Consumer Fraud Archive

BofA Customer Service Finally Proves it’s Run by Morons

July 11th, 2013. By AbiK

You gotta love Bank of America. On the heels of reports of debt collection harassment—and the recent Bank of America debt collection harassment class action lawsuit that was filed—BofA managed to not only inspire ire in its customers but also make a complete fool out of itself! How did it manage that, you ask? Read on…

In the age of social media-enhanced customer service (ie, have a problem with a company? Tweet it and await your response…), Bank of America is right up there with the best of them responding to customer mentions (#BofA, @BofA, etc…) of the big bank on Twitter. Well, as Gizmodo reported earlier in the week, sometimes too much monitoring for company mentions—along with what looked like either cookie-cutter automated responses or more likely complete incompetence—can make a customer service department look like a bunch of idiots. And, indeed, BofA’s customer service looked that way.

Here’s the low-down: A guy (Twitter handle=@darthmarkh) tweeted that he’d been creating some chalk art on the sidewalk out in front of a BofA location in NYC—and, might I add, he’d done a damn good job recreating the Monopoly game “go to jail” graphic (see pic above). Needless to say, the cops finally told him to stop and move along. He did, and he then tweeted about the incident with the mention of “@bankofamerica”—but his goal was to spread word of BofA’s alleged “illegal foreclosure fraud” rather than to have BofA take notice and ask if he’d like assistance.

Well, the clueless wonders over at BofA customer service reached out to @darthmarkh to find out if there was “anything they could do to help?” Seriously. (See the twitter conversation here). And, it went on to include gems like “We are here to help, listen, and learn from our customers and are glad to assist with any account related inquiries.”

And we’re so glad you are! Can you imagine the level of incompetence it takes to either respond—in person—like that, or to build an automated-response system that would generate such responses regardless of the nature of inquiry it was responding to? #EpicFail doesn’t even do this one justice.

The field day that @darthmarkh’s followers had after that was, as you can imagine, hilarious. And it should be mentioned that as of today, there hasn’t been an official response from BofA or acknowledgment of the screw-up—guess it’s better to stay mum and hope it all just creeps off everyone’s Twitter pages.

Sadly, doesn’t look like BofA has done much since the rallying cry for better customer service from CEO Brian Moynihan back in January of this year. Now, instead of looking like they’re listening to customers and ‘making it easier for customers to do business with the bank’, you have to wonder if anyone at all is actually listening—and, if they are, if they even have a brain.

Tags: #EpicFail, Bank of America, BoFA, BofA class action lawsuit, BofA Customer Service, debt collection harassment, foreclosure fraud
Posted in Consumer Fraud, Emerging Issues | 7 Comments »

Law News For You: Energy Drink ER Trips Skyrocket

June 18th, 2013. By AbiK

Tags: Monster Energy Drink, Monster Energy Drink Lawsuit, Personal Injury, Wrongful Death
Posted in Complaints/Comments, Consumer Fraud, Food Illness, lawsuits, Lawyers, Personal Injury | No Comments »

SRSLY? ABA Rep Tries to Defend High Caffeine Energy Drinks #EpicFail

May 30th, 2013. By AbiK

Love it when a reader comments on one of our articles and her comment tries to defend something absurd. Like energy drinks with a sh*tload of caffeine in them. That young kids are drinking. And potentially even dying from.

This reader, who left her message with the screen name “MaureenatABA” (note, a quick gander over at the ABA site shows a Maureen Beach as their Director, Communications. Coincidence?) —and for those of you thinking that’s the American Bar Association, no, that would be the American Beverage Association—commented on a recent article we posted, “Monster Energy Drinks Attorney Weighs In“, in which attorney Kevin Goldberg with Goldberg, Finnegan & Mester provided insight on what’s wrong with how energy drinks are classified (or not) by the FDA. It’s a dubious system at best.

Needless to say, as one of the attorneys representing the family of Anais Fournier, the 14-year-old girl who drank two bottles of Monster Energy drinks and went into cardiac arrest and died six days later—Goldberg has some unique insight into energy drinks (and I imagine a hell of a lot of discovery). The Monster drink lawsuit, btw, is a wrongful death one that alleges not only dangerous levels of caffeine in the drink, but inappropriate marketing of the energy drink to children.

