Do any of these seem legit?

kneo316 asked:


I was looking for good deals for the recently launched samsung innov8 when I saw these sites advertising unbelievable deals.

http://www.rentradelimited.net/samsung-i8510-inno8510816.html
http://www.sametimemallltd.org/samsung-i8510-i85108.html

The regular price for this phone is upwards of $500-550 but these guys offering a steal. I established contact with them, they claim to be based in the UK but their English implied otherwise, lot of typos in their emails.

They prepared to accept payments only through western union or money gram which offer little to no consumer protection.

Thoughts?
Thanks for your responses…

One of em has agreed to meet a friend of mine in London and transact in person and the other is ready to use paypal provided I order > 10 items.

I know that the likelihood of these guys being cons is quite high but yet want to see how safe can I be while dealing with them…besides the phone is just amazing specially at the price :D

Victor

 Mail this post

Posted under Consumer Protection

This post was written by admin on December 31, 2008

Tags: , ,

What do Republikans think about this? “Ron Paul says he turned down appeal to endorse McCain.”?

Marq JPAA asked:


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080910/ap_on_el_pr/ron_paul_third_parties
Paul says he turned down appeal to endorse McCain

By SUZANNE GAMBOA, Associated Press Writer 22 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Republican Rep. Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning Texas lawmaker who attracted a devoted following in the GOP primaries, said Wednesday he rejected an appeal to endorse John McCain’s presidential bid.

Paul said the request came from Phil Gramm, the former McCain adviser and ex-senator whom the campaign jettisoned after he said the country was a “nation of whiners” about the economy. Gramm defeated Paul in the Republican primary for the Senate in 1984.

Speaking to reporters at a news conference, Paul said Gramm called him this week and told him, “You need to endorse McCain.” The Texas congressman said he refused.

“The idea was that he would do less harm than the other candidate,” Paul said.

Paul won no primaries in the Republican nomination contest but developed a strong following on the Internet.

He appeared at a news conference with three third-party candidates: independent Ralph Nader; former Georgia Democratic Rep. Cynthia McKinney, the Green Party candidate; and Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate. Bob Barr, the Libertarian candidate, was invited but said at his own news conference later that he declined because Paul didn’t endorse one candidate.

“We need today, now, 55 days before this election, bold, focused, specific leadership and that is not the amorphous kind that says any of the above or none of the above,” Barr said.

Barr said he had asked Paul to join him as his running mate on the Libertarian Party ticket while his current running mate, Wayne Root would step aside. “We don’t anticopate that he will,” Barr said.

Earlier, Paul called the presidential elections a charade and said voters are faced with the “lesser of two evils.”

The majority of Americans, about 60 percent, are unhappy with their choices in the race, Paul said. He urged the three third-party candidates to bring all their supporters together to vote against the “establishment candidates.”

Paul, 73, a former doctor, ran for president as the Libertarian candidate in 1988. He is unopposed in the November race for his congressional seat.

Nader derided media focus on what he called “lipstickgate,” referring to the bickering between the McCain and Barack Obama campaigns over whether a phrase used by Obama was a sexist comment against Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin.

Nader, a consumer protection advocate, acknowledged differences among the third-party candidates such as government regulation of health and safety standards. But he added that he shares Paul’s support for more opportunity in the political process for third-party candidates.
Dontcha just LOVE Republikan stupidity?

BlueJuliet — Ron Paul IS a Republican. He is a REPUBLICAN Congressman from Texas.

It’s just that unlike the neoconservatives who have hijacked the Republican Party and turned it into «Die Nationalen Christlichen Republikanischen Weißen Partei
der Leute für Gott und Land», Ron Paul actually happens to take the U.S. Constitution *seriously* — and we liberals actually *respect* that!

Debbie

 Mail this post

Posted under Consumer Protection

This post was written by admin on December 28, 2008

Tags: , ,

Why did my dog die so young? Is this a myth?

Dogs are our Guardian Angels! asked:


Could it be from back yard breeding? He died of lymphoma, and 3 other dogs from his litter died of lymphoma months short of their 2nd birthday.

