Archive for September, 2011

The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint with U.S. District Court alleging that Christopher Mallett has engaged in deceptive practices online, targeting debt-ridden consumers. The complaint outlines Mallett’s alleged misdeeds, which include violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

According to the FTC, Mallett:

  • Impersonated federal consumer protection agencies on multiple websites.
  • Falsely claimed that he and his websites were affiliated with federal consumer protection agencies.
  • Invented a consumer protection agency that does not actually exist (the Department of Consumer Services Protection Commission).

The FTC claims that Mallett attempted to attract debt-ridden consumers to his site and redirect them to affiliate sites that provided relief for mortgages, debts, and taxes. None of these sites had any actual affiliation with the federal government, and all reportedly charged customers for their services.

If proven, these actions would violate the Telemarketing Sales Rule and the Mortgage Assistance Relief Services Rule, which outline how online services and mortgage assistance can be advertised and sold.

Plagiarism of FTC Words & Symbols

In addition to Mallett’s alleged fraudulent affiliation claims, the FTC charges that he improperly used the FTC’s official seal and closely copied language from the FTC’s web site on his own web pages. Mallett’s companies and web sites reportedly include:

  • U.S. Debt Care
  • World Law Debt
  • U.S. Mortgage Relief Counsel
  • gov-usdebtreform.net
  • worldlawdebt.org
  • FHA-homeloan.info

Because of the close matches between official government logos and language and that on Mallett’s sites, he may also face charges of impersonating government agencies.

Unsubstantiated Debt Settlement Claims

In addition to his false claims of government affiliation, Mallett reportedly made unsubstantiated claims about how his services could benefit consumers. The FTC notes that Mallett promised substantial reduction in consumer debts, even going so far as to publish charts showing previous customers’ “success” in lowering their debts.

Mortgage & Debt Relief Scams

The FTC is bringing the complaint as part of its efforts to eliminate scams that prey on consumers who are struggling with mortgage-related debt and other types of consumer debt. These types of scams can be particularly malicious because unsuspecting consumers may spend money they can barely afford for what they believe is a service that will help them turn their finances around.

When they learn that the service was nothing more than a scam, they often suffer a double blow of having lost money and having lost a chance at getting significant help toward improving their financial situation.

In some cases, consumers turn to such services to avoid filing for bankruptcy; ironically, spending money on such scams may push these consumers over the edge financially, leaving them with few choices besides personal bankruptcy.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • E-mail this story to a friend!

DigiNotar, a Dutch company that provided digital authentication certificates for Dutch government-owned Internet domains, has filed for bankruptcy after a serious hacking incident led to a significant security breach. Wired.com reports that DigiNotar, which is owned by Vasco Data Security (an Illinois company) was hacked in June because of insufficient security.

The hacker, according to reports:

  • Obtained more than 500 fake digital certificates for major web sites (including Google, Skype and Mozilla); and
  • Could use those certificates to collect users’ sensitive information when they entered it onto what they thought were secure sites.

Shortly after the breach was announced, the Dutch government reportedly stopped using DigiNotar’s services. When Vasco Data Security announced DigiNotar’s bankruptcy, it apparently made explicit its plans to maintain its own high security levels and to cooperate with the bankruptcy trustee and judge as necessary.

Digital Privacy & Identity Theft

The world of online identity protection relies on a system of encryption and authentication that, if hacked, can allow unauthorized individuals or groups to access sensitive information. When a hacker obtains false security certificates (as happened with DigiNotar), that hacker could access users’ accounts and even read their communications.

One of the main reasons that this hacking incident led to DigiNotar’s bankruptcy is that the company had failed to take adequate steps to protect itself from potential hackers. Apparently:

  • The hack occurred in early June but the company was not aware of it until mid-July, when an independent company conducted an audit of its security features;
  • DigiNotar’s system did not include strong passwords, anti-virus protection or updated software patches;
  • DigiNotar did not admit to the breach until August, when Iranian Gmail users reported difficulty accessing their email. At that time, Google confirmed that a fraudulent certificate was available and possibly being used to offer a fake Gmail page.

