Customer Service Issues

Watchdog Nation goes on TV to warn about crooked repairman

June 17, 2015 by Dave Lieber

You know what would suck? You’re a crooked appliance repairman who advertises on Craigslist.

Then some guy goes on TV, shows your face and warns everyone about you.

That’s what happens here.

The story of Dallas Morning News Watchdog Dave Lieber and convicted thief Michael Stoneham.

Read the full story here in The Dallas Morning News Watchdog column.

Here’s the ad he has used:

Michael W. Stoneham

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Still here? Visit Dave Lieber’s other fun websites: DaveLieber.org

Filed Under: Bad Business, Column, Customer Service Issues, Video Tagged With: appliance repair, craigslist, Dave Lieber, Michael Stoneham, watchdog nation

What’s the biggest lie in the 2015 Texas Legislature?

April 21, 2015 by Dave Lieber

Do you believe insurance companies will actually walk away from a billion dollars in profits if insurance lobbyists fail to get wicked Senate Bill 1628 passed? Dallas Morning News Watchdog Dave Lieber calls them out on this ridiculous claim the industry is using to promote this bill.

Read a news story about this bill: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/state/headlines/20150420-texas-home-insurers-see-another-strong-year-but-still-seek-limits-on-lawsuits.ece

Read my opinion column: http://www.dallasnews.com/investigations/watchdog/20150409-watchdog-texas-insurance-lobbyists-have-a-plan-you-wont-like.ece

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Still here? Visit Dave Lieber’s other fun websites: DaveLieber.org

Filed Under: Announcements, Bad Business, Column, Customer Service Issues, Government Tomfoolery Tagged With: #TXLege, Dave Lieber, Insurance, Senate Bill 1628, watchdog nation

Five Bills Designed to Make Texas Consumer-Friendly

January 22, 2015 by Dave Lieber

Make shopping for electricity fairer for Texans. Force roofers to get a state license. Stop charging extra for people who pay with debit and credit cards. Verify that fingerprinting all Texans for driver’s licenses is legal. Protect auto insurance customers who ask questions about their policies.

These are the five dream bills offered up by Dallas Morning News Watchdog Dave Lieber in his recent two-part series. Read Part One and Part Two.

By far, his Retail Electricity Reform Act of 2015 is his top-priority. “I get more complaints from Texans about their electricity contracts than any other subject,” Lieber says. “I have placed the top ones into my dream bill. I’m seeking one or more lawmakers willing to take on the big powerful interests and clean up all the loopholes. So far, no legislator has taken the big step. But I’m hoping for it.”

Lieber wants to ban minimum usage fees, regulate unregulated fees and make comparison shopping easier by forcing all companies to advertise the full price including the delivery charge.

Watchdog Nation founder Dave Lieber discusses his legislative proposal on NBC5. Watch here:

Read about the four minor bills here.

Read about the major electricity bill here.

Follow The Watchdog at www.dallasnews.com/watchdog and see the progress of this year’s campaign.

Still here? Visit Dave Lieber’s other fun websites: DaveLieber.org

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

More Watchdog Nation News:

Watchdog Nation Partners with Mike Holmes

America meets Watchdog Nation/Listen to Fun Radio Interview

Watchdog Nation Debuts New e-Book and Multi-CD Audio Book

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Filed Under: Announcements, Column, Customer Service Issues, Government Tomfoolery, Introduction to Watchdog Nation, Manifesto, Utilities, Video Tagged With: Dave Lieber, electricity in Texas, PUC, Reliant Energy, retail electricity reform, texas electricity, Texas Legislature 2015, txu, watchdog nation

Top 10 Consumer Tips for 2015

December 30, 2014 by Dave Lieber

This video shows the best tips for 2015 from Dallas Morning News Watchdogs Dave Lieber and Marina Trahan Martinez.

How did we figure this out?

Based on our mail and the most common problems we see. If you hit most of these correctly, you’ll lessen your chances for a hassle-free ’15.

Happy New Year from The Watchdog Desk at The Dallas Morning News.

Watch Dave live on NBC5.

Read the full column this is based on here.

For desktop and laptop viewers, here’s the information in a cartoon we made.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

More Watchdog Nation News:

Watchdog Nation Partners with Mike Holmes

America meets Watchdog Nation/Listen to Fun Radio Interview

Watchdog Nation Debuts New e-Book and Multi-CD Audio Book

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Still here? Visit Dave Lieber’s other fun websites:

Personal: YankeeCowboy.com

Hipster site: DaveLieber.org

Filed Under: Announcements, Column, Customer Service Issues, Government Tomfoolery, Introduction to Watchdog Nation, Manifesto, Privacy, Technology Issues Tagged With: Dave Lieber, Marina Trahan Martinez, Top 10 Consumer Issues, watchdog nation

Did you get slammed for unwanted $29.95 a month credit monitoring? You can get a refund.

