<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <title>The Consumerist</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/" />
    <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://consumerist.com/index.xml" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2009-11-10:/1</id>
    <updated>2011-12-20T21:12:37Z</updated>
    <subtitle>Shoppers bite back.</subtitle>
    <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type Enterprise 4.32-en</generator>

<entry>
    <title>The Super Bowl Will Be Streamed Online &amp; On Some Mobile Phones For The First Time</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/the-super-bowl-will-be-streamed-online-on-some-mobile-phones-for-the-first-time.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025771</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T22:00:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T21:12:37Z</updated>

    <summary>Not in front of the TV? No problem for those watching this year&apos;s Super Bowl if you&apos;ve got a computer with an Internet connection or certain mobile phones -- Super Bowl XLVI will be streamed online for the first time ever, the NFL announced today. It all starts with NBC broadcasts of Wild Card Saturday and the Pro Bowl says the Associated Press, continuing with the Super Bowl in Indianapolis on Feb. 5. The games will also be available via Verizon&apos;s NFL Mobile app. Not only will the stream have the usual broadcast, it&apos;ll include additional camera angles, in-game highlights...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mary Beth Quirk</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1537494</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term=" E-commerce" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="NBC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="nbc" label="nbc" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="nfl" label="nfl" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="superbowl" label="super bowl" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="wearelivinginadigitalworld" label="we are living in a digital world" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Not in front of the TV? No problem for those watching this year's Super Bowl if you've got a computer with an Internet connection or certain mobile phones -- Super Bowl XLVI will be streamed online for the first time ever, the NFL announced today.</p>

<p>It all starts with NBC broadcasts of Wild Card Saturday and the Pro Bowl says the <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/story/2011-12-20/super-bowl-online-streaming/52101970/1""target=_blank">Associated Press</a>, continuing with the Super Bowl in Indianapolis on Feb. 5. The games will also be available via Verizon's NFL Mobile app. </p>

<p>Not only will the stream have the usual broadcast, it'll include additional camera angles, in-game highlights and live stats, as well as replayable Super Bowl ads. </p>

<blockquote>"Whether it's just for a quarter if somebody has to run out to the store to get something they forgot, now they can stay connected to the game," Hans Schroeder, the NFL's senior vice president of media strategy and development, told The Associated Press. "With such a big television audience, it will be interesting to see the expanded reach."</blockquote>

<p>And of course, this means there's another way to ignore Madonna's half-time performance.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/story/2011-12-20/super-bowl-online-streaming/52101970/1" target="_blank">Super Bowl to be streamed online for first time</a> [USA Today]</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Best Buy Waits Until Now To Admit It Doesn&apos;t Have That Stuff You Ordered On Black Friday</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/best-buy-waits-until-now-to-admit-it-doesnt-have-that-stuff-you-ordered-on-black-friday.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025772</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T21:30:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T21:10:33Z</updated>

    <summary>In case you are calendar-challenged, Christmas is less than a week away, meaning you have precious little time to get your shopping done. Unfortunately for some people who thought they were getting things done early by ordering through Best Buy&apos;s website over the Black Friday weekend, they are just now finding out that they are out of luck. TheStreet.com reports on the flurry of complaints in the BestBuy.com forums from customers who placed orders weeks ago, only to find out this week that their order has been canceled. &quot;We had ordered and [received confirmation] for a Holiday Bundle from Best...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Chris Morran</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1531140</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Best Buy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="bestbuy" label="best buy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="bestbuycom" label="bestbuy.com" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="holidayshopping" label="holiday shopping" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="yeahwedonthavethose" label="yeah... we don&apos;t have those" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>In case you are calendar-challenged, Christmas is less than a week away, meaning you have precious little time to get your shopping done. Unfortunately for some people who thought they were getting things done early by ordering through Best Buy's website over the Black Friday weekend, they are just now finding out that they are out of luck.</p>

<p>TheStreet.com reports on the flurry of complaints in the BestBuy.com forums from customers who placed orders weeks ago, only to find out this week that their order has been canceled. </p>

<p>"We had ordered and [received confirmation] for a Holiday Bundle from Best Buy's Web site. We received a confirmation on the purchase and an expected shipping date," writes one customer. "On Thursday of this past week we received an e-mail informing us that the order was being canceled." </p>

<p>To atone for this error, Best Buy offered this shopper a gift card. Unfortunately, it will not arrive until after Christmas.</p>

<p>"I placed two orders for the Fujifilm AX-350 on Black Friday for $50 each," writes another peeved customer. "They have been back ordered up until today, one week before Christmas and now they are cancelled. I called up to inquire and they stated that there was nothing that they could do." </p>

<p>In a statement to the Street, some Best Buy Geek writes:<br />
<blockquote>Due to overwhelming demand of hot product offerings on BestBuy.com during the November and December time period, we have encountered a situation that has affected redemption of some of our customers' online orders. We are very sorry for the inconvenience this has caused and we have notified the affected customers.</blockquote></p>

