But how well do the leading complaint websites themselves work? On Monday, an old-fashioned bricks-and-mortar organization, the Consumer Federation of America, delivered a mixed verdict: The best sites are great for helping consumers voice irritation, but not so great for helping them address it.

Stephen Brobeck, the federation’s executive director, said the group decided to examine more than a dozen complaint websites, in part because they show up so frequently in Web searches.

Not very long ago, aggrieved consumers had few options beyond griping to friends or relatives, filing a complaint with the Better Business Bureau or state attorney general, or suing, Brobeck said. Now, sites such as My3cents, Complaints Board, and Ripoff Report, offer an alternative.

Though some sites, such as My3cents, offer consumers the chance to post positive comments, the sites have special appeal to the disgruntled.

“They’re unhappy, and they want to vent,” Brobeck said. “And this is a very low-cost way to vent, with potentially high impact.”

Susan Grant, the federation’s director of consumer protection, said the best sites could help potential customers of the large, national companies most likely to appear in the sites’ databases.

She said a lack of complaints should not be seen as any sort of guarantee. “But if there are lots of complaints, and lots of complaints about particular kinds of problems, that’s a good indicator to consumers that they may want to look elsewhere for their purchases,” Grant said.

Grant said the sites could also prove useful because consumers sometimes shared stories about how they ultimately solved a problem.

The consumer advice line managed by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) received 50,790 calls and e-mails complaining about second-hand cars last year, 8 per cent more than 2008’s 47,026 complaints. Complaints mostly related to defective vehicles and services as well as potentially misleading selling.

The continuous high level of complaints about used cars prompted the OFT to launch a study into the second-hand motor market in May last year. The study is considering whether car buyers are being sufficiently and effectively protected from dodgy dealers. Full results are expected to be published in the spring.

After used-cars, problem televisions were the second most popular gripe, with Consumer Direct receiving 22,184 complaints, an increase of 9 per cent on 2008. This was closely followed by complaints about mobile phone service agreements.
Out of the top ten most complained about goods and services, laptops saw the biggest increase on 2008 – of 42 per cent.

In total Consumer Direct recorded 1.5 million calls and e-mails in 2009, the majority of which criticised traders.

David Fisher, director of Consumer Direct,said: “While total complaint levels dropped slightly in 2009, complaints about some goods such as laptops and TVs rose significantly. In some cases this may reflect growing sales for particular products rather than a higher percentage of faulty goods or services.”

New York, NY (NewYorkInjuryNews.com) –The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) www.fda.gov has announced that McNeil Consumer Healthcare’s Johnson & Johnson unit should have taken action to recall Tylenol and other over-the-counter products after filed complaints of a strange smell of the product, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The FDA’s office of compliance sent the company a letter informing them of the violation of agency reporting rules and manufacturing practice rules. Consumers had been complaining about a mildew, moldy smell coming from the products in September 2008, and the agency did not begin a full investigation into the problem or report the complaints to the FDA until September 2009.
Friday, January 15, 2009, McNeil Consumer Healthcare expanded the recall to more than just Tylenol, but also recalled several other products such as Benadryl, Motrin, St. Joseph’s Aspirin. There were also complaints of musty-smelling Rolaids. There were consumer reports of nausea and temporal stomach issues due to use of the medication.

Investigations revealed that the moldy smell was linked to traces of a chemical that is applied to wood pallets used to ship the products. The company first recalled the Tylenol products in November 2009, simultaneously; the FDA was inspecting one of the agency’s plant in Puerto Rico. The FDA reported that, with the expanded recall, there were 50 million bottles recalled. It was noted that in 2009, Tylenol made up about $1 million in sales across the country. A report released by company, which stated that it failed to test if the Tylenol was contaminated, even after numerous consumer complaints.

Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray said 30,259 consumer complaints were logged last year, up from about 24,000 complaints in 2008. The largest share of complaints came from consumers who bought a vehicle or repair services, followed by complaints against debt collection and credit reporting companies and home-improvement firms.

Kim Kowalski, a spokeswoman for Cordray’s office, said 37 lawsuits filed by the state against companies last year over alleged violations of consumer protection laws brought in $4.1 million in customer restitution, civil penalties and other relief. Resolutions with companies that didn’t go to court totaled an additional $2.8 million.