December 4, 2014 by Dave Lieber

Call me naive, but I imagined a company that tricks people into paying $29.95 a month for a credit-monitoring service they didn’t know they ordered would be headquartered in a faraway land.

A company that lured people with the promise of free credit scores in big print but hid the actual cost in tiny print must be offshore, right?

A company that informs surprised customers it can cancel anytime but isn’t available to take cancellations? Hidden somewhere on an island nation?

Nah. Try the 8100 block of Walnut Hill Lane in Dallas.

As readers of The Dallas Morning News Dave Lieber Watchdog column first learned, One Technologies Inc. is headquartered on the sixth floor of a corporate tower.

I first learned about the company weeks ago after my wife, Karen, tried to get her free credit report from the government-sponsored site and accidentally ended up on one of the dozens of websites run by the Dallas company.

She typed in her personal information, then pulled back when asked for credit card information.

No payment is required on government-sponsored annualcreditreport.com. But One Technologies has gamed the Internet so its dozens of websites confuse people.

The company, which uses many names including ScoreSense and MyCreditHealth, is easily found through its use of common search terms linked to its many websites. The sites’ names carry common keywords such as “free credit report” and “check credit scores.” The company also purchased click-on ads to attract users.

This month, the façade of respectability disappeared for One Technologies. The Federal Trade Commission, working with the states of Ohio, Illinois and Texas, successfully brought legal action to stop the company’s sales practices.

The FTC, in legal filings, reports 210,000 complaints against the company from banks, credit card companies, law enforcement agencies and the Better Business Bureau.

One Technologies “participated in deceptive acts,” according to a final court order agreed to by company officials and made public this month.

One Technologies must pay $22 million into a restitution fund for victims.

The company can no longer hide its online terms of purchase in obscure web boxes that users must open to see. Terms must be clear and conspicuous. Frustrated customers must be allowed to cancel immediately through an available call center.

Last week, I visited the company in its office tower and expected to find it shuttered. That’s what Attorney General Greg Abbott’s office promised in a news release.

Abbott’s headline bragged, “State of Texas Shuts Down Bogus Online ‘Free’ Credit Scores Scheme.”

Imagine my confusion when I walked into the company’s sixth floor suite and found people working.

Turns out Abbott’s office oversold. After the company complained, the headline was changed: “State of Texas Stops Online Scheme that Claimed to Offer ‘Free’ Credit Score Schemes but Charged Monthly Fees.”

That’s not the only mistake I see in this enforcement action against a company that capitalizes on customers’ mistakes. In its only public statement about its comedown, One Technologies attempts to turn a national disgrace into a crowning achievement.

The company headlines its public statement: “ScoreSense/One Technologies Sets New Benchmark for Industry Transparency and Disclosure.”

In its opening sentence, the company claims that it “set a new standard for the industry’s clearest and simplest subscription disclosures.”

The company brags that it has helped “to establish industry best practices for enrolling customers” in online businesses.

Denying what it agreed to in the court order, the statement refers to government claims against it as “alleged” and states that “the terms of One Technologies’ offers have always been disclosed to the consumer.”

Fred Loeber, an executive, is quoted: “We call on our competitors to adopt this new benchmark.”

Shameless audacity.

“No fines or penalties were imposed,” the statement continues. “One Technologies will establish a fund for providing refunds to certain past customers.”

How nice. An established fund. Sounds like a scholarship. There’s no mention of $22 million in the company statement.

This company accused by the feds and three states of deception shows in its own words that it hasn’t learned the lesson. Shameless audacity.

Staff writer Marina Trahan Martinez contributed to this report.

Follow Dave Lieber on Twitter at @DaveLieber.

Check out The Watchdog on NBC5 at 11:20 a.m. Mondays talking about matters important to you.

# # #

In the Know

Get free credit reports from annualcreditreport.com. Type the address correctly.