<p>As customers continue to shift their holiday shopping to online retailers, stories like this do very little to help convince shoppers they should think of Best Buy's website as a dependable place to make purchases.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.thestreet.com/story/11351924/1/best-buy-cancels-some-black-friday-orders.html" target="_blank">Best Buy Shoppers Find Black Friday Deals Unreliable</a> [TheStreet.com]</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Motley Crew Of Celebrities Complains To McDonald&apos;s About Egg Suppliers</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/motley-crew-of-celebrities-complain-to-mcdonalds-about-egg-suppliers.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025773</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T21:15:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T21:11:56Z</updated>

    <summary>Less than a month after McDonald&apos;s dropped one of its largest egg suppliers over concerns about conditions at the facility, a group of celebrities -- ranging from bona fide stars to &quot;oh yeah... them&quot; on the fame scale -- has penned a letter to Jim Skinner, CEO of the fast food giant, about what they view as inhumane treatment of chickens at egg farms used by the Golden Arches. Here is the text of the letter signed by super-hunk Ryan Gosling, Emily &quot;the other&quot; Deschanel, Alicia Silverstone, True Blood&apos;s Kristin Bauer, go-to Canadian Bryan Adams, Zooey &quot;the other&apos;s sister&quot; Deschanel,...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Chris Morran</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1531140</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="McDonald&apos;s" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="aliciasilverstone" label="alicia silverstone" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="bryanadams" label="bryan adams" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="edbegleyjr" label="ed begley jr." scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="eggs" label="eggs" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="emilydeschanel" label="emily deschanel" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="kristinbauer" label="kristin bauer" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="mariamenounos" label="maria menounos" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="mcdonalds" label="mcdonald&apos;s" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ryangosling" label="ryan gosling" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="starpower" label="star power" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="steveo" label="steve-o" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="wendymalick" label="wendy malick" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="zooeydeschanel" label="zooey deschanel" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Less than a month after McDonald's dropped one of its largest egg suppliers over concerns about conditions at the facility, a group of celebrities -- ranging from bona fide stars to "oh yeah... them" on the fame scale -- has penned a letter to Jim Skinner, CEO of the fast food giant, about what they view as inhumane treatment of chickens at egg farms used by the Golden Arches. </p>

<p>Here is the text of the letter signed by super-hunk Ryan Gosling, Emily "the other" Deschanel, Alicia Silverstone, True Blood's Kristin Bauer, go-to Canadian Bryan Adams,<br />
Zooey "the other's sister" Deschanel, Don't Shoot Me star Wendie Malick, TV host person Maria Menounos, the incomparable Steve-O and Ed Begley, Jr.</p>

<blockquote>Dear Mr. Skinner:
After visiting McDonaldsCruelty.com and learning from my friends at Mercy For Animals that McDonald's egg suppliers routinely torture egg-laying hens and their baby chicks, I have to tell you: "I'm Hatin' It."

<p>On behalf of compassionate people everywhere, I implore you to help end the needless suffering of these animals by adopting strict and meaningful animal welfare policies worldwide, including the commitment to prohibit the purchase of eggs produced by hens who spend their miserable lives crammed into tiny wire cages.</p>

<p>While McDonald's has already established a 100% cage-free purchasing policy in Europe, your U.S. restaurants continue to support egg factory farms that confine hens for most of their lives in cages so small they can't even spread their wings.nearly anything that comes naturally to them. Common sense tells us that animals with legs and wings should be given the basic freedom to move.</p>

<p>Sadly, there is not a single federal law to protect hens from cruelty from the time they hatch to the time they are killed. While McDonald's brags about the "billions and billions served," millions of hens exploited for your restaurants are being grossly underserved. In fact, these animals are being abused in ways that would land your egg suppliers in jail, if dogs or cats were the victims.</p>

<p>In MFA's investigative video, McDonald's egg suppliers are shown burning off the beaks of baby birds without painkillers, chicks are shown trapped and mangled in cage wire suffering from untreated wounds, live chicks are slowly suffocated in trash bags, and dead and rotting corpses are left in cages with hens still laying eggs for McDonald's Egg McMuffins.</p>

<p>While all of these abuses are unconscionable, perhaps the worst form of torture forced on these innocent animals is the use of battery cages. As you should know, battery cages are considered so cruel that leading animal welfare experts condemn them, and the entire European Union, as well as California and Michigan, have banned their use. A growing number of your competitors have already committed to only buying eggs from cage-free suppliers. It's time for McDonald's to stop clowning around and help put an end to some of the most abusive factory farming practices.</p>

<p>It's a good time for some great changes at McDonald's. As the largest egg buyer in the entire country, McDonald's has the power - and the moral responsibility - to ensure that the eggs in its Egg McMuffins don't come from rotten egg suppliers.</p>

<p>As a civilized society, it's our moral obligation to prevent cruelty to animals - including those used in food production. Thank you for your consideration of this important issue.</p>

<p>Sincerely,<br />
Ryan Gosling <br />
Emily Deschanel<br />
Alicia Silverstone <br />
Kristin Bauer <br />
Bryan Adams<br />
Zooey Deschanel<br />
Wendie Malick <br />
Maria Menounos<br />
Steve-O <br />
Ed Begley, Jr.</blockquote></p>