The nearly $7 million generated in Cordray’s first year as attorney general represented half of the $14 million netted in 2008. That year marked the resignation of Attorney General Marc Dann amid a sexual harassment scandal and his temporary replacement by Nancy Rogers, law school dean at Ohio State University. Kowalski said 2008’s total included a number of big-ticket, multi-state pharmaceutical settlements, netting Ohio about $9 million.

Litigation efforts in 2009, she said, focused more on complaints that didn’t involve large amounts of restitution, such as phony debt collection scams

As of mid December 2009, the Council said it had received 2,300 complaints from consumers who felt their rights were abused by service operators in different sectors – a wide leap from the less than 1,200 it received in 2008.

Yet, the total amount of such reports of violations for the whole year becomes insignificant when compared with the “millions of abused Nigerians” which the council acknowledges exist; “many of whom are in the grassroots.”

The Director General, Ify Umenyi, said the council opened new offices in all the zones during the year and that this helped improve consumers’ closeness with the council. It also plans several response centres in all the 774 local governments.
“Can one make complaints on every of such case in a place where you are almost sure nothing will come out from?” But the council believes the almost double record of complaints in 2009 reflected the impact of the new regional offices built in Bauchi, Awka, Katsina, Port Harcourt and Oshogbo and hopes the installed lines will improve on thatfor 2010.

“Besides physical presence, aggrieved customers can exploit the services of our new call contact center by dialing the vanity number -0700-call-cpc,” Ms. Umenyi said.

Many of the 2300 complaints during the year dwelt on adulterated consumer products, disparity between advertised and selling prices, alleged maltreatment by airline companies, excessive phone charges and calls dropping.

“About 85% of the complaints were resolved during thirty mediation meetings,” Ms. Umenyi said.

Toyota and Lexus vehicles received 41% of all consumer complaints to a federal database about runaway acceleration, more than Chrysler, General Motors, Honda and Nissan combined, analysis by Consumer Reports found. Other than Toyota, the only automaker with double-digit rates of complaints was Ford, which was the subject of 28% of complaints.

Chrysler’s 2008 model-year vehicles received 9% of complaints and GM’s 5%; Honda had 4% of complaints and Nissan 2%, the study showed.
Toyota’s share of the U.S. market in 2007 and 2008, when 2008 model-year cars were sold, was roughly 16%.

Toyota could not immediately be reached for comment.

Toyota has been the subject of increasing scrutiny over sudden acceleration in the wake of an August accident in an an out-of-control Lexus ES outside of San Diego that took four lives, including that of an off-duty California Highway Patrolman.

That prompted Toyota to announce its largest-ever recall, of 4.26 million vehicles in the U.S. and Canada. Starting in January, the automaker will modify or replace accelerator pedals in seven Toyota and Lexus models, alter carpeting in some models and install new safety software. The recall includes vehicles from the 2005 through 2010 model years.

Toyota has repeatedly blamed interaction between the gas pedal and floor mats that could cause the pedal to become entrapped in a full-throttle position. But investigations into a number of accidents, including the San Diego county crash, have not conclusively found that the floor mat was responsible.
A Times review found that 19 people had died in sudden-acceleration accidents involving Toyota vehicles since the 2002 model year, more than all other automakers combined. In addition, The Times found that complaints of sudden acceleration increased dramatically after the automaker began replacing mechanical throttles with electronic throttle systems in the 2002 model year.

On Friday, the San Diego sheriff released a report on its three-month investigation into the Aug. 28 wreck, finding that “additional factors causing a sudden acceleration event (re: electrical, mechanical or computer generated) should not be ruled out.”

Consumer Reports limited its research to acceleration incidents that “could be a real dangerous safety issue,” excluding low-speed events or ones where the vehicle movement was arrested before the problem became more serious, according to Bartlett.

In addition, Consumer Reports excluded incidents that were reported after the San Diego crash to eliminate any spikes in complaints that could have been caused by publicity.

The remaining data, Bartlett said, indicated that Toyota was not the only automaker to receive unintended-acceleration complaints, since Ford also registered a higher number. The Ford complaints, however, were mostly limited to one model, the F-150 pickup, while Toyota complaints fell across a wide spectrum of vehicles, including ones not in the current recall.