I should share MaureenatABA’s comment:

“Most energy drinks contain significantly less caffeine than a similarly-sized cup of coffeehouse coffee.  In fact, many contain about half (http://bit.ly/11FcrFN).  In addition, a Harvard study revealed that there is not enough caffeine in a standard energy drink to trigger an arrhythmia, even in a person with a pre-existing heart condition (http://1.usa.gov/16gzKXN).  Energy drinks have been enjoyed safely by millions of people around the world for more than 25 years and in the U.S. for more than 15.- Maureen at ABA“

Well, Maureen, posting a link to the ABA’s chart depicting caffeine levels in a soft drink, an energy drink, and a cup of coffee is a bit lame. It’s a pretty picture, of course, though the scale of the 16-oz. soft drink icon is a bit off and the blatant green circle on the coffee clearly (and shamelessly, c’mon) targets Starbuck’s—but that’s all it is: a picture. It doesn’t cite independent sources that have tested for caffeine levels, and oddly, it shows a different story than what Consumer Reports reported back in December when it—independently—provided a different chart that listed caffeine levels in specific brand name drinks. If you missed that chart, it’s shown at right.

Oh MaureenatABA—I forgot—you’re probably then saying that there’s that Harvard study you referenced! You are so right. And here’s some interesting things about that:

1. It’s from 1989.

2. The mean age of the study participants was 61 years.

3. The drinks the study participants received had 200 mg caffeine in them.

Forgive me, but what Goldberg is dealing with is…

1. Something that happened recently. Note that you mention that these energy drinks have been in the U.S. for the last 15 years. According to my math, 2013 minus 15 years brings us to 1998—which is almost a DECADE after the Harvard study was done. The authors of the study surely did not have a supply of today’s energy drinks to test.

2. A younger population. Rather than a population reaching retirement, the lawsuit focuses on a 14-year old child (and, as a class, all children).

3. Caffeine levels that go beyond 200 mg “modest dose” administered in the Harvard study.

For those of you who want a less skewed perspective on the Monster Energy Drink lawsuit, I’d suggest reading Jane Mundy’s interview with attorney Kevin Goldberg. And stay tuned.

 

Tags: American Beverage Association, Caffeinated Drinks, Goldberg Finnegan & Mester, Kevin Goldberg, Monster Energy Drink, Wrongful Death
Posted in Class Action, Consumer Fraud, lawsuits | 2 Comments »

13 TGI Fridays Targeted In Drink Scam Investigation

May 28th, 2013. By AbiK

Given news of late, Clifton, NJ may not be the best location to grab a burger and a drink. First, the Tick Tock Diner on Route 3 winds up with a manager being charged in a plot to torture, rob and kill the owner of the diner. Apparently, as NJ diners go, the Tick Tock is a far cry from Rosie’s Diner—Rosie’s was the NJ diner where the Bounty ‘quicker picker upper’ commercials from the ’70s & ’80s were filmed (though, Chelsea Clinton did do some campaign stomping at the Tick Tock in 2008 for her mom).

That gem was then followed by a Tick Tock Diner waitress filing sexual harassment charges against the same manager (somehow conjures up visions of that—groan—line, “got some fries with that shake?”, doesn’t it?)

And now, NorthJersey.com reports the Clifton TGI Fridays—literally a stone’s throw away from the Tick Tock Diner—is being investigated, along with 12 other TGI Fridays restaurants in NJ, for consumer fraud—specifically, switching out premium-brand liquor with non-premium brands in order to trick customers into paying more for their bar drinks.

According to the NJ State Division of Alcohol and Beverage Control (ABC), drink subbing costs consumers hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.

TGI Fridays, to be fair, is not the only target of the ABC investigation in NJ. And to be fair, this was Ricky Richardson, president of Friday’s USA, statement in response to the investigation:

“We consider the alleged actions detailed by the New Jersey Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control to be very disturbing. If accurate, they would represent a violation of our company’s values and our extensive bar and beverage standards which are designed to deliver the highest guest experience in our restaurants.”

Richardson continued, “We have zero tolerance for actions that undermine the trust of our guests and call into question the reputation we have built up over the past 48 years.”

The list of establishments being investigated as part of “Operation Swill” includes Railroad Cafe (East Rutherford), The Brick House (Wyckoff), Sunset Tavern (Burlington), Graziano’s Ristorante (Chesilhurst), Brunswick Grove (East Brunswick), Villari’s Lakeside (Gloucester Township), Yesterdays (Marmora), Italian Affair (Glassboro), Bells Tavern (Lambertville), Murrays (Dover), Sona Thirteen (Morristown), Blackthorn Restaurant (Parsippany), Ruby Tuesday (Bridgewater), Cafe 34 (Matawan), Applebee’s (Kearny), and Cucina Calandara (Fairfield). The 13 TGI Fridays are in Clifton, East Windsor, Old Bridge, North Brunswick, East Hanover, Piscataway, Freehold, Marlboro, Hazlet, Linden, Hamilton, Springfield, and West Orange.