<p><a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-celebrities-take-mcdonalds-to-task-over-us-egg-practices-20111220,0,306942.story" target="_blank">Celebrities take McDonald's to task over U.S. egg practices</a> [Chicago Tribune]</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>New Banking Service Says It Won&apos;t Treat You Like Those Big Bad Banks Do</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/new-banking-service-says-it-wont-treat-you-like-those-other-big-bad-banks.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025769</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T21:00:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T20:21:56Z</updated>

    <summary>As widespread distrust and dislike for big banking spreads across the country, a new online service called Simple is aiming to woo those disgruntled customers with no-hassle, no-fee banking. Its goal? To be everything those other banks aren&apos;t. Many consumers ditched their megabanks this year over checking fees, fees to use ATMs at other banks, maintenance fees and any other fee thrown at them. Simple.com, which CNN says has been in development for two years, starting as BankSimple, launched last month and is offering to give customers a fee-free experience. At Simple, a real person will answer your phone call...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mary Beth Quirk</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1537494</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Taking it seriously" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="banks" label="banks" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="bigbankbacklash" label="big bank backlash" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="simplecom" label="simple.com" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>As widespread distrust and dislike for big banking spreads across the country, a new online service called Simple is aiming to woo those disgruntled customers with no-hassle, no-fee banking. Its goal? To be everything those other banks aren't.</p>

<p>Many consumers ditched their megabanks this year over checking fees, fees to use ATMs at other banks, maintenance fees and any other fee thrown at them. <a href="http://www.simple.com""target=_blank">Simple.com</a>, which <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/20/technology/simple_bank/index.htm""target=_blank">CNN</a> says has been in development for two years, starting as BankSimple, launched last month and is offering to give customers a fee-free experience.</p>

<blockquote>At Simple, a real person will answer your phone call directly -- the same person every time if possible. You will get intuitive Web and mobile apps that can field natural-language questions like, "How much did I spend on taxis in New York last month?" And you'll get it without any of the surprise fees customers hate. No monthly account fees, no overdraft charges, no debit-card fees or charges for using another bank's ATMs</blockquote>.

<p>How can Simple do all this? By basically outsources the actual banking matters to partner banks, insured by the FDIC, that hold your money safe while Simple acts as the customer service arm.</p>

<p>Simple's CEO had a bad banking experience in 2009, and vowed never to go back to that bank ever again. Fast forward to the founding of Simple.com, which was developed after polling 14,000 customers to see what they wanted in a bank.</p>

<p>So far Simple only has a small amount of customers, as it dips its toes in the banking waters. But there are already 90,000 lined up for an account, should the company continue to expand.</p>

<p><a href="http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/20/technology/simple_bank/index.htm" target="_blank">Simple's pitch: A no-fee, no hassle bank account</a> [CNNMoney]</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Report: Someone At The RIAA Downloaded $9 Million Worth Of Pirated Dexter Episodes</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/report-someone-at-the-riaa-downloaded-9-million-worth-of-pirated-dexter-episodes.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025770</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T20:15:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T20:04:04Z</updated>

    <summary>The hallowed halls of the Recording Industry Association of America, where all music is bought at full price and never shared, lest people face violations of up to $150,000 per pirated item, has reportedly been infiltrated by ne&apos;er-do-wells who think they can BitTorrent copyrighted material at work and not be caught. According to the folks at TorrentFreak, a check of the RIAA&apos;s IP addresses on YouHaveDownloaded.com show that someone at the association actually downloaded a torrent with the entire first five seasons of Dexter. Sixty episodes at $150,000 per violation would equal $9 million. There was also an episode of...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Chris Morran</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1531140</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Government and Legal" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="piracy" label="piracy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="riaa" label="riaa" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="whatsgoodforthegoose" label="what&apos;s good for the goose" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>The hallowed halls of the Recording Industry Association of America, where all music is bought at full price and never shared, lest people face violations of up to $150,000 per pirated item, has reportedly been infiltrated by ne'er-do-wells who think they can BitTorrent copyrighted material at work and not be caught. </p>

<p>According to the folks at TorrentFreak, a check of the RIAA's IP addresses on <a href="http://www.youhavedownloaded.com/" target="_blank">YouHaveDownloaded.com</a> show that someone at the association actually downloaded a torrent with the entire first five seasons of Dexter. Sixty episodes at $150,000 per violation would equal $9 million.</p>

<p>There was also an episode of Law & Order: SVU that apparently went straight to an IP address at the RIAA, so slap on another $150,000.</p>

<p>First off, who in the world uses BitTorrent on their work computer? Maybe the RIAA peeps took a lesson from the <a href="http://consumerist.com/2010/04/sec-soaking-up-to-their-eyeballs-in-porn-cant-see-fraud.html">porn-happy folks at the SEC</a>.</p>

<p>Regardless, we're just glad this person didn't download the just-finished season of Dexter, because it was downright awful. </p>

<p><a href="http://torrentfreak.com/riaa-and-homeland-security-caught-downloading-torrents-111217/" target="_blank">RIAA and Homeland Security Caught Downloading Torrents</a> [TorrentFreak via <a href="http://gizmodo.com/5869321/dear-recording-industry-pay-9-million-for-pirating-tv-shows-or-shut-up?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews" target="_blank">Gizmodo</a>]</p>