Here’s a list of websites used by One Technologies:

freescoreonline.com

freescore360.com

checkmycreditnow.com

freeonlinescore.com

creditreports.com

freecreditcheck.com

freescoreusa.com

mycredithealtlh.com

ScoreSense.com

spendonlife.com

2012TransUnionExperianandEquifaxScores.com

3-BureauCreditScores.com

3-BureauMonitoring.com

3-FreeCredit-Scores.com

3-in-1 creditscore.com

Amazing-CreditScores.com

CreditCheck2013.com

CreditReview2013.com

Credit-Review-Team.com

CreditScore-Check.com

Credit-Scores.net

CreditSummary.com

FastAccessToYourCreditScore.com

FastReview.us

FraudMonitoringOffer.com

FreeScoreCheck360.com

MyFree3B.com

MyFree3Bcheck.com

Online-CreditScores.com.

ProfessionalCreditScores.com

ScoreCheck.net

Scores-2012.com

Scores2013.com

ScoresDirect.net

Think-Credit-Scores.com

TimeForACreditCheckUp.com

TrackerTripleScores.com

ViewYourCreditScoreFast.com

Your-Credit-Check.com.

YourCreditScoreIsWaitingForYou.com

YourFree3B.com

YourFree3Bcheck.com

YourFree3Bscore.com

YourFreeScore360.com

Your-Score-Check.com

YourScoreCheck.com

SOURCE: Texas attorney general’s office

Filed Under: Bad Business, Column, Customer Service Issues, Privacy, Technology Issues, Video Tagged With: annualcreditreport.com, Canterbury Communications, credit monitoring, credit score, FTC restitution fund, MyCreditHealth, One Technologies, Roger Chang, ScoreSense

VIDEO: Watchdog Dave Lieber shares his best secret

November 24, 2014 by Dave Lieber

Here’s Watchdog Dave Lieber’s gift to you.

His secret weapon to survive.

The best way he knows how to keep you, your family and your business out of trouble.

It’s so simple.

Watch The Dallas Morning News Watchdog columnist share it now on NBC5 with news anchor Kristi Nelson.

# # #
Watch Dave talking about matters important to you Mondays around 11:20 a.m. on NBCDFW.

Filed Under: Announcements, Column, Customer Service Issues, Video Tagged With: consumer protection, fight back, Starbucks

The Watchdog: Time Warner Cable’s fine print fools a customer

April 20, 2014 by Dave Lieber

I’m fed up with businesses that tease us with large print come-ons in advertising and hide the conditions in small print that most people miss. Until now, the worst I’d seen recently was at the State Fair of Texas. The sign stated, “Ask Me About our Botox.” Underneath, in tiny print, was the word “Effect.”

So it’s not Botox. It’s the Botox Effect. Doh.

Today I call out Time Warner Cable for doing the same to Sherry Buffington of Farmers Branch and who knows how many others.

She received a flier from TWC with a “limited-time offer.” If she upgrades her TV-Internet-phone package, she would receive a Samsung Galaxy Note tablet. “A $399 Value,” the ad states.

Buffington called TWC and asked about the promotion. A customer service rep promised her she qualified for the expensive tablet. She gave the go-ahead for a switch.

But the tablet never arrived. She went round and round with the company for the next several weeks. Nobody would give her a straight answer about why she didn’t receive the promised gift. She contacted The Watchdog and told me she felt “duped.”

TWC informed me that Buffington had not read the fine print on the offer and did not qualify. That was the bad news. The good news, however, was that TWC folks went back and listened to a recording of her original phone call and heard that the rep promised her a tablet when he shouldn’t have.

TWC offered Buffington a $300 bill credit as a makeup for the error. TWC’s position: She had to switch to a specific bundled package (which she didn’t) and the fine print explained that.

I contacted Buffington and told her tsk, tsk, you gotta read the fine print in life. But then Buffington sent me the actual ad and I was truly surprised. The fine print was so small and in a lighter shade of type than the rest of the flier. The rest of the flier was in big letters. But this fine print was so small I couldn’t even read what she sent me. It was disgustingly small.

To be fair to TWC, the company is not selling the tablet but the bundled package. The tablet is the lure. But this reminds me of the famous saying: “The big print gives, and the small print takes away.”

I asked the company to send me a sharper copy. I measured the font size. The letters are 1/16 of an inch tall. The tiny print alerts customers that they must sign up for a specific package to qualify.

When I asked Melissa C. Sorola, TWC’s director of public relations, about this, she pointed out that the requirements “are stated three times in the documents.” Yes, that’s true. But it was in 1/16 of an inch everywhere. I don’t find that acceptable. Do you?

Font size in ads is an issue when shopping for electricity in Texas. Under state rules electricity requirements must be “written in language that is clear, plain and easily understood, and shall be printed in paragraphs of no more than 250 words and in a font no smaller than 10 point.”