Sadly, this is not the first time we’re reporting on a NJ restaurant trying to pull the ol’ switcheroo on its drinking clientele. Remember Laguna Grill and Martini Bar?

And sadly, this time, switching out the top shelf booze for lesser quality booze is the least of anyone’s concerns…

Some of the targeted establishments have allegedly taken things to a new level. A NorthJersey.com report states that some of the samples taken from confiscated liquor bottles showed evidence of dirty water and rubbing alcohol. Cheers!

The ABC investigation has been going on a year and has included taking statements from employees and also reviewing sales and invoice records for about twenty liquor “brands of interest”. And, of course, samples have been taken—150 of them—using the True Spirit Authenticator (yes, such a thing apparently exists). According to the NJ Office of the Attorney General, of the 150 samples taken, 30 were not the brand they claimed to be. Twenty percent of top-shelf bottle samples isn’t exactly a low percentage.

The penalty for drink-subbing typically involves a liquor license suspension (and potentially a fine, as in the case of Laguna Grill and Martini Bar). Suspensions range in length depending on whether its a first-time violation or second or third—and keep in mind, a violation occurs when just one drink is poured; so multiple violations can be derived from just one bottle.

Tags: Consumer Fraud, Drink Subbing, NJ State Division of Alcohol and Beverage Control, TGI Fridays, Tick Tock Diner
Posted in Consumer Fraud, Emerging Issues | 1 Comment »

FitFlops Flop: Class Action Filed Over Flip Flops Gym

April 10th, 2013. By AbiK

Seriously. If a pair of flip flops has a “gym built in”, can a Jimmy Choo’s diet be far behind? (No, actually—as a quick glance at Jimmy Choo advertising makes it clear they know what business they’re in, and what a pair of stilettos can and cannot do.)

Rhetorical questions aside, first there was the Reebok Toning Shoes class action lawsuit. That one settled for $25M. Then there was Skechers Shape-Ups. That one settled for $45M. And THEN there was New Balance Toning Shoes, which settled for $2.3M.

They say three’s a charm, and I’m sure the lawyers representing FitFlop customer, Barbara Glaberson, 70, of Ventnor, NJ, are well aware that they’ve got footwear trends (at least legally speaking) on their side with three toning shoe defendants having to settle for millions.

According to an article at Philly.com, Glaberson purchased a pair of bronze Walkstar FitFlops sandals for $60 at Nordstrom’s in the spring of 2010. And guess what? After wearing the sandals, she found they didn’t make her fit.

Well, according to one of Glaberson’s lawyers, Timothy G. Blood, a partner in Blood, Hurst & O’Reardon L.L.P. in California, Glaberson “…thought it would be great to get more out of just walking around. They did nothing for her, and she felt like she had been ripped off.”

Gullible though she may have been, when you consider that FitFlops were advertised as “the flip flop with the gym built in” and that they retail at a higher price point, surely they sound like they must do more for you than your average pair of Havaianas, coming in at around $20 retail—and certainly more than the “2 for $5” Old Navy flip flops. Right? Granted, Havaianas and Old Navy flip flops make a better fashion statement, but fashion be damned where there’s calf toning to be had for $60.

So, fast-forward, Glaberson has filed a class action lawsuit, v. FitFlop USA L.L.C., claiming that the FitFlops Walkstar sandals did not, apparently, come with a gym built-in. Nor, I’m guessing, any Nautilus equipment. Nor a treadmill. And they didn’t make her more fit. (On the flip side—no pun—it’s important to note that Glaberson is not claiming physical injury, which had been an aspect of some of the other toning shoe lawsuits that preceded this; she is merely alleging consumer fraud.)

We’ll have to see where this one nets out, but it’s one to watch. As Philly.com points out, both sides have legal representation with some serious klout. On Glaberson’s side, there’s Blood and his partners who have worked with the FTC on the Reebok EasyTone Settlement for $25M. On FitFlops side, there’s William S. Ohlemeyer, a partner with Boies, Schiller & Flexner L.L.P.—the firm that represented Al Gore in the post-election debacle over the outcome of the 2000 presidential race. Stay tuned…

Tags: Class Action, Consumer Fraud, false advertising, FitFlops Lawsuit, New Balance, Reebok, Skechers, Toning Sneakers
Posted in Class Action, Consumer Fraud, Emerging Issues | 4 Comments »