apparently needed)! :-)
Reviewed March 10, 2009
If the people complaining on your website knew how to spell or talk, it would be a relief. They probably would not complain so much.
Reviewed March 9, 2009
Re: "Your doctors gagging patients" article. I am not sure I completely agree with your position. The professions such as medicine and law do not share the same arms-length business/consumer relationship as that of any business such as a mechanic, realtor or any other business. The nature of the relationship is much more intimate, where the customer is relying on the doctor or lawyer to tell them what they need and they disclose confidential information.
By putting this on the internet, this exposes that relationship and, because lawyers and physicians are strictly regulated to protect confidentiality, their hands are tied and they cannot always respond to disgruntled clients and patients. What are they supposed to say? Yes, she is angry about the hysterectomy but she had a long history of STDs that diseased it - stemming from manic sex episodes characteristic of bipolar patients like her. Or perhaps, yes I refused to sue the defendants for fraud because Mr. ** told me he stole those funds and despite what he thinks, he had no case.
If patients and clients are allowed to make the issue public, then shouldn't then doctors or lawyers be free to respond without needing to keep patient or client records confidential? People don't like to lose their cases and they don't like adverse medical results, but half of all legal cases lose and many people can't be cured. There is a lot of anger through no fault of the professional. And yes, except in outrageous cases, most laymen aren't really capable of judging whether they are getting quality legal or medical services. They don't understand that their 85-year-old parent died on the table because it was a choice of either take that risk or face a certain painful death three months later.
They also have to deal with people that are, by definition, ill or in legal trouble, which includes most people having mental problems, criminals and frauds. Or enraged that their father/mother/child died or that they lost their case, perhaps a child custody case. Despite the fact that you did the best any doctor or lawyer could with what they had to work with. These people are prone to be malicious and vexatious, which is usually for the same reason they are in the system in the first place. Some physicians for example usually have two or three people a week faking symptoms in order to get drugs. Lawyers are frequently asked to file baseless actions by malicious clients or participate in committing some fraud on the court like destroying evidence or perjury.
This is reality folks. It's not your mechanic/consumer relationship. It's one where what you do to make clients or patients gush approval about you may be horrible professional conduct. A doctor could win kudos for passing out the morphine. A lawyer could get a pat on the back for helping the client fabricate evidence. But in both cases, it would be reprehensible. By the same token, if you are valiantly dealing with a more hopeless medical or legal population, the complaints are bound to be more frequent from people disappointed with the results.
Medical boards and Bar associations have long recognized this special situation so they allow complaints to be filed and decided in confidence, then published if there is any legitimacy to them. My point is not that they shouldn't be rated for client or patient satisfaction. I am not sure I disagree with you. But the business/consumer advocate lens you are viewing the relationship needs to be a little more sophisticated. Your viewpoint needs more consideration about how to fairly deliver consumer critiques of professional services rather than gag order, as if they are Panasonic getting people to refrain from criticizing their appliances. Perhaps we need something altogether new in this situation.
P.S. Why don't you add a comments section for your articles?
Reviewed Feb. 27, 2009
Your banner ads are for government grants!
Reviewed Feb. 25, 2009
I haven't been scammed. I'm not dumb enough to fall for them. I thought, however, that it was extremely ironic that when I read your article it was flanked by two ads by Google both of which were exactly the same scams you were talking about in your article! Jeffreysgrant... It's bad enough that they run these ads, but it's not very smart for them to run them right next to your (very helpful) article exposing them! :D
Reviewed Feb. 19, 2009
I just read your article for government grant scams and in it you state “any government grant offer is a scam. Period.” So if this is true, tell me please why on this exact same web page you have no less than 3 ads for free government grant money? So either they are all a scam period and you allow scam artist to advertise with you, or your reporting is in error.
Reviewed Feb. 17, 2009
I came to this site to get information about government grant scams and you people have the bogus ads on your website from Google ads. Your right hand doesn't know what your left hand is doing.
Like most major media, our site is supported by advertising. There are no subscription fees or membership dues. It's important for consumers to realize that advertising is separate from editorial content; we do not endorse or recommend companies that advertise on our site.Please note that many ads are keyword-driven. This means you may often see an ad for the very product or service that is being reviewed on the page you're viewing.Advertising makes free content possible. Thanks for your understanding.