For perspective, a 10-point font size is twice as large as the font used by TWC for its small print.

The Federal Trade Commission gives guidelines to businesses for fine-print advertising on its ftc.gov website. The regulatory agency has what it calls Clear and Conspicuous Standards.

“Your ads should clearly and conspicuously disclose all information about an offer that is likely to affect a consumer’s purchasing decision. Disclose the most important information — like the terms affecting the basic cost of the offer — near the advertised price.

“Print advertisers should not attempt to hide the real cost or the critical terms or conditions by putting them in obscure locations, such as the border area on a print ad, burying them in numerous densely packed lines of fine print or including them in small-type footnotes.”

The FTC adds, “It’s against the law for businesses to bury important details about a product or service in the fine print.”

The Watchdog continues to become less trusting of companies that try to hide information from us. I agree with Buffington when she tells The Watchdog: “Deception is never acceptable, and consumers definitely should not stand for it.”

IN THE KNOW: FTC standards

Here are the Federal Trade Commission’s Clear and Conspicuous Standards:

Prominence: Is the fine print big enough for people to notice and read?

Presentation: Is the wording and format easy for people to understand?

Placement: Is the fine print where people will look?

Proximity: Is the fine print near the claim it qualifies?

If an ad violates these standards, complain to the FTC at 1-877-FTC-HELP or visit www.ftc.gov/complaint.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

More Watchdog Nation News:

Watchdog Nation Partners with Mike Holmes

America meets Watchdog Nation/Listen to Fun Radio Interview

Watchdog Nation Debuts New e-Book and Multi-CD Audio Book

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Still here? Visit Dave Lieber’s other fun websites:

Personal: YankeeCowboy.com

Hipster site: DaveLieber.org

Filed Under: Bad Business, Column, Customer Service Issues, Technology Issues Tagged With: Clear and Conspicuous, Clear and Conspicuous Standards, Dave Lieber, fine print, Time Warner Cable, watchdog nation

The Watchdog: Dealer sells a car but later changes its mind

April 20, 2014 by Dave Lieber

Every so often The Watchdog hears from people who regret buying a car. Maybe they drove home and realized the price was too high. Or they bought the wrong car.

They go back to their dealer and try to return the car. Too bad, so sad. There’s a legal contract, pal. And don’t even think about leaving the car.

If an upset buyer ditches a purchased car, a tow truck comes from the financing company. A black mark for repossession goes on the buyer’s record. But what if it were to happen the other way?

What if a dealer sells someone a car but then a day later gets seller’s remorse? What if a dealer signs a sales contract with a customer and then backs out after their lender doesn’t like the terms?

That’s what’s happening to Sandra Baker, an Arlington resident who works two jobs to save enough money to buy a car. She thought she found her ideal ride at Patterson Kia of Arlington — a 2012 Nissan Sentra for $15,000 that includes an extended warranty.

High interest at 18 percent, but the best part is no money down. She signed the deal and received the congratulations of the sales staff. When she went back the next day to get it, they wouldn’t give her the car. She was asked to sign a new deal.

The good news was her payments dropped. The bad news was that she was now asked to make a $2,500 down payment and find a co-signer. Baker turned the deal down. A contract is a contract, she said firmly.

The Watchdog discussed the matter with Joe Johnson, general manager at Patterson Kia, and another staffer in the finance department who handled the deal. I learned from them that the documents Baker signed were not final sales agreements but conditional on the availability and approval of outside financing, they said.

The deal was completed late at night after their lender closed. The finance officer guessed what terms would work. But the guess was wrong. They told me that after the lender’s rejection, they were allowed to put the original deal aside and seek a new one.

There was no intent to hurt the customer, Johnson said. “We do everything here by the book.” After we talked, Patterson Kia called Baker and offered her a third deal. This time the offer was a $1,100 down payment. She rejected that offer, too. She likes her original deal with no money down.

“They should honor this,” she says. “It’s not my mistake. If it’s a mistake by their financial officer, I hate it. I’m sorry. But I think they should honor the deal.”

Both sides are at a standoff now. In a phone interview, the dealership’s GM pointed out places in his contract that show Baker didn’t own the car. One document signed by Baker is called a conditional delivery agreement.

It states the deal hinges on whether “final approval of financing is granted by a financial institution.”

That seems clear enough. But North Texas consumer lawyer Jerry Jarzombek reviewed the document for me. He described the language used as “flaky” and pointed to inconsistencies that he said were enough to get the agreement tossed.