The most common reasons for complaints to the department included denial of claims, claims delays, and unsatisfactory offers. The department recorded the most complaints in the following types of insurance: auto, group health, individual health and homeowners.

Some of the highest amount claims recovered were:

•Earlier this year a family of nine from southwest Missouri filed a complaint against their homeowners insurance company regarding a tornado loss that left them in a hotel room for over a month. After the department’s involvement, the family received a final recovery from the insurer of nearly $278,000.

•After being denied coverage for treatment of lymphoma, a consumer filed a complaint with the department. After mediation by the department, the insurance company overturned the denial and approved the procedure, which cost more than $250,000.

•After purchasing life insurance with the proceeds of her late husband’s life policy, a consumer complained that her new policy did not include the benefits she had been promised. After the department’s involvement, the consumer’s policy was re-written and her insurance company returned $109,846 to her.
In the first nine months of 2009, the department fielded almost 4,200 formal complaints and assisted nearly 3,000 consumers in writing and another 21,000 over the telephone.

The top categories of complaints were as follows:
By reason

•Denial of claim
•Delay of claim processing
•Unsatisfactory settlement offer
•Claim handling

By line of insurance

•Private passenger auto
•Group health
•Individual accident and health
•Homeowners

The state Public Utility Commission said it doesn’t know how many operate in Texas because it doesn’t classify companies by business model. Unofficial estimates indicate the companies serve as many as 100,000 customers, The Dallas Morning News reported.

Consumer protection rules do not address the unconventional business model that prepaid electric companies use, but Texas utility commissioners — intent on spurring competition — still licensed them.

Complaints about the companies are rampant, including concerns that poor, sick and disabled customers have found themselves without air conditioning. Some people said they were forced out of their homes or ended up skipping necessary medicine because of the bill.
The companies, which charge customers in advance based on estimated usage, are a type of subprime provider that popped up after Texas deregulated its electricity market in 1999 and allowed customers to start choosing their providers in 2002.

Some firms charge as much as 50 percent more than traditional companies to people who lack credit or money for deposits. And quick cutoffs are a constant threat.

Prepaid opeThe PUC has not involuntarily revoked a single operating company’s license even though consumer complaints against all types of electricity providers are on the rise. Staff recommendations for stiff penalties have been withdrawn. Instead, the PUC has backed negotiated settlements.

Randy Chapman, executive director of the Texas Legal Services Center in Austin, said a prepaid customer can be snared in a cycle of rising charges with few options.

“For a life-essential product,” he said, “I don’t think there should be traps.”

Though prepaid companies now target Texas’ poorest residents, similar products could be offered to millions of consumers within a few years.
rators say they offer power to people who might not be able to obtain it otherwise. Higher rates reflect the risk to the company that customers will use more electricity than they paid for, they say.

Rules introduced by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) mean lenders must revisit about 185,000 cases of consumers who have unsuccessfully complained about cover bought alongside unsecured loans since 1 July 2007, and compensate any they find have been mis-sold policies. If the review reveals widespread problems they could be forced to reopen cases going back to 2005 when the FSA took on the regulation of general insurance.

Single premium PPI, which is designed to cover loan repayments if a borrower falls ill or is made unemployed, was heavily criticised by the Competition Commission which said consumers were paying over the odds for policies they were often unable to claim on. The policies are sold at the same time as loans and often add to the overall balance, which means they attract interest. They also tend to be very costly to cancel.
The watchdog said firms had been acting in a “wholesale” manner – rejecting complaints and waiting for consumers to take them to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) before offering payouts – when they should have been looking at cases on an individual basis.

On average the firms have rejected around 60% of the PPI complaints they have received, although some have rejected nearly 100%. Of the 16% of complaints which go on to the FOS, around one in 10 result in the consumer’s favour. This is against an average of 50% across all financial products.

The FSA’s managing director of retail markets, Jon Pain, said: “The outcome of a complaint about a PPI sale should not depend on whether or not the complainant persists past the firm on to the FOS.
“This is the last chance for the industry to show that it can act fairly, consistently and in the best interest of consumers on PPI. All firms operating in this sector should take note and where necessary get their house in order. Where we find questionable practices in sales or complaint handling, firms can expect that we will take action.”
The Financial Services Consumer Panel welcomed the move but said the FSA needed to do more to help PPI customers. The group’s chairman, Adam Phillips, said: “This action has taken a long time, and the FSA still needs to tackle PPI sold with credit cards, secured loans and mortgages where people may not have complained.