After reports of the incident surfaced, an Iranian man in his early 20s reportedly identified himself as a hacker and noted that his actions were an act of political retaliation for events that occurred during the Bosnian war in 1995.

The hacker may have allowed Iranian government officials to access citizens’ Gmail accounts, thus possibly providing them with a means of spying on dissidents. In other contexts, similar hacking feats could translate to other types of identity theft.

Major Blow to Legitimacy

After the incident played out, Google, Mozilla and other major web sites announced that they would no longer accept authentication certificates issued by DigiNotar, as they no longer trusted the company to adequately protect itself from hackers.

The bankruptcy filing will likely allow Vasco Data Security to maintain its operations without significant interruption.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • E-mail this story to a friend!

A report released by the Census Bureau shows that income dropped for U.S. families and more families were living at or below the poverty line in 2010 than in previous years. In fact, 2010 marked the third consecutive year that the poverty rate increased; since 2007, the total has crept up by 2.6 percent.

The Census Bureau further reported that:

  • Between 2009 and 2010, the poverty rate increased from 14.3 percent to 15.1 percent.
  • Last year, 46.2 million Americans were living in poverty.
  • 2010’s numbers mark the highest poverty rate the country has seen since 1993.
  • About 16.7 percent of Americans are now either unemployed or “marginally attached to the workforce” (i.e. underemployed).

One interesting side note about these numbers is that the unemployment rate has not changed significantly in the last year, even though the number of people living in poverty has. This suggests, according to sources, that the high unemployment rate has pushed wages down.

Higher Prices

Perhaps contributing to the nation’s rising poverty rate is a steady upward movement of consumer prices. Last month’s numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that the energy index rose 1.2 percent and the food index increased by 0.5 percent, its largest jump since March.

Even without the volatile energy and food price changes, other prices rose 0.2 percent, largely driven by apparel and housing costs.

Saving Money in the Thick of It

So what can a cash-strapped consumer do when times get tough? Spend more carefully, for one thing. Here’s a look at some tips for keeping bills lower, even as prices creep up and income falls.

  • Use the freezer. While you might forget leftovers in the fridge, you can store them in all their first-night freshness in the freezer. Bonus: freezing food for later saves time when you defrost it.
  • Learn sneaky food-saving recipes. Stale bread can be a real bummer – nobody wants to spend money on something and throw it out. But recipes for bread pudding and homemade croutons are both super-easy ways to rescue stale bread. Soup stocks are a great way to rescue vegetables past their prime.
  • Buy in season. Summer’s bounty means prices on produce are often at their lowest in the hot months. To take advantage, stock up and either freeze, dehydrate, or can the extras.
  • Check your bills carefully. Small mistakes may end up costing you over the long run. Make sure you’re paying only what you truly owe on bills. And vigilance can help you detect any suspicious activity (like possible identity theft) before it becomes a major problem.
  • Downgrade. Cable and Internet services can be pretty costly. If you aren’t watching all your channels or using your Internet for work, consider trimming the extras to save every month.
  • Go green. Three small steps can help you save serious money on electric bills. First, unplug electronics when you’re not using them. To make this easier, install surge protectors that you can switch off or unplug easily. Next, replace incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescents, which use less energy and last about ten times longer. Finally, opt for natural light and air whenever possible.
Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • E-mail this story to a friend!

Wednesday, September 21st, 2011

Falling SAT Scores & The Future of the Economy

The College Board announced this week that SAT scores among U.S. high school students dropped from last year. While the decrease may not seem significant (the average reading score fell three points, writing fell two points, and math dropped by one), analysts are worried that the dip could be part of a larger trend.

Unfortunately, that trend could have significant long-term impact on the future of the U.S. economy and jobs market.

