Consumer protection research including all manner of deceptive or disputed practices
Many people have seen my emails with Ran Duan of Sichuan Garden restaurant in Brookline.
Having reflected on my interaction with Ran, including what I said and how I said it, it’s clear that I was very much out of line. I aspire to act with great respect and humility in dealing with others, no matter what the situation. Clearly I failed to do so. I am sorry, and I intend to do better in the future.
I have reached out to Ran and will apologize to him personally as well.
Complaint. Answer. Docket and public comments.
Status: Consent order. $30,000 penalty.
Summary: mischaracterizing surcharges as “tax”
Who benefits from Bitcoin? Not savvy customers who would otherwise pay by credit card with cashback or loyalty points. I sketch the arithmetic in today’s post.
Consumers Pay More when They Pay with Bitcoin. PYMNTS.COM, May 20, 2014.
Complaint. Answer. Docket and public comments.
Status: Consent order. $10,000 penalty.
Summary: mischaracterizing surcharges as “tax”
Complaint. Answer and supplemental submission. Docket and public comments.
Status: Dismissal.
Summary: mischaracterizing surcharges as “tax”
Complaint. Answer. Edelman Reply. Air Europa Motion to Strike. Docket and public comments.
Status: Consent order. $100,000 penalty.
Summary: mischaracterizing surcharges as “tax”
Complaint. Answer. Docket and public comments.
Status: Consent order. $65,000 penalty. (Consolidated with complaints from two other passengers)
Summary: price advertising violations including mischaracterizing surcharges as “tax”
Air travel tickets often include surprisingly large amounts described as “tax.” In one round trip New York-Paris ticket we quoted in January 2012, the fare was listed as $230 while “tax” was listed as $598.14 — fully 72% of the listed total. If government taxes were actually as large as Air France claims, many passengers might want to complain to responsible politicians and regulators. And passengers might have a different view of cramped seating, unpalatable food, or other service shortfalls on a $230 ticket versus a $828.14 ticket. But in fact, specifically contrary to Air France’s characterization of $598.14 as “tax,” the majority of the “tax” was not charged by any government, airport, or similar authority, and rather was retained by Air France to defray its ordinary operating expenses.
Our investigation uncovers a variety of examples in which airlines have mischaracterized various surcharges as “tax” and otherwise failed to satisfy applicable price advertising regulation. We present proof in both screenshots and recorded telephone calls, preserving clear records of carriers’ misrepresentations. Details:
Misrepresentation of Fuel Surcharges in Airline Price Advertising
Complaint. Answer. Edelman Reply. American Surreply. Edelman supplemental filing. American response and supplemental response. Docket and public comments.
Status: Consent order. $60,000 penalty.
Summary: price advertising violations including mischaracterizing surcharges as “tax”
Complaint. Answer and Oneworld answers to questions. Docket and public comments.
Status: Consent order.
Summary: mischaracterizing surcharges as “tax”