<p><i>Thanks to Simon for the tip!</i><br />
</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Perhaps This FedEx Delivery Man Is Preparing For A Monitor-Throwing Contest</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/perhaps-this-fedex-delivery-man-is-preparing-for-a-monitor-throwing-contest.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025762</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T20:00:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T19:23:23Z</updated>

    <summary>A soft touch should be a job requirement for package delivery personnel, because recently it seems like we&apos;re seeing way too many lobbed and otherwise mistreated boxes. In this new video, a surveillance camera catches a FedEx delivery guy chucking a computer monitor over a fence. YouTube user goobie55 describes the event thusly: &quot;Here is a video of my monitor being &apos;delivered.&apos; The sad part is that I was home at the time with the front door wide open. All he would have had to do was ring the bell on the gate. Now I have to return my monitor...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mary Beth Quirk</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1537494</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term=" Stupid Shipping Gang" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="FedEx" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="fedex" label="fedex" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="upintheair" label="up in the air" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>A soft touch should be a job requirement for package delivery personnel, because recently it seems like we're seeing way too many lobbed and otherwise mistreated boxes. In this new video, a surveillance camera catches a FedEx delivery guy chucking a computer monitor over a fence.</p>

<p>YouTube user <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKUDTPbDhnA&feature=g-trend&context=G2c16d1fYTAAAAAAABAA""target=_blank">goobie55</a> describes the event thusly: "Here is a video of my monitor being 'delivered.' The sad part is that I was home at the time with the front door wide open. All he would have had to do was ring the bell on the gate. Now I have to return my monitor since it is broken."</p>

<p>Even with the chance of being caught on camera, it's sad to see delivery folk opting to throw, toss or otherwise loft boxes into the air, to the detriment of the customer. Just abit earlier today, <a href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/fedex-thinks-this-is-an-appropriate-place-to-leave-a-package.html""target=_blank">we had another example of airborne delivery</a>, with a FedEx package ending up on a balcony. </p>

<p>While we're on topic, let's take a walk down memory lane with another instance of a delivery dude, this time for UPS, <a href="http://consumerist.com/2011/03/dont-ups-drivers-realize-customers-have-security-cameras.html""target=_blank">being caught on camera chucking a box</a>. </p>

<p>Watch below as FedEx man doesn't hesitate for a moment in hoisting the monitor over the fence. In fact, he starts his approach to the throw a few steps before he reaches the point of launch.</p>

<p><object width="640" height="480"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PKUDTPbDhnA?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PKUDTPbDhnA?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="640" height="480" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></p>

<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKUDTPbDhnA&feature=g-trend&context=G2c16d1fYTAAAAAAABAA" target="_blank">FedEx Guy Throwing My Computer Monitor</a> [YouTube]</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Walmart Managers Turn Away Wannabe Secret Santa</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/walmart-manager-turns-away-wannabe-secret-santa.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025768</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T19:30:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T19:25:49Z</updated>

    <summary>The biggest trend this holiday season appears to be people who have some money doing something nice for those who might need it by anonymously paying for layaway purchases. But when a woman in Houston attempted to do this at two of her local Walmarts, managers at both stores turned her away, citing a nonexistent company policy. When KPRC-TV got a hold of the story, they spoke to a regional VP at the retail behemoth who confirmed that there is no policy preventing people from secretly paying for another person&apos;s layaway purchases, and that Walmart has already accepted several similar...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Chris Morran</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1531140</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Walmart" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="holidayshopping" label="holiday shopping" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="houston" label="houston" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="layaway" label="layaway" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="secretsanta" label="secret santa" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="secretsantas" label="secret santas" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="walmart" label="walmart" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="wedontwantyourmoney" label="we don&apos;t want your money" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>The biggest trend this holiday season appears to be people who have some money doing something nice for those who might need it by anonymously paying for layaway purchases. But when a woman in Houston attempted to do this at two of her local Walmarts, managers at both stores turned her away, citing a nonexistent company policy.</p>

<p>When KPRC-TV got a hold of the story, they spoke to a regional VP at the retail behemoth who confirmed that there is no policy preventing people from secretly paying for another person's layaway purchases, and that Walmart has already accepted several similar anonymous donations this season, including one for $9,500.</p>

<p>"I was really disappointed that we didn't handle it right," the veep tells KPRC. "There's no reason we don't support this. It's the customers in Houston taking care of the customers in Houston."</p>

<p>The executive reached out to the woman and asked to her to come back to the store, where she was able to hand over her $300 to help pay for other shoppers' items. To make up for the goof, Walmart matched that with $300 of its own. </p>

<p>"It just came at a time that I really needed it," said one recipient of the woman's generosity. "I had a tossup, you know? Pay the light bill or get these gifts and you know, I just had to get one thing and came here and ended up leaving with everything."</p>

<p><a href="http://www.click2houston.com/news/Walmart-turns-away-layaway-donor/-/1735978/6195338/-/1852wq/-/index.html" target="_blank">Walmart turns away layaway donor</a> [Click2Houston.com via <a href="http://blog.chron.com/newswatch/2011/12/despite-walmart-glitch-houston-woman-pays-off-a-layaway-account/" target="_blank">Chron.com</a>]</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Research Shows Holiday Online Shopping Up 15% This Year</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/research-shows-holiday-online-shopping-up-15-this-year.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025760</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T19:00:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T18:07:16Z</updated>