“We also still await FSA enforcement action against individuals in some of the bigger players who were responsible for the mis-selling of PPI.”

The consumer group Which? said it hoped lenders would not attempt to exploit the rules to get out of paying adequate compensation. It added that complaints from consumers that had resulted in small pay outs should also be reviewed.

But if you’ve ever had a beef with a contractor, wanted to check the complaint record of the company offering you a cut-rate homeowner insurance policy, wondered how to escalate your problem with the local electric company or couldn’t get the installer to come back to take a look at your new but balky furnace, Uncle Sam really is here to help.

Just off the presses, the 30th edition of the Consumer Action Handbook from the General Service Administration’s Office of Citizen Services and Communication is chock-full of goodies for aggravated citizens who don’t know how or where to complain.
Even the savviest consumer has an issue from time to time with a product or service. But those who remain calm, maintain an even keel and pursue their grievances quietly but firmly are the ones who turn lemons into lemonade.

As the Consumer Action Handbook points out, the first step in resolving a problem is to contact the seller. Not only do you have a right to gripe, you have a responsibility. A problem can’t be corrected if no one knows about it. Do it as soon as possible. Don’t let that leaky connection go until more damage is done. And don’t stew until the problem has become larger than it really is.

If your issue is settled on the first call, you’re better off than most people. But if you are not satisfied, ask to speak to a supervisor or manager. And keep going up the ladder — to national headquarters or the manufacturer, if necessary — until you reach someone who will listen to your tale of woe.

If a home builder is a national outfit, for example, and the local office is apathetic to the fact that your bathroom tile is cracked, by all means, go to the next level.

If you are dealing with a manufacturing defect — say, the ice maker in your fancy new refrigerator keeps freezing up — realize that many companies have special customer service offices whose primary function is to solve such issues. The directory portion of the Consumer Action Handbook has listings for several hundred firms, or you can visit a company’s website, where you can click on the “contact us” link.

Each time you make a contact, keep a record of the date and time, and write down the name and phone number of the person with whom you spoke. Also take notes, recording your recollection of whatever was discussed, the solutions discussed and the offers, if any, that were made. Similarly, keep copies of all e-mails.

Type up your notes so that they are legible, and follow up with the person to whom you spoke with a letter that reinforces your position and states what actions you expect the company to take. But be reasonable. The maker may be willing to send someone out to re-stretch the rugs in your living room, but it cannot be expected to replace the set of dishes that broke when you tripped over the hump left by the original installer.

“Your letter should be brief and to the point,” the consumer handbook advises. “State exactly what you want done about the problem and how long you are willing to wait for a response. Don’t write an angry, sarcastic or threatening letter. The person reading your letter probably wasn’t responsible for your problem, but could be very helpful in resolving it.”

If, after you have given the company a reasonable amount of time to respond to your complaint, you are still not placated, consider filing a grievance against it.

Most people know they can file a complaint with their Better Business Bureau and the state or local consumer protection office. But as the consumer handbook points out, you also can take your problem to the state or federal agency that regulates that business.

Real estate brokers, for example, answer to state real estate commissions, and builders and remodeling contractors are often licensed by agencies that sometimes have systems in place to help consumers resolve their problems. Problem lenders can be reported too.

Politicians are another great resource, and so are local media outlets. Many state and local elected officials are able to help their constituents. Newspapers, radio stations and television stations are often interested in stories in which consumers are harmed, particularly if they are hoodwinked. Some still have action-line or hotline services.

Even national consumer groups may be able to help. If they can’t assist on specific complaints, maybe they are interested in hearing about issues that could influence their educational efforts or might become the focus of one of their advocacy programs.

Still not satisfied? Try to find out whether the company in question belongs to an industry trade association. Many associations have dispute systems in place for helping consumers resolve problems with their members.

Maybe the company will submit to conciliation, mediation or arbitration, in which a neutral third party meets with both sides in an effort to figure out an acceptable solution. If so, the handbook advises that you obtain a copy of the rules beforehand so you will know whether the decision is binding or whether participation places any restrictions on your ability to take legal action