I blame it on back yard breeding, and when we bought the dog, she didn’t want to bring the btch out, because I had my female with me……so I didn’t get to see her……

I am well educated now, its a shame that a tragedy leads to education, but, I don’t regret saving him from that bad breeder.

Oh the reason why I know there were 3 other puppies from that same litter that died, is because when I called to report this byb to the state of illinois consumer protection…something like that, can’t remember…..but the lady was in shock, and said you are not going to believe this, but there are 3 other complaints, all dogs died from lymphoma……….from the same litter.

WE complained, and all they did was warn her. that’s it.

So anyway, can this be genetic, or over breeding or what?

Martin

 Mail this post

Posted under Consumer Protection

This post was written by admin on December 25, 2008

Tags: , ,

Sold a Defective Automobile by Dealer?

FoxMulder asked:


MY wife found a car on the internet. We are in Florida (sucky consumer protection state). The dealer has an as is warranty policy. Before signing anything, my wife asked if there were mechanical problems, she was told there were none. The internet ad does not list any problems with the car. She took it for a test drive with no apparent problems. When she got home, it overheated, We looked and there was no fluid in the radiator. The battery died overnight which we replaced. Now the car refuses to start. The dealership refuses to speak with us. They worked on the car to make it look new, especially the engine. So, it appears there is more wrong with this car than advertised and what they represented. Maybe this is why they have an as is warranty policy. You sell a defective car and you are off the hook. Any advice on this? Do we have any rights under Florida Law?
btw, my wife checked all fluids. Engine was detailed to make it brand new looking. She specifically asked for problems was assured there were none. Checked car on Carmax, said car was not in an accident. She wouldnt have bought car if there were problems
Thanks all
Just to add, my wife did what any normal prudent person would do when buying a car.

Delores
 Mail this post

Posted under Consumer Protection

This post was written by admin on December 20, 2008

Tags: , ,

Envelope-Stuffing Work at Home Scheme

The most common type of work-at-home fraud is envelope stuffing.

Envelope stuffing. Promoters usually advertise that, for a “small” fee, they will tell you how to earn money stuffing envelopes at home. Later - when it’s too late - you find out that the promoter never had any employment to offer. Instead, for your fee, you’re likely to get a letter telling you to place the same “envelope-stuffing” ad in newspapers or magazines, or to send the ad to friends and relatives.

Typically, there is nothing to stuff. Instead, you receive instructions on how to deceive others by placing an ad like the one you responded to! Other schemes require you to assemble gift and specialty products for which there is little or no market.

 Mail this post

Posted under Home Business Scams

This post was written by admin on December 18, 2008

Business Opportunity Fraud for 900-Number Lines

The Federal Trade Commission warned today that tens of thousands of consumers may be investing in fraudulent business opportunities for 900-number lines. The agency announced “Project Buylines,” which culminated in seven cases against the marketers of these “turnkey” prepackaged businesses. The FTC charged that some or all of the defendants in these cases made blatantly false earnings claims, and failed to give investors federally required pre-purchase information that may have tipped the investors off to the fraud. The marketers of these businesses own the 900-number lines and the programs that consumers will hear when calling the numbers, and represent that all investors have to do is advertise the lines and then take a portion of the revenues for themselves, the FTC said.

“Project Buylines targets the latest and hottest business opportunity fraud today — the chance to operate your own 900-number line,” said Jodie Bernstein, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “We came across a huge number of ads for these scams as we did follow-up on Project Telesweep, the massive federal-state crackdown on display rack and vending machine ?biz opp’ frauds that netted nearly 100 cases last July. We found far fewer ads for vending opportunities after Project Telesweep, but the number of ads for 900-number business opportunities is skyrocketing.

“Moreover, we believe these new 900-number businesses are even more enticing,” Bernstein said. “Unlike display rack or vending machine business opportunities where the investor has to service, restock and trouble shoot as many as 50-100 racks or machines, pay-per-call franchises marketers promise ?effortless’ revenue — their pitch is that one need only purchase the lines, advertise, and wait for the profits to roll in.”

