How companies use arbitration clauses to screw consumers: A cautionary tale

Photo by Austin Distel on Unsplash

Via the Philadelphia Inquirer, something consumers should consider:

“When you download Uber’s app, you agree that you’re older than 18, that you’re not using a stolen credit card to pay your driver, and — if you’re like one Philadelphia woman and fracture your spine in a Center City car crash — that you won’t seek a jury trial against the ride-share giant.

“But, a Philadelphia Common Pleas Court judge has ruled that, because Uber can’t prove that Jillian Kemenosh actually read the company’s terms and conditions before she signed up or rode in the car that ran a red light, she can’t be forced to settle her claims behind closed doors.

“Sitting in the back seat of an Uber in March 2018, Kemenosh was more than halfway home on a four-mile trip from Columbus Boulevard to her Center City apartment when the driver of the 2010 Toyota Highlander ran a red light at 16th and Vine Streets, crashing into another vehicle.

“Suffering a fracture to her spine, concussion, and traumatic brain injury, Kemenosh sued Uber, its local subsidiaries, and the driver, requesting a jury to determine her payout.

“But, Uber argues in court documents, by approving the ride-share’s “terms and conditions” when she downloaded the app in 2013, Kemenosh had already forfeited her right to a jury, agreeing instead to resolve any legal disputes only through binding arbitration, which forces users to waive their rights to sue and settle matters privately.

“Proponents of arbitration say that it’s faster and cheaper than court. But critics say it revokes a consumer’s right to publicly take action against a company.”

CPAP maker pays $37.5M in kickback lawsuit

Photo by Vladislav Muslakov on Unsplash

Via the Associated Press. Imagine that — corruption everywhere, even while you sleep:

“SAN DIEGO (AP) — ResMed, a San Diego-based company that sells sleep apnea machines, will pay $37.5 million to settle allegations that it provided kickbacks to obtain customer referrals, federal prosecutors announced Wednesday.

“The settlement covers five whistleblower lawsuits filed on behalf of the federal government. The lawsuits say that the company provided free services and equipment to medical equipment suppliers, sleep labs and other health care providers in violation of the federal False Claims Act.

“Paying any type of illegal remuneration to induce patient referrals undermines the integrity of our nation’s health care system,” Jody Hunt, head of the U.S. Justice Department’s civil division, said in a statement. “When a patient receives a prescription for a device to treat a health care condition, the patient deserves to know that the device was selected based on quality of care considerations and not on unlawful payments from equipment manufacturers.”

How Big Cable manipulated their speed tests

Photo by Glenn Carstens-Peters on Unsplash

Via Salon:

“If you chose an internet-service provider based on their official internet speed scores published by the Federal Communications Commission, you have have been lied to.

“According to a new report in the Wall Street Journal, AT&T, Cox, Comcast and other telecom giants pressed the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to remove unfavorable data on their speed tests to improve their scores. The FCC has an ongoing research initiative called Measuring Broadband America which is meant to hold internet service providers accountable for their promised internet speeds by gathering “independent” data.

“According to the Wall Street Journal, the FCC uses data from a month or two in the fall to produce the report. The FCC and SamKnows, a company that measures internet performance,  alert the internet providers the dates of when the tests will be done and sends them lists of testers’ names so they can confirm the internet packages. The relationship and process, according to the report, allows the companies to make targeted upgrades and improve service for the households being tested, thus manipulating the results.”

Consumer chief undermines consumers, again.

Amazon helps itself, not consumers

Photo by Bryan Angelo on Unsplash

Go read, it’s quite enlightening. Via the Washington Post:

SEATTLE — When Jeff Peterson’s Amazon seller account was hacked recently, he frantically tried to reach Amazon’s customer service for help restoring access to his sports memorabilia store.

As nearly 4,000 fraudulent orders rang up, the Garden Grove, Calif.-based seller called Amazon’s seller support line, phoned its main customer service number, reached out via a separate account on its Canadian site, and even sent an email to chief executive Jeff Bezos. Nothing worked.

“I can’t get any answers from Amazon at all to fix this,” Peterson said, as negative reviews of his service accumulated, decimating his business.

One thing he hadn’t done was pay as much as $5,000 a month for a program Amazon offers sellers as a way to get quick help from a real person.

Amazon has become a powerful marketplace alongside its role as an online retailer, with more than 2.5 million third-party sellers who have become global businesses on its platform. Early on, Amazon compelled sellers to use its warehouses to guarantee speedy Prime shipping, in addition to other programs that largely benefited consumers. But now, sellers and former employees familiar with Amazon’s internal strategy say the company is increasingly focused on boosting its profits on the backs of its sellers — often without any clear upside for customers.

 

Decrease corporate power to increase consumer power

If it’s done right, healthcare reform won’t cost any more than we already spend

Be suspicious

If you think side effects are related to a new drug you’re taking, err on the side of caution. Be persistent with asking questions. Remember, most of what doctors tell you was relayed by a pharmaceutical salesperson. They might believe they’re telling you the truth, but often, the full facts have been hidden from the prescribers:

Warren promises to kill ISP monopoly protection

This is exactly the pro-consumer attitude we like to see! You go, Sen. Warren:

Presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren has unveiled a plan she says will not only improve broadband access in America, but kill state laws specifically designed by the telecom industry to hamstring broadband competition.

Warren’s proposal, outlined in a Medium post as part of a broader plan for rural America, includes doling out $85 billion to help fund broadband deployment to underserved areas. FCC data suggests that 39 percent of rural Americans still lack access to broadband.

But the plan also does something notable: it takes aim at the growing roster of protectionist state laws telecom lobbyists have used to crush competition across the country.

“Many small towns and rural areas have turned to municipal networks to provide broadband access in places that the private market has failed to serve—but today, as many as 26 states have passed laws hindering or banning municipalities from building their own broadband infrastructure to protect the interests of giant telecom companies,” Warren said.