Reviewed Feb. 13, 2009
Mark Huffman's article regarding the dangers of zapping "eye floaters" with the so-called controversial YAG laser is bar none the most unprofessional article I have ever read. I have yet to see one shred of medical or scientific evidence to prove that this procedure is as dangerous as your article claims it is. Well-trained ophthalmologists have performed this procedure thousands of times without incidence.
Eye floaters "are not" natural! Pieces of matter are not supposed to float around in your eyes especially in your direct field of vision. Eye floaters are extremely disruptive, especially for those of us who work with computers and must read a great deal. More times than not, floaters are more than disruptive, they are debilitating! Eye floaters can also be very dangerous - driving, for example, especially for people who are monocular.
How would you like someone who only has the use of one eye to be driving on the same road as you and your family and have a floater in their field of vision or how about your surgeon while operating on you with floaters in their direct vision? It doesn't sound too appealing, does it? You should get your facts straight before you print them for the world to read. You have lost all credibility with me and I am sure by now with a great many of your readers.
Reviewed Feb. 9, 2009
Your website is not working properly. I am trying to look up information on various companies in various states. When I go to www.consumeraffairs.com/db/ConsumerProtection.html, there is a way to search by zip - which I do and I get an error that I cannot access your database. I see no way to contact you on your web page, other than this complaint form. Can you please provide assistance with this? Am I doing something wrong? You can call or email me. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.
Reviewed Feb. 9, 2009
For the past week or so, I've been receiving the Consumer Affairs e-mail alerts where the links for the articles don't work properly. Today, the links to "read more" or the article "title" link lead to a Save prompt instead of opening the article.
Reviewed Feb. 5, 2009
I went to consumeraffairs.com to read about cash4gold.com. While there reading, I see a flashing, very annoying ad for yourgiftexperts.com. This ad is so annoying that I click on the X at the top right corner to cancel it; instead of cancelling, it brings up a window. I next click on "cancel", which brings up another window. Now I have to wait for them to come up completely before canceling each one separately. I think cancel should mean cancel especially on a consumer affairs type of website.
Reviewed Jan. 24, 2009
As I read complaints on ConsumerAffairs.com about an apparent scam run by people selling Bromalite, I noticed an ad in the left margin for the very product being criticized! The ad promoted free samples of Bromalite and a similar offer for Acai Berries. Together, these products were the dynamic duo of weight loss programs. I was skeptical of the request for a credit card in the free promotion, which charged me $4.99 shipping. So I did not submit the order and avoided any damage, except, I now question the legitimacy of ConsumerAffairs.com! What is going on here?
Like most major media, our site is supported by advertising. There are no subscription fees or membership dues. It's important for consumers to realize that advertising is separate from editorial content; we do not endorse or recommend companies that advertise on our site.Please note that many ads are keyword-driven. This means you may often see an ad for the very product or service that is being reviewed on the page you're viewing.Advertising makes free content possible. Thanks for your understanding.
Reviewed Jan. 10, 2009
I recently stumbled upon ConsumerAffairs.com and began reading some of the consumer posts on the website. What I have mostly noticed is that it is full of ignorant people who are looking for any way to get a little extra something from someone. To be fair, I'm sure that there are several consumers who have used this website that have legitimately been scammed or wronged. However, I feel that this website will only contribute to the continuing economic struggles that our nation has been dealing with. Several of these companies or small business which have actually done no wrong could see a loss of customer base due to the content of this website. It is admirable that whoever built this website is trying to help consumers, but I wonder how many people have actually been helped compared to the number of innocent small businesses that have been hurt by the slander found on these forums. I do not demand that this website be shut down, just that consumer posts should be further looked in to and confirmed prior to allowing comments to be posted.
Reviewed Jan. 9, 2009
You guys have a lawsuit on your hands. The attorneys will be contacting you about your misrepresentations about other companies and individuals that are reported. The class action lawsuit is going to be against you. The problem comes from idiots like you and your website, not knowing the whole truth. You just post your complaints without any research whatsoever. Well the end result is slander. You are just as at fault as the person writing the complaint. If the papers and media as a whole were allowed to do that using companies and individuals' names and states, there would be lawsuits. Well, yours is coming. You might want to take the time to read and then research the postings for more truth than emotional anger. Most of the time, idiots react without thinking through the consequences. Now you have your turn to see just what it feels like to try and help people, then have it turn on you for doing nothing more than what you thought was right.
People are human. They make mistakes. But I can tell you that I have never purposely done anything wrong to warrant a complaint on your dumb website. But it will pay off in the end now. Thanks to you. Maybe you should take some time and effort to really see if there is a valid reason for a post.