The Test Score-Employment Link

Here’s a look at why faltering SAT scores are raising some concern among those worried about the long-term recovery of the U.S. economy.

  • SAT Benchmark: The College Board, which administers the SAT, has determined that a score of 1550 out of 2400 indicates that a student has a 65 percent chance of earning at least B-minus grades in college and thus of earning a degree.
  • Less than half of seniors meeting the benchmark: In 2011, only 43 percent of seniors planning to attend college achieved the benchmark score. This suggests that the majority of those entering college this fall have a less than 65 percent chance of completing school (according to the College Board’s research).
  • Unemployment by degree earned: The failure to complete college is troubling considered in the context of current unemployment rates. While the national average hovers around nine percent, that number varies significantly when total education is considered. In 2010, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released numbers indicating that, when the nation’s unemployment rate was at 8.2 percent, the rate for those with a doctoral degree was a mere 1.9 percent; professional degree earners had a 2.4 percent rate; those with masters degrees, 4.0 percent; those with bachelor’s degrees, 5.4 percent; associate degrees, 7.0 percent; some college, 9.2 percent; high school diploma, 10.3 percent; and no high school, 14.9 percent.
  • The future of U.S. jobs: Those numbers reflect a trend in the U.S. that involves available jobs becoming more and more skilled. The Secretary of Education has gone on the record saying that most jobs available in the U.S. in the future will be skilled and that education and training are becoming more and more essential to obtaining and keeping employment.

Those who start college and don’t finish may still have to contend with student loans, which are not dischargeable in bankruptcy. Student debt can be especially difficult without the increased earning potential that typically accompanies a completed degree.

Economic Recovery and Employment

Naturally, nobody will insist that the economy has recovered until the unemployment rate has fallen closer to normal levels. Though many analysts say that recovery must start in the housing market, most citizens and politicians pay more attention to employment numbers, because these have a more observably direct impact on citizens.

Part of the worry that the College Board’s numbers spurred comes from overseas: students in China and elsewhere are improving on standardized tests as U.S. students fall behind. This has led some people to worry that, if American workers, students, and schools don’t improve, the country might have to start outsourcing jobs for the highly trained.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • E-mail this story to a friend!

Monday, September 19th, 2011

Changes on the Way for Credit Scores?

Though the Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) introduced a new credit-scoring model more than three years ago, lending institutions are only now beginning to adopt it. According to a new report on Credit.com, the delay could be bad news for consumers hoping to apply for credit or loans.

The new model, called FICO 8, was ready for adoption in 2008 and rolled out in 2009. But, aside from Citibank, which adopted the new scoring method earlier this summer, the major lenders in the U.S. (including Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Chase, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) have yet to change their scoring techniques.

FICO Background

The FICO credit score is generally heralded as the gold standard in the lending industry. This score ranges from 300 to 850 and determines what kind of rates consumers get on loans (and whether they qualify for loans at all).

Negative credit actions (including defaulting on loans, filing for bankruptcy, going into foreclosure, etc.) lower a credit score; positive credit actions (paying bills on time, having a low credit usage ratio, etc.) raise it.

Is the Delay Hurting Borrowers?

Sources note that FICO 8 introduces scoring tools that could give consumers a better chance of qualifying for loans, including:

  • Less emphasis on unpaid debts under $100. Many of those debts, it seems, might be from the doctor. According to the Commonwealth Fund, 14 million Americans are currently fighting medical bills. And the FTC notes that half of all debts in collections are medical.
  • More consumer categories. Rather than dividing consumers into 10 groups, FICO 8 carves out 16, meaning that scoring tools will be able to more accurately predict consumer behavior.
  • Fairer comparisons. The old credit-scoring model (still currently in use in much of the country) essentially had one ruler for every lender. The new model allows lenders to compare someone with, say, a short credit history to others with histories of a similar length. This will help provide a more accurate picture of whether or not someone is a good credit risk compared to her peers.
  • Credit utilization will count more. To balance the effect of counting small unpaid debts less, high credit utilization ratios will hurt a score more significantly (i.e. those with maxed out on cards will suffer).