    <summary>If they could make a noise, digital cash registers would have been busy ringing this year, as new research shows consumers are online shopping to the tune of 15% more than last year, up from $26.9 billion to $30.9 billion. The L.A. Times cites ComScore, which says the 46 days between Nov. 1 and Dec. 16 were more lucrative online than last year during the same period. Just last week, Americans spent around $1 billion on each of four different days online shopping. The biggest day for spending was Monday Dec. 12, at $1.13 billion. Even though the delivery clock...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mary Beth Quirk</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1537494</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term=" E-commerce" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="nolinesonline" label="no lines online" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="onlineshopping" label="online shopping" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>If they could make a noise, digital cash registers would have been busy ringing this year, as new research shows consumers are online shopping to the tune of 15% more than last year, up from $26.9 billion to $30.9 billion. </p>

<p>The <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/12/online-holiday-shopping.html""target=_blank"><em>L.A. Times</em></a> cites ComScore, which says the 46 days between Nov. 1 and Dec. 16 were more lucrative online than last year during the same period.</p>

<p>Just last week, Americans spent around $1 billion on each of four different days online shopping. The biggest day for spending was Monday Dec. 12, at $1.13 billion.</p>

<p>Even though the delivery clock is winding down, as it gets closer and closer to Christmas Day, this week "may see another strong day or two" of online sales, ComScore Chairman Gian Fulgoni said, but "it's clear that we have now reached the crescendo for this season and that spending will begin to slow as we get closer to Christmas."</p>

<p>Shopping with your feet on the coffee table and a plate of Christmas cookies by your side or heading out to play parking lot roulette and big box store tug-of-war over flat-screen TVs -- no wonder consumers are staying home.</p>

<p><a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2011/12/online-holiday-shopping.html" target="_blank">Online holiday shopping up 15% this year so far, ComScore says</a> [L.A. Times]</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Man Sentenced To Year In Prison For Leaking So-So Wolverine Movie</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/man-sentenced-to-year-in-prison-for-leaking-disappointing-wolverine-movie-online.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025761</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T18:15:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T18:05:22Z</updated>

    <summary>The New York man who pleaded guilty to uploading a nearly finished work print of X-Men Origins: Wolverine to the internet a month before it hit theaters, has been sentenced to a year behind bars in federal prison for letting the world see how mediocre the movie was before they had to pay $10 to see it at the theater. In addition to the prison term, the sentence includes one year of supervised release and numerous computer restrictions. The judge noted that the man had a previous conviction for a similar crime and that he&apos;d &quot;been regularly uploading pirated movies...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Chris Morran</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1531140</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Government and Legal" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="crimenews" label="crime news" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="payingtheprice" label="paying the price" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="piracy" label="piracy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="wedeservedabetterwolverinemovie" label="we deserved a better wolverine movie" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>The New York man who pleaded guilty to uploading a nearly finished work print of X-Men Origins: Wolverine to the internet a month before it hit theaters, has been sentenced to a year behind bars in federal prison for letting the world see how mediocre the movie was before they had to pay $10 to see it at the theater.</p>

<p>In addition to the prison term, the sentence includes one year of supervised release and numerous computer restrictions.</p>

<p>The judge noted that the man had a previous conviction for a similar crime and that he'd "been regularly uploading pirated movies for four or five years, and did not appear remorseful after charges were brought."</p>

<p>Prosecutors argued that even though Fox was able to pull down the original file from the internet about one day after it first leaked, "by then, the damage was done and the film had proliferated like wildfire throughout the Internet, resulting in up to millions of infringements." </p>

<p>And yet the film still managed to rake in $373 million worldwide, not including DVD, on-demand and cable sales. </p>

<p>"The federal prison sentence handed down in this case sends a strong message of deterrence to would-be Internet pirates," said the United States Attorney who surely never used Napster or watched a bootleg DVD bought off the street. "The Justice Department will pursue and prosecute persons who seek to steal the intellectual property of this nation."</p>

<p><a href="http://www.deadline.com/2011/12/wolverine-pirate-to-serve-year-in-prison/" target="_blank">'Wolverine' Pirate To Serve Year In Prison</a> [Deadline.com via <a href="http://www.avclub.com/articles/man-who-first-showed-everyone-xmen-origins-wolveri,66854/" target="_blank">AVclub.com</a>]</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Wrong Holiday: Whole Foods Doesn&apos;t Bother To Research What People Actually Eat During Hanukkah</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/wrong-holiday-whole-foods-doesnt-bother-to-research-what-people-actually-eat-during-hanukkah.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025758</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T18:00:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T20:31:56Z</updated>