Reviewed Jan. 9, 2009
Joe consistently publishes complaints about the Prius with article headers that don't match the content. He takes every complaint as if it is the gospel truth and fact based, numbers or any questioning be damned. For example, The Ten Worst Used Cars and Trucks. It starts out with a claim of 215,000 complaints but each of the selected vehicles has no number of reports out of the 215,000. In short, he has cherry picked his favorites to complain about with no metrics from this claimed 215,000 entry database to back up his claim. This is pure hokum and propaganda.
We also notice that there are no user comments to correct errors in the articles. This is again, the practice of a propagandist who simply "declares reality" without allowing any independent fact checking. Finally, we noticed that in any sort of comparison, such as Test Drive: 2006 Toyota Prius, no equivalent class vehicle is mentioned. The only other vehicle in the article is a powerful C6 Corvette. Obviously, Joe and his team have no concept of apple-to-apples comparison or fair and objective reporting.
Reviewed Jan. 7, 2009
There’s a misleading headline in news story on your site. I didn't see any other way to contact you, but thought you'd like to know. The headline was, "H&R Block to Stop Selling Refund Anticipation Loans in California". The story begins on January 2, 2009.
Tax Refund Loans - "Tax preparation giant, H&R Block, has agreed to stop selling high-cost refund anticipation loans as "early tax refunds" in California..."
My point is that they won't stop making the loans. They simply agreed to stop referring to them misleadingly as early tax refunds. In fact, they are loans, not early refunds.
Reviewed Jan. 2, 2009
I read the report about the Grinches that stole Christmas and found it to be insulting and close-minded. On behalf of the nearly 700,000 postal employees that make every effort to deliver the mail correctly and in good condition, while driving safely, I want to say that while you may have thought you were being funny, you are not. Yes, there are the 5%-ers that we make every effort to address. I am sure you are in the 5%-er club where you work. 5 percenters are those that do not live up to the expectations of their position.
Those of us in the 95% group, who go to work each day and try to do the right thing for our customers, take exception to your generalizations concerning our work habits. As a Consumer Affairs professional, I take exception to your remarks and feel you should not classify everyone as incompetent when in fact, we deliver more mail in a timely manner than anyone else. We do it in a safe and productive way and we smile at our customers no matter what, even the ones that disparage us.
Reviewed Dec. 29, 2008
I have looked repeatedly for your contact e-mail address - either you have done away with it or have it hidden. I have also looked for your rogue gallery and can no longer find it. On some subjects you can find some complaints, but not the rogue gallery. You have changed and made it too hard for the consumer to use your site, and it appears you do not want to hear from the consumer. What happened? You used to be for the consumer - no more!!!!
Reviewed Dec. 23, 2008
While trying to research past consumer affairs with Comcast internet company, I found this site through a Google search. Searching through Consumer Affairs' listings of previous consumer complaints, I realized that either Americans now have drastically low grammar, punctuation, and editing skills, or that you have some version of a mechanical trained chimp writing your complaints for you. Though, unbelievable as it may seem, I believe in this case the latter to be true. I'm not sure if you realize the dribble posted on your site, but I think anyone trying to run a reputable business, should at least maintain a website in one well written language. Due to the poor quality of the written complaints, I chose to question and eventually rule out the validity of anything posted on this site.
Reviewed Dec. 21, 2008
For about the last week, you have had a very annoying, flashing logo on your site. Every single time, it advises me I have "WON" a Dell Laptop computer. I can't make it stop flashing. If I click on close or the X, it takes me to their page. Where, the only way I can shut them down is to unsubscribe and that requires that I give them my EMAIL ADDRESS! Your site, of ALL POSSIBLE SITES, ought to be free of such chicanery and dishonesty! I understand you probably need advertisers to keep this site running. But I INSIST that you only do so with reputable advertisers! And a flashing sign that keeps telling me I am the lucky 100,000th person, and says it for days or weeks, is clearly running some kind of scam! Shame on you!