The cases the FTC announced today are against:

  • Genesis One Corp., which does business as Bureau One out of Los Angeles, California, and its corporate officers Rose Kistorian and Alex Bass;
  • Innovative Telemedia, Inc., of Boca Raton, Florida, and Frederick O. Buckley (who also is known as Westy Monroe);
  • Bureau 2000 International, Inc. and Malibu Media, Inc., which do business out of the same address in Los Angeles, and corporate officers Krystee Carr and Dave Ryder;
  • William Szabo, who has done business as Gold Leaf Publishing and Distributing Company, Inc. out of Orlando, Florida,
  • Pioneer Communications of Nevada, Inc., based in Los Angeles, and its officers Glen Burke and Mike Luther;
  • J. P. Meyers Company, Inc., of Southampton, Pennsylvania, and its officer Joseph Shapiro; and
  • Ad-Com International, Inc., of Valley Village, California, and its corporate officers Lorraine Corrales and Anthony Catalano.

The defendants in these cases generally offer business ventures that consist of pay-per-call information or entertainment programs that consumers can access by calling 900 numbers. For a base price that varies from a few hundred to nearly $4,000, investors get a package that purportedly includes one or more 900-number lines, recordings of the programs and instructions consumers will hear when they call the lines, prepared advertisements and/or assistance in preparing and placing ads, and other technical support. The defendants all made claims that investors would make a great deal of money, the FTC alleged, citing in its complaint earnings claims ranging from a few thousand to more than $200,000 a year.

In the cases against the Genesis One, Innovative Telemedia and Gold Leaf Publishing defendants, the FTC charged that the earnings claims were false, noting that few, if any, investors made the promised amounts. In an additional charge against Innovative Telemedia, the FTC alleged that the marketer failed to pay its investors the agreed-upon portion of revenues from calls to the 900-number lines.

In every case except the one against Innovative Telemedia, the FTC also alleged that the defendants violated the FTC’s Franchise Rule. This is a pre-purchase disclosure rule designed to help consumers fully analyze a business opportunity and avoid fraud. The rule requires franchise sellers to give potential investors a basic disclosure document containing detailed information about the franchise, its senior officers, financial history, and the names of current and prior franchisees. If franchisors choose to make earnings claims, the rule also requires them to give potential franchisees a document laying out the substantiation for those claims. The FTC charged that these defendants failed to provide these two documents, which may have given consumers information that would have led them to decide against purchasing the business opportunities.

In each case, the FTC is seeking court orders that would require the defendants to pay redress to injured investors or disgorge their illegal profits to the U.S. Treasury, and would bar the defendants from engaging in similar deceptive practices in the future. In the Genesis One and Innovative Telemedia cases, the FTC already has won temporary restraining orders halting the schemes, freezing the defendants’ assets and appointing receivers to manage the corporate entities’ financial affairs pending the outcome of trial.

The FTC votes to file the complaints detailing the charges in these cases were all 5-0. They were filed in various federal district courts around the country (see below), and hearings will be scheduled soon.

In the meantime, the FTC’s Bernstein warns consumers to be very wary of classified ads touting 900-number riches, especially when the business opportunity marketers fail to give consumers detailed written information about the business.

“The FTC’s Franchise rule is, essentially, an anti-fraud rule,” Bernstein said. “It gives consumers a roadmap for checking out this kind of business opportunity so that they can inoculate themselves against being ripped off,” Bernstein said. “Consumers thinking of investing in a franchise-type business opportunity should view a company’s failure to provide the extensive pre-purchase information required by the rule as a harbinger of fraud.”

NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. These complaints are not findings or rulings that the defendants have actually violated the law. The cases will be decided by the courts.

Copies of the complaints in these cases are available from the FTC’s Public Reference Branch, Room 130, 6th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580; 202-326-2222; TTY for the hearing impaired 202-326-2502. To find out the latest news as it is announced, call the FTC NewsPhone recording at 202-326-2710. FTC news releases and other materials also are available on the Internet at the FTC’s World Wide Web site at: http://www.ftc.gov

 Mail this post

Posted under Home Business Scams

This post was written by admin on December 18, 2008