Possible Reasons for Delay

According to Credit.com, the delay in adoption of FICO 8 might be related to a number of factors. Fannie and Freddie (responsible for underwriting most mortgages in the U.S.), for example, are currently facing opposition in Congress to the government support they enjoy. After suffering major losses in the mortgage meltdown, they may be more focused on staying afloat than changing the way they do business.

As for other major lenders, the outlook isn’t much better. Seventeen major banks are now facing lawsuits regarding toxic assets they sold to investors during the mortgage boom. Depending how the suits play out, those institutions could owe serious money that they may or may not have. Considering those conditions, a non-essential policy change may seem frivolous.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • E-mail this story to a friend!

The Federal Trade commission reported this week that it has halted a payday lender from attempting to garnish consumers’ wages without the necessary court order. The company, Payday Financial, LLC, reportedly did business under the names Big Sky Cash and Lakota Cash.

Sources note that, in order to garnish its customers’ wages, Payday Financial divulged information about alleged payday loan debts to their employers, which is illegal. The attempt to garnish wages also prevented customers from disputing the debts in court or working out a payment plan with the lender.

Wage Garnishment Rules

Federal law permits government entities to request wage garnishment for unpaid debts owed to the government; however, the law requires that private creditors (i.e. anyone other than the government) go through the court system if they want to pursue wage garnishment.

According to the FTC, Payday Financial sent customers’ employers paperwork designed to look like documents from the federal government requesting wage garnishment to repay debts. That move has led the FTC to charge Payday Financial with:

  • Misrepresenting their legal wage garnishment status to employers (in other words, lying about their legal ability to garnish the employees’ wages);
  • Lying about their communication with consumers (specifically, by indicating that they had already given the employees an opportunity to contest or pay the debt);
  • Illegally revealing the existence and amount of alleged debts without consumers’ consent or knowledge;
  • Violating the FTC’s Credit Practices Rule, which does not permit lenders to require that consumers consent to wage garnishment in the event of default; and
  • Violating the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, which prohibits payday lenders from requiring borrowers to authorize direct debit payment of loans.

Payday Financial has agreed to stop garnishing its customers’ wages until a court decides on the case.

Halting Wage Garnishment through Bankruptcy

Consumers who are dealing with legal wage garnishment have the option of filing for bankruptcy to prevent further withdrawal of funds from their wages. Personal bankruptcy includes a legal protection called the automatic stay, which prevents collection actions of all kinds for the duration of the bankruptcy case.

The automatic stay can halt:

  • Wage garnishment;
  • Debt lawsuits;
  • Foreclosure;
  • Repossession; and
  • Phone calls and mailings from creditors.

In bankruptcy, filers may have debts discharged or enter a repayment plan to catch up on past-due debts. Once a debt has been discharged or repaid in part through the bankruptcy court, creditors no longer have a legal right to collect on it (meaning they can no longer legally garnish wages to cover that debt).

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • E-mail this story to a friend!

On September 2, the Federal Housing and Finance Authority (FHFA) sued 17 companies over sales of toxic mortgage-backed securities to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Among those named in the suit were many of the country’s largest banks, including Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, CitiGroup, and Morgan Stanley.

The suit does not currently request a specific amount of money in damages, but according to the Associated Press, Fannie and Freddie bought $196 billion worth of toxic securities during the housing boom. Here’s a closer look at the suit and what might happen.

FHFA: Financial Firms Broke State & Federal Laws

One of the suit’s allegations is that the financial firms violated federal and state laws by selling the securities to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two government-sponsored companies that help make mortgages more affordable to Americans. Specifically, the lawsuit claims that the banks and other lenders:

  • Sold mortgage-backed securities that had “materially false or misleading” statements and omissions of critical information;
  • Falsely indicated that the mortgages met legal underwriting guidelines and were all thoroughly reviewed; and
  • Substantially overstated borrowers’ ability to make mortgage payments on their loans.