Elsewhere in the contract, it states in capital letters, “THIS CONTRACT IS NOT VALID UNTIL YOU AND WE SIGN IT.” Baker signed her name.

But the GM insisted that his dealership did not sign the contract. He’s right. There’s no signature with a pen. But someone stamped the dealer’s name on the line beside the words “Seller signs.” Under federal law, a stamped company name is as good as a signature, Jarzombek said, adding: “They rubber-stamped it. They’ve obligated themselves to deliver the car. They established mutual obligation.”

What can a consumer do? File a lawsuit for breach of contract and possible violations of deceptive trade practice laws.

If a consumer wins, a settlement may include additional money for damages and legal fees. GM Johnson says the language used in his documents is clear. “All I can tell you is, I’m in the car sales business. I’m not a bank. We offered her the terms that the bank made available to her.”

It could be worse. Under Patterson Kia’s conditional delivery agreement, if someone buys a car and drives it off a lot but a lender later doesn’t approve, the buyer has to return the car. If the buyer left a trade-in but that car is gone, Patterson Kia only has to pay the agreed trade-in value to make things right.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

More Watchdog Nation News:

Watchdog Nation Partners with Mike Holmes

America meets Watchdog Nation/Listen to Fun Radio Interview

Watchdog Nation Debuts New e-Book and Multi-CD Audio Book

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Still here? Visit Dave Lieber’s other fun websites:

Personal: YankeeCowboy.com

Hipster site: DaveLieber.org

Filed Under: Bad Business, Column, Customer Service Issues Tagged With: Dave Lieber, Jerry Jarzombek, Patterson Kia, watchdog nation

The Watchdog: Stream Energy target of racketeering class-action lawsuit

April 20, 2014 by Dave Lieber

One of Texas’ best-known electricity companies has been smacked with a major and quite unexpected setback. Stream Energy and its marketing arm Ignite face a class-action lawsuit in a Houston federal court charging that Stream and Ignite sell through a pyramid scheme in violation of federal racketeering laws.

The recipients of any potential settlement include hundreds of thousands of independent associates who worked for Ignite selling Stream electricity contracts between 2005 and 2011.

Houston lawyer Scott M. Clearman, who filed the case, says in a worst-case scenario, if Stream has to pay a major settlement, “It could close the company.”

Business experts say the ramifications of this lawsuit are so deep that a Stream loss in the case could wreak havoc across the entire multilevel marketing industry.

Chairman and co-founder Rob Snyder tells The Watchdog the suit is “distressing.” The allegations are untrue, he says.

The company is appealing and several Stream officials tell me they expect an appeals court to dismiss the class-action certification. We’ll see.

Snyder says there is no pyramid scheme because the company sells a true product and uses established multilevel marketing systems to build its massive sales force: “We sell electricity, and we pay for word-of-mouth advertising through our associates,” he says.

Clearman’s 5-year-old lawsuit against Dallas-based Stream tells a different story. The lawyer charges that the company’s sales setup benefits those at the top. He cites federal racketeering laws because, he says, phone and mail were used to perpetrate the fraud in a conspiracy led by Stream and Ignite leaders.

Although promises of big income gains are made to bring sales people in, at least 25 percent of those who invest to get started in the sales program don’t make their money back, his lawsuit claims.

Stream chairman Snyder explains that it’s natural for sales team leaders at the top of a hierarchy to make more money than low-level associates.

“Our leaders build sales organizations, and they get a commission on the sale when our customers use electricity,” Snyder says.

The case has attracted little attention. Even a top-ranking Public Utility Commission of Texas official said the agency was not aware of the class-action certification until informed last week by The Watchdog. But the ramifications go much further than Stream alone.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other sales organizations have weighed in with a legal brief. They argue that if the case is successful, businesses using multilevel marketing could face a series of challenges from participants who lose money.

“A wide range of businesses, from mortgage lenders to for-profit colleges would face the risk of being coerced into extortionate settlements without having a meaningful opportunity to present legitimate defenses,” the brief states.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

More Watchdog Nation News:

Watchdog Nation Partners with Mike Holmes

America meets Watchdog Nation/Listen to Fun Radio Interview

Watchdog Nation Debuts New e-Book and Multi-CD Audio Book

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Stream’s Snyder says, “All you have to do is allege a pyramid scheme and you’ll be presumptively certified as a class-action. Defendant firms are looking down the barrel of a gun.”

Surprisingly, a staunch critic of pyramid schemes — and someone who once predicted Stream’s selling strategy would collapse under its own weight — now defends the company in this situation.