Reviewed Dec. 8, 2008
This page on Consumeraffairs.com offers false and misleading information. https://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2008/12/laptop_shopping.html Examples are as follows: OSX... it is invariably more expensive than an equivalent machine with a different OS. False. The retail price of OS X is cheaper than Windows Vista. As part of a purchased system it is certainly not a more expensive option than Windows. Especially when ongoing costs are taken into consideration. Spanning the gap is Microsoft, makers of Windows XP and Windows Vista. Windows is the most common OS on the planet. Are you offering consumer information or marketing for Microsoft? It's usability as well as price falls somewhere in between OSX and Linux. This is false and misleading to the consumer. OS X and desktop-oriented Linux distributions offer superior security, usability, reliability, and performance when compared to Windows Vista. And again, Windows is NOT cheaper than OS X. If you're buying at a store, be sure to ask someone if you can try out a computer with each OS if you're not familiar with the differences. And the chances that you will find three approximately equal products running these three operating systems under one roof are?
Reviewed Dec. 5, 2008
Your forty-eight hour notice emailed to me advising you were using my complaint against grocery practice of shrinking product has turned into a week. Although I appreciate the thought my article was worthy of publication on your site, I'm a little miffed it never saw print. What happened? Thank you.
Reviewed Dec. 2, 2008
After hearing from a client in regards to problems with the Canidae dog food, we researched the issue on your website. I have to say I was not impressed with the fact finding abilities of the presentation of the information. The other food companies could easily trash Canidae, thus providing them with FREE negative marketing. The average consumer, who should not have to worry about such a problem occurring, is not after reading this review is certainly inclined to feel Canidae is a horrible food, when the facts belie this point.
It is shameful the information is not formatted differently on your site, and there is not more accountability to post on your website. Perhaps there should be a process of verification of authenticity. I hope something is done to this to protect the good name of a good dog food - one that doesn't put the bottom line before the interests of stakeholders.
Reviewed Nov. 30, 2008
I am here reading your web page and seeing your ADVICE saying all of these are scams. Yet I see 3 ,Count them, 3 ads on your page right now advertising FREE GRANT MONEY. I am very disappointed in you. You say that they are a scam then you advertise for them. What does that say about you??
Like most major media, our site is supported by advertising. There are no subscription fees or membership dues. It's important for consumers to realize that advertising is separate from editorial content; we do not endorse or recommend companies that advertise on our site.Please note that many ads are keyword-driven. This means you may often see an ad for the very product or service that is being reviewed on the page you're viewing.Advertising makes free content possible. Thanks for your understanding.
Reviewed Nov. 26, 2008
I am complaining about your article on 7 reasons why not to trade in your gas hog. I think you are missing the point. It's not only saving money on less fuel usage it's getting off of foreign dependency.
Reviewed Nov. 19, 2008
Why is it that when I click on an auto manufacturer, say Honda, it immediately shows a list of all the complaints, but when I click on Toyota, nothing comes up unless I click the categories on the right.
Reviewed Nov. 13, 2008
You have complaints about nutraceutical free trials, and yet you run banners for Central Coast Nutraceuticals. Silly.
Like most major media, our site is supported by advertising. There are no subscription fees or membership dues. It's important for consumers to realize that advertising is separate from editorial content; we do not endorse or recommend companies that advertise on our site.Please note that many ads are keyword-driven. This means you may often see an ad for the very product or service that is being reviewed on the page you're viewing.Advertising makes free content possible. Thanks for your understanding.
Reviewed Nov. 12, 2008
I sent you a complaint regarding AIG annuities. You have agreed to publish it. It has been over 10 days and this has yet to occur. I do believe my letter will help others. What is the hold up?
We publish as many consumer comments as we can but we are not able to publish everything we receive. Sorry.
Reviewed Oct. 11, 2008
The advertisement showing Senator Obama as some kind of sullen, crude and evil person and suggesting that HE is the criminal - not McCain (Keating 5) or Sarah Palin (Alaska succeed from States) should not be allowed on a website like this without equal time from Obama's campaign. the post office is government agency that is in place for all people - not just Republicans and not McCain - emphasis on the name CAIN. I am going to inform all Obama supporters that this advertisement is on here including Move On, etc. Thank you.
We would happily accept political advertising from the Obama camp. "Equal time" does not really apply to paid advertising if you think about it for a moment.
Reviewed Oct. 4, 2008
I read a debunking expose from Consumer Affairs on their website about cars running on hydrogen (water). The report spent some time and space quoting detailed responses from eminent scientists as a "scamwatch" type story. I thought this was helpful until I realized that the surrounds of the story contained maybe a dozen direct adverts on how to convert your car to run on water!! What is going on here?