At its core, the lawsuit claims that the 17 sellers lied to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to get them to buy loans that they knew were toxic, yet sold them as low-risk to the government agencies.

Housing Market Bubble, Burst & Fallout

The housing boom allowed millions of Americans to get mortgage loans. Many of those loans were sub-prime, had adjustable rates or were ultimately unaffordable to the borrowers. When interest rates reset a few years after the loans were originated, many borrowers were unable to make payments and defaulted.

While those borrowers faced the problem of foreclosure and perhaps filed for bankruptcy to help ease their debt burden, they were not the only ones affected by their inability to pay.

Investors that bought their mortgages (often after the loans were pooled and sold off in sections in a process called “securitization”) stopped earning money on their investments. Because Fannie and Freddie were big investors, they stood to lose a lot of cash – which put into question their ability to continue supporting the U.S. housing market by buying mortgage debt.

The FHFA (which oversees Fannie and Freddie) is taking legal action in part because of the devastating financial consequences the two companies faced. In July 2008, the federal government had to take action to make sure the two enterprises didn’t fail because, at the time, they guaranteed or owned about half of the residential mortgages in the U.S. (worth about $6 trillion).

Theoretically, the lawsuit could help recover losses that Fannie and Freddie suffered from the collapse of the housing bubble. It might also serve as a warning and/or deterrent to other financial institutions and could prompt legislative change to regulate how residential mortgages are originated, securitized and sold.

The lawsuit was filed in New York and Connecticut.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • E-mail this story to a friend!

Last week, Silicon Valley-based solar company Solyndra laid off more than 1,000 workers and announced plans to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The move made waves in part because the company had appeared promising to many investors: Solyndra attracted more than $1 billion in venture capital and a $535 million loan guaranteed by the federal government.

The company appeared to have everything going for it: it had developed new technology to improve the design of existing solar panels and it emerged at a time (2008) when investors were eager to back “green” technology.

But a number of factors got in its way of success:

  • Changing solar equipment prices: Solyndra apparently entered the market at a time when materials to make solar panels were expensive and watched the value of its equipment decline over time.
  • Increased competition from China: When Solyndra was in its early stages, competition from China was reportedly shaky and not well established. Over the course of Solyndra’s growth, solar panels produced in China gained credibility on world markets. Plus, the Chinese government subsidizes production.
  • Oversupply: Globally, more solar panels have been produced than people have been interested in buying. Part of the diminished demand can be blamed on the recession.

Learning from Bigger Bankruptcy Filings

If nothing else, the fate that Solyndra is facing serves as a welcome reminder to individuals considering filing bankruptcy. Many factors that lead people to choose bankruptcy protection are beyond any individual’s control.

In fact, bankruptcy filing surveys consistently note that top reasons people file for bankruptcy include:

  • Divorce;
  • A birth or death in the family;
  • Job loss or reduction;
  • An unexpected illness or injury; and
  • Natural disasters.

As part of its Chapter 11 bankruptcy, Solyndra will likely sell off parts of itself (such as its thin-film solar technology) that are valuable, if not workable for the company at present. Individuals can learn from this, too, and consider some of the following cash-raising techniques before or during bankruptcy:

  • Get a part-time gig: Many people have talents from which they make no money. As part of a bankruptcy recovery, consider selling those services.
  • Lighten the load: In Chapter 7 bankruptcy, filers’ non-exempt assets are sold to raise money for creditors as part of the bankruptcy process. Chapter 13 filers could try something similar, by selling unneeded items online or via a yard sale.
  • Don’t be discouraged: A number of high-profile investors (including the federal government and the Walton family of Wal-Mart fame) supported and helped fund Solyndra. Sometimes, even the best-laid plans end badly. Bankruptcy gives individuals and businesses a chance to move forward.
Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • E-mail this story to a friend!