    <summary>UPDATE: Just hours after a Washington Post blogger ranted against a Washington D.C. area Whole Foods with a Hanukkah display of matzoh has responded via Twitter to apologize for the incident. The Whole Foods store writes: &quot;@washingtonpost The store has removed the matzo displays-color us embarrassed! Sincerest apologies if we offended anyone. Happy Hanukkah!&quot; Blogger Jessica posted the good news in an update, acknowledging that yes, matzoh can be enjoyed year-round, and some latke recipes do call for matzoh flakes. Let&apos;s all bask in the holiday glow of a positive resolution, shall we? ---------------------------- Whoever is in charge of holiday-themed...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mary Beth Quirk</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1537494</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term=" Supermarkets" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="Whole Foods" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="hanukkah" label="hanukkah" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="holidazedandconfused" label="holidazed and confused" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="wholefoods" label="whole foods" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>UPDATE: Just hours after a Washington Post blogger ranted against a Washington D.C. area Whole Foods with a Hanukkah display of matzoh has responded via Twitter to apologize for the incident.</p>

<p>The Whole Foods store writes: "@washingtonpost The store has removed the matzo displays-color us embarrassed! Sincerest apologies if we offended anyone. Happy Hanukkah!"</p>

<p>Blogger Jessica<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/all-we-can-eat/post/whole-foods-pulls-matzoh-from-hanukkah-display/2011/12/20/gIQAhOeF7O_blog.html""target=_blank"> posted the good news</a> in an update, acknowledging that yes, matzoh can be enjoyed year-round, and some latke recipes do call for matzoh flakes. Let's all bask in the holiday glow of a positive resolution, shall we?<br />
----------------------------</p>

<p>Whoever is in charge of holiday-themed displays at Whole Foods could've benefited from about four seconds searching the Internet, as one blogger was disgruntled to find traditional Passover offerings advertised as food for the Hanukkah season. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/all-we-can-eat/post/hanukkah-at-whole-foods-now-with-matzoh/2011/12/19/gIQAWafA5O_blog.html""target=_blank"><em>Washington Post</em></a> blogger Jessica writes that she was happy at first to see an entire display dedicated to Hanukkah at Whole Foods, but that delight turned to dismay when she realized that the predominant offering was matzoh.</p>

<blockquote>Matzoh and matzoh balls and a wide variety of matzoh-y things would be just spectacular if this were a) a Passover display or b) the cracker section, but it is neither. It is Hanukkah which, for the uninitiated, is not Passover and is not a holiday on which one eats matzoh. What Whole Foods is really displaying is a casual kind of ignorance for which there is no excuse.</blockquote>

<p>She points out that if Whole Foods can manage to "ensure that organic pasta comes packaged in biodegradable boxes made of locally grown hemp," surely, it should be able to Google "Hanukkah food." </p>

<p>If they did, they might have found that potato latkes and jelly doughnuts called sufganiyot are common at Hanukkah. See? It's that easy.</p>

<p><em>*Thanks to Michael R. for the tip!</em></p>

<p><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/all-we-can-eat/post/hanukkah-at-whole-foods-now-with-matzoh/2011/12/19/gIQAWafA5O_blog.html" target="_blank">Hanukkah at Whole Foods: Now with matzoh!</a> [Washington Post]</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Don&apos;t Fall For The &quot;Locked Debit Card&quot; Text Alert Scam</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/dont-fall-for-the-locked-debit-card-text-alert-scam.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025759</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T17:31:35Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T17:31:41Z</updated>

    <summary>With holiday shopping season heading into the home stretch, it&apos;s prime time for ID thieves. Which is why some people might fall prey to scammers who text cell phone users with alerts that their debit cards have been locked. CBS Chicago reports on a rash of these bogus texts claiming to be from Chase and Fifth Third banks, telling people that their cards have been locked and to call hijacked number to resolve the issue. Of course, if you actually call that number, you&apos;re likely to end up providing a scammer with the information required to raid your bank account...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Chris Morran</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1531140</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="JP Morgan Chase" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="Scams" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="chase" label="chase" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="fifththirdbank" label="fifth third bank" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="scamalamadingdong" label="scamalama-ding-dong" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="scams" label="scams" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="textalerts" label="text alerts" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>With holiday shopping season heading into the home stretch, it's prime time for ID thieves. Which is why some people might fall prey to scammers who text cell phone users with alerts that their debit cards have been locked. </p>

<p>CBS Chicago reports on a rash of these bogus texts claiming to be from Chase and Fifth Third banks, telling people that their cards have been locked and to call hijacked number to resolve the issue. </p>

<p>Of course, if you actually call that number, you're likely to end up providing a scammer with the information required to raid your bank account or steal your identity. </p>

<p>Instead, you should contact your bank if you're concerned. Of course, most of the people getting these message don't even have accounts at the bank named in the text, so they have nothing to worry about. </p>

<p>Most banks that offer e-mail and text alerts have very specific identifiers on those alerts to help differentiate them from fakes. But in general, never give out your information to someone who contacts you. Instead, call the number on the back of your card to make sure you're speaking to an actual bank employee.</p>

<p><script type='text/javascript' src='http://video.chicago.cbslocal.com/global/video/videoplayer.js?rnd=692335;hostDomain=video.chicago.cbslocal.com;playerWidth=385;playerHeight=255;isShowIcon=true;clipId=6562801;flvUri=;partnerclipid=;adTag=News;advertisingZone=CBS.CHI%252Fworldnowplayer;enableAds=true;landingPage=;islandingPageoverride=false;playerType=STANDARD_EMBEDDEDscript;controlsType=fixed'></script></p>