Southern Methodist University marketing professor Daniel Howard says, “The danger in this lawsuit is that if this goes through, it may ruin an entire industry, and it could bring down some pretty reputable companies as well.

“Once you have a class-action lawsuit like this saying there’s a racketeering and corrupt influence, it gives an ugly veneer to an entire industry, and that’s not necessarily true.”

The lawyer suing Stream and Ignite points to a $329 entry fee to join the sales program and a $29 monthly fee to host a sales website. He says many never make their money back. He cites dozens of sales recruitment meetings in the lawsuit where promises of great wealth were made to hopeful participants.

Until now, Stream has been riding high. The company started in 2005 and now has 350,000 Texas customers and 200,000 more electricity customers in New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Georgia.

Its marketing materials describe it as “one of the fastest-growing new enterprises in the history of American business” and “the largest network marketer of energy in the world.” The company claims about $6 billion in revenue since it began.

Most of the time, the company has stayed out of trouble. The Texas attorney general’s office has only two dozen complaints on file about the company. However, the PUC fined the company $94,000 in 2011 for numerous violations relating to contracts, marketing, connections and many other state rules.

Another top Stream executive, president Mark Schiro, tells The Watchdog: “We feel strongly that we will ultimately prevail in this case.” The judge’s decision was wrong, he adds. “And nothing has yet to be proven.”

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

More Watchdog Nation News:

Watchdog Nation Partners with Mike Holmes

America meets Watchdog Nation/Listen to Fun Radio Interview

Watchdog Nation Debuts New e-Book and Multi-CD Audio Book

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Still here? Visit Dave Lieber’s other fun websites:

Personal: YankeeCowboy.com

Hipster site: DaveLieber.org

Filed Under: Bad Business, Column, Customer Service Issues, Utilities Tagged With: Dave Lieber, MLM, Rob Snyder, Scott Clearnman, Stream Energy, Stream Energy lawsuit, watchdog nation

The Watchdog: JFK launched the U.S. consumer-rights movement

April 20, 2014 by Dave Lieber

In the billion words written about President John F. Kennedy in these last days, almost everyone has missed one of the most important contributions of his presidency.

JFK is the founder of the American consumer rights movement.

I bet you didn’t know that. Here’s how it happened.

The year before he died, Kennedy stood before cameras in the Roosevelt Room in the White House and announced his support for changes in law that we take for granted today: truth in lending, pesticide regulations, meat inspections, government approval of pharmaceuticals, product safety and, my favorite, more TV channels.

Kennedy said, “Consumers, by definition, include us all. If consumers are offered inferior products, if prices are exorbitant, if drugs are unsafe or worthless, if the consumer is unable to choose on an informed basis, then his dollar is wasted, his health and safety may be threatened, and the national interest suffers.”

No president had ever talked like that.

Kennedy went further, announcing his consumer bill of rights:

The right to safety. Products should not be hazardous to health or life.

The right to be informed. Consumers should be protected from fraudulent, deceitful or grossly misleading information in advertising and on labels.

The right to choose. Give people a variety of products at competitive prices.

The right to be heard. Consumer interests should be heeded by legislators and policymakers.

Kennedy’s wishes are now enshrined in law.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

More Watchdog Nation News:

Watchdog Nation Partners with Mike Holmes

America meets Watchdog Nation/Listen to Fun Radio Interview

Watchdog Nation Debuts New e-Book and Multi-CD Audio Book

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Still here? Visit Dave Lieber’s other fun websites:

Personal: YankeeCowboy.com

Hipster site: DaveLieber.org

Filed Under: Announcements, Column, Customer Service Issues, Introduction to Watchdog Nation Tagged With: consumer rights movement, Dave Lieber, FTC, JFK, President Kennedy, watchdog nation

Watchdog Nation goes on TV to warn about crooked repairman

What’s the biggest lie in the 2015 Texas Legislature?

Five Bills Designed to Make Texas Consumer-Friendly

Top 10 Consumer Tips for 2015

Did you get slammed for unwanted $29.95 a month credit monitoring? You can get a refund.

VIDEO: Watchdog Dave Lieber shares his best secret

The Watchdog: Time Warner Cable’s fine print fools a customer

The Watchdog: Dealer sells a car but later changes its mind

The Watchdog: Stream Energy target of racketeering class-action lawsuit

The Watchdog: JFK launched the U.S. consumer-rights movement

Search Watchdog Nation

VIDEO: Dave Lieber TED talk on business communication

The Book