Reviewed Oct. 3, 2008
Why, under the "pocket pets" section where you report rodents carry diseases that are dangerous to humans, are you listing ferrets? If you bothered to read up of them, you would know ferrets are not rodents and pose no disease risks that cats and dogs don't already pose. Because of this information, some daycare licensing regulations ban ferrets from centers as both pets and drop in visitors. Your information is wrong!
Reviewed Sept. 12, 2008
I think this web site is a waste of time. I see no real prupose of this web site but to spread rumors.
If you are going to help us consumers then do it, don't just post s*** on your web site.
Think about it. You know what I am talking about.
What do you think we should do other than post information on our Web site
Reviewed Aug. 25, 2008
Consumer affairs never allows any post to enter their website with proof of actual purchase which forces me to question the validity of each complaint. If they don't check the validity of the complaint how do you know if someone actually purchased something from the company their complaining about and furthermore if the complaints are genuine? I question the structural integrity of this website and until someone can verify that the complaints are attached to a specific purchasing situation any and all complaints listed on this website are subject to question.
The reader is free to weigh the evidence and draw his or her own conclusions. You want someone to tell you what to believe
Reviewed Aug. 22, 2008
As I used your web site to check on shower doors and specifically Century Shower Doors I first had to read a disclaimer from one manufacturer, Century Shower Door Inc. in California, which clearly states that the complaints listed below are not about them. Then as I proceeded to read and INVESTIGATE I determined that the first 3 complaints after their disclaimer were directly pointed at Century Shower Door Inc. of California and not the other Century Shower Door of NJ. As a company that has a tremendous impact on the well being of businesses you have a Large Duty to correctly and ACCURATELY direct the complaints. You have a duty to determine which company the complaint is directed at and to clearly state that in any complaint you publish. Now that you have received a complaint about your inaccuracies will you correct your mistakes?
Investiagte which Century Shower Door company you are publishing complaints about and state it clearly! Your inaccuracies are unprofessional and damaging.
Businesses that have similar names to other companies with registered complaints, incur damages in lost sales that cannot be measured. It is the publisher's responsibilty to accurately list the offender.
Reviewed Aug. 18, 2008
I live in the Philippines, having been married to a Filipino 15 years. The article against marrying Filipinos is not exactly true. Only 15% of u.s. marriages last in America among Americans. Thats very poor. The article is biased not not exactly true. Americans men must be careful marrying abroad, but if they use common sense and rather than infatuation overlooking the negative signs, they get fantastic wives. In the Philippines thousands of Americans reside with their Filipino wives, securely, more than in America.
It is true that many penpals are not what they claim to be, but nonetheless foriegn brides, are more lasting than american women. the Philippines has literally thousands of Americans and Europeans married to Filipino women doing extremely well as compared to marrying an american woman. Your article is very biased. Men need an article to be more cautious marrying foreign wives, but to say marrying a foreign wife is a mistake is a total misrepresentation. Men must take the time to come over and check out the woman and the family he's marrying into and once a man finds an honest, really Christian wife, he has a wife that no American woman could meet the mans expectations.
You're stereotying foreign women as all being the same and thats simply untrue. There are honest and dishonest people among all nations. In the American community Americans married to foreign brides do very well, except for those women who married for the wrong motives, just like American women do. Your article is misleading. It is true that Americans marry foreigners hastily, but there are better foreign wives than American wives. Especially in the U.S. many women do not marry, but are career orientated or have batched up their own mariages, being divorced, many with children. Marrying a women with chidren ends up a tremendous mistake in America.
Before writing such a powerful article you need to come to Cebu Philippines and walk thru the malls and you'll see thousand of Americans and Europeans married to Filipino wives and they're doing better than their American counterparts who marry American women. Your article is misleading.
Reviewed Aug. 12, 2008
I went to your cite looking for info about companies who monitor your credit and hopefuly keep people for stealing your personal information. I read about the horror stories written by users of freecreditreport.com and behold, who is one of the supporters of your web site? freecreditreport.com!
If you let them use advert space on your cite, then your being paid for that ergo they are supporting you. Please don't tell me you have no control over what Google puts there.
Nothing happened as I will not trust anything you have to say. I already know freecreditreport.com is a total scam, but was shocked to see you allow them to use your advert space.
Like most major media, our site is supported by advertising. There are no subscription fees or membership dues. It's important for consumers to realize that advertising is separate from editorial content; we do not endorse or recommend companies that advertise on our site.Please note that many ads are keyword-driven. This means you may often see an ad for the very product or service that is being reviewed on the page you're viewing.Advertising makes free content possible. Thanks for your understanding.