<p><a href="http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/12/19/locked-debit-card-text-alerts-are-fake/" target="_blank">'Locked Debit Card' Text Alerts Are Fake</a> [CBSlocal.com]</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>How An Attempt To Return TV To Best Buy Left Man With No TV And No Refund</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/how-my-attempt-to-return-tv-to-best-buy-left-me-with-no-tv-and-no-refund.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025757</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T17:15:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T17:04:25Z</updated>

    <summary>Eli thought he could just walk into a Best Buy with a TV and a gift receipt and walk out with a refund or store credit. But this is Best Buy, where nothing ever ends up the way it&apos;s supposed to. According to Eli&apos;s post on his Google+ page, when the Best Buy staffer went to process the return, they somehow made the mistake of crediting the money back to the original person who had purchased the gift, meaning he was left empty-handed. &quot;They admit it was a mistake and they meant to give me store credit, but refuse to...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Chris Morran</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1531140</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Best Buy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="bestbuy" label="best buy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="giftreceipts" label="gift receipts" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="holidayshopping" label="holiday shopping" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="returns" label="returns" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="weveseenbetterbuysactually" label="we&apos;ve seen better buys actually" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Eli thought he could just walk into a Best Buy with a TV and a gift receipt and walk out with a refund or store credit. But this is Best Buy, where nothing ever ends up the way it's supposed to.</p>

<p>According to Eli's <a href="https://plus.google.com/108805173335728622833/posts/ByiMZvsyJmi" target="_blank">post on his Google+ page</a>, when the Best Buy staffer went to process the return, they somehow made the mistake of crediting the money back to the original person who had purchased the gift, meaning he was left empty-handed.</p>

<p>"They admit it was a mistake and they meant to give me store credit, but refuse to do anything to fix it," he writes. "If I make a $240 mistake, I'm out $240. If BestBuy makes a $240 mistake, I'm out $240."</p>

<p>Eli claims that when he insisted he shouldn't have to leave the store without either the TV or a refund of some sort, Best Buy staff threatened to call the police. Instead, he beat them to the punch, calling in the cops to talk some sense into the store. Unfortunately, the officers ultimately sided with the store on this one.</p>

<p>"The cops agreed with me at first," says Eli, but after they talked to store management for half an hour, the officers changed their mind and stood by guarding the TV "because apparently I look like as gonna run out with it."</p>

<p>The only resolution for that Best Buy could come up with for this situation was for Eli to contact the original gift giver and get the money from them. But why should he have to endure that awkwardness for a store's error? What if that gift giver is either reluctant or refuses to hand over the money Eli should have received?</p>

<p>"The Best Buy employees were not jerks, and the cops were not either," writes Eli. "Everyone who is at fault is nowhere near the situation but in some... office somewhere and thus makes it easy for them to make broad policies that defy logic."</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>We&apos;re Sorry, Your Delicious Package Of Treats Was Intercepted By Post Office Rats</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/were-sorry-your-delicious-package-of-treats-was-intercepted-by-post-office-rats.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025750</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T17:00:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T16:40:21Z</updated>

    <summary>Rodents make the worst postal workers, especially when delicious, edible holiday treats are involved. One post office in Manhattan had a few rats and/or mice working over packages before they reached their intended destinations, resulting in a holiday surprise of a different kind. The New York Times&apos; Andy Newman shows photographic evidence of a few packages, one from the Vermont Brownie Company, gnawed through by rodents and sent to the NYT offices via the Midtown Post Office. Two large holes in the box, worked over by teeth, and not a brownie in sight. The proof that there were supposed to...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Mary Beth Quirk</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1537494</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term=" Stupid Shipping Gang" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="postoffice" label="post office" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="pregnawedpresents" label="pre-gnawed presents" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="usps" label="usps" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Rodents make the <em>worst </em>postal workers, especially when delicious, edible holiday treats are involved. One post office in Manhattan had a few rats and/or mice working over packages before they reached their intended destinations, resulting in a holiday surprise of a different kind.</p>

<p>The <a href="http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/holiday-gifts-intercepted/?src=tp""target=_blank"><em>New York Times</em></a>' Andy Newman shows photographic evidence of a few packages, one from the Vermont Brownie Company, gnawed through by rodents and sent to the <em>NYT</em> offices via the Midtown Post Office. </p>

<p>Two large holes in the box, worked over by teeth, and not a brownie in sight. The proof that there were supposed to be treats inside comes by way of a card, reading, "Our brownies are individually wrapped so they stay fresh." We're sure the little beasties enjoyed the freshness!</p>

<p>Other packages arrived yesterday bearing similar holes, one chewed through and missing exotic chocolates, and another with a side nibbled away, but with its tin of fudge unmolested. </p>

<p>Being the ever-investigative <em>NYT</em>, reporters headed to the suspected source, where post office workers did admit the existence of rats. </p>

<p>A spokesperson also commented on the problem.</p>

<blockquote>"The little animals can smell the chocolate and goodies," she said. "At Midtown they've been very good at putting things in cabinets to keep them away from nibbles, but this time of year they just have more packages than they do have space to accommodate them." </blockquote>

<p>But unless that package is insured, the post office will not recompense you, even against hungry, hungry rats.</p>

<p><a href="http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/holiday-gifts-intercepted/?src=tp" target="_blank">Special Delivery, With Teeth Marks</a> [New York Times]<br />
</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>FedEx Thinks This Is An Appropriate Place To Leave A Package</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/fedex-thinks-this-is-an-appropriate-place-to-leave-a-package.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025756</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T16:31:23Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T16:31:32Z</updated>

    <summary>Consumerist reader Tim was a bit annoyed when he got an e-mail saying a delivery from FedEx had been left at his doorstep. But that was nothing compared to what the FedEx driver did to his next door neighbor. &quot;When I arrived home, I noticed my neighbor&apos;s package on the balcony and took photos,&quot; Time tells Consumerist. &quot;Since he lives on the top floor, he had to pull out a ladder to take the package down as the lower level neighbor was on vacation.&quot; At least they let his neighbor know that they had placed the package on the &quot;Balkon,&quot;...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Chris Morran</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1531140</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="FedEx" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="fedex" label="fedex" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="jumpshot" label="jump shot" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Consumerist reader Tim was a bit annoyed when he got an e-mail saying a delivery from FedEx had been left at his doorstep. But that was nothing compared to what the FedEx driver did to his next door neighbor.</p>

<p>"When I arrived home, I noticed my neighbor's package on the balcony and took photos," Time tells Consumerist. "Since he lives on the top floor, he had to pull out a ladder to take the package down as the lower level neighbor was on vacation."</p>

<p>At least they let his neighbor know that they had placed the package on the "Balkon," not to be confused with Balki Bartokomous. </p>

<p>Tim says he sent off an EECB to FedEx execs to find out if this sort of delivery is in line with company policy and considered good delivery.</p>

<p><img alt="balkon.JPG" src="http://consumerist.com/balkon.JPG" width="640" height="480" class="mt-image-none" style="" /></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Survey: 40% Of U.S. Drivers Putting Off Vehicle Repair &amp; Maintenance</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2011/12/survey-40-of-us-drivers-putting-off-vehicle-repair-maintenance.html" />
    <id>tag:consumerist.com,2011://1.10025755</id>

    <published>2011-12-20T16:15:00Z</published>
    <updated>2011-12-20T16:16:50Z</updated>

    <summary>When you&apos;re driving around in a vehicle that needs repairs, there&apos;s a possibility that you&apos;re putting yourself and others at risk. But with many people still strapped for cash, car troubles often take a back seat to pinching pennies, according to the results of a new survey by our polling pals at Consumer Reports. According to the CR survey of U.S. drivers who have responsibility for vehicle repair decisions, 40% of respondents are currently postponing car maintenance or repairs on their primary vehicle. And of those people who are delaying taking their car to get fixed, 44% also admitted that...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Chris Morran</name>
        <uri>http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&amp;blog_id=1&amp;id=1531140</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Recession Watch" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="carrepairs" label="car repairs" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="consumerreports" label="consumer reports" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="recessionwatch" label="recession watch" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="whatsthatnoise" label="what&apos;s that noise?" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>When you're driving around in a vehicle that needs repairs, there's a possibility that you're putting yourself and others at risk. But with many people still strapped for cash, car troubles often take a back seat to pinching pennies, according to the results of a new survey by our polling pals at Consumer Reports.</p>

<p>According to the CR survey of U.S. drivers who have responsibility for vehicle repair decisions, 40% of respondents are currently postponing car maintenance or repairs on their primary vehicle. </p>

<p>And of those people who are delaying taking their car to get fixed, 44% also admitted that they felt the value, safety, or reliability of the vehicle would suffer, with some saying the car was becoming an embarrassment. </p>

<p>Lower-income households were more likely to delay necessary work. And when it comes to delaying work on car parts that regularly need maintenance because of wear and tear -- like brake pads or tires -- drivers aged 18 to 34 years, were significantly more likely to procrastinate, with 21% of that group admitting to putting off such repairs, compared to only 14% of those aged 55 or over.</p>

<p>"They family car is the second largest purchase a consumer can make. It's also often one of the most abused," said Jeff Bartlett, deputy online automotive editor, Consumer Reports. "We expect our car to work even in the harshest conditions. So protecting that investment should be a priority, especially when it becomes a safety issue."</p>

<p>The survey also found that many drivers are choosing to hold onto their cars for longer in order to put off the cost of buying a new (or at least new for them) vehicle. On average, owners have 78,000 miles on their current vehicle, meaning many are quickly approaching major maintenance milestones that shouldn't be ignored.</p>

<p>Also of interest in the CR survey, 83% of respondents said they were confident their local repair shop would provide the right maintenance and repair work done for the right price. In addition, more than half said they completely trust their shop. According to the survey, independent repair shops were used more often (37%) than dealers (30%) or repair chains (11%).</p>

<p>Consumer Reports has launched the Car Repair Estimator, a repair information service powered by RepairPal, that can help drivers understand common problems, learn how components work, and receive a service estimate that reflect local prices. <a href="http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/repair/index.htm" target="_blank">http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/repair/index.htm</a></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

</feed>

