Consumer News: Fitbit to pay $12 million for failing to report burn injuries

But affordability continues to be the wild card

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Experts expect U.S. mortgage rates to remain largely above 6% through 2026, with only modest declines compared with 2025.

• Economic uncertainty and Treasury yields not just Federal Reserve policy will heavily influence how far and fast rates fall.

• Regional and market differences mean some buyers could see affordability improve faster than others.

As 2026 gets underway, the outlook for U.S. mortgage rates points to a year of relative stabilization rather than dramatic decline, economists and industry analysts say. After the long climb to historically high levels in recent years, most forecasts suggest the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate will cluster around the low 6% range, offering modest relief compared with recent peaks but not a return to pandemic-era lows.

Major forecasting agencies, including Fannie Mae, the National Association of Realtors (NAR), and the Mortgage Bankers Association, project 2026 rates averaging roughly 6.0%6.3% only slightly below where they stood at the start of the year. Some scenarios envision rates dipping just below 6% by years end if inflation continues to cool and market conditions remain favorable.

Whats driving the rate outlook

Mortgage rates dont move in lockstep with Federal Reserve policy, and experts caution against assuming that Fed rate cuts alone will bring deep decreases. Instead, long-term Treasury yields which mortgage rates tend to follow and broader economic signals like inflation and job growth will be central to rate behavior in 2026.

If you find the right home and can afford the monthly payments, you should take the opportunity in front of you, Greg Schwartz, CEO of Tomo Mortgage, told Forbes. If rates decline, competition will increase. More buyers will reenter the market, sellers will regain leverage, and prices will follow.

Affordability still an issue

A key silver lining for homebuyers is that even modest rate declines could improve affordability especially when combined with slower home price growth and rising incomes, forecasts suggest. Some housing market analysts foresee that monthly mortgage payments could become measurably more manageable compared with previous years, even if rates stay above 6%.

Regional disparities are also expected. Markets with higher inventory and slower price growth might see sharper improvements in buyer access and affordability than high-demand urban areas.

Market reactions and volatility

Although the broader trend points toward a relatively stable 2026, short-term volatility remains possible. Recent movements in mortgage rates have shown the impact of political, economic, and global influences: markets briefly saw rates dip below 6% after major mortgage-backed securities purchases, but they have also climbed in response to geopolitical and financial developments.

For prospective homebuyers and those considering refinancing this year, the message from experts is one of measured optimism. Rates are likely to remain elevated by historical standards meaning borrowing costs wont fall back to ultra-low levels but are also unlikely to spike sharply higher absent unexpected economic stress.

As a result, buyers may find more manageable mortgage costs in 2026 compared with the last two years, especially if they lock in rates and dont wait for a rate trough that may never arrive.

The move is designed to increase supply for homebuyers and lower prices

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• President Trump signed an executive order aimed at blocking private equity firms from purchasing single-family homes, framing the move as a way to ease housing costs for families.

• The order directs federal regulators to redefine large-scale investor activity in residential housing and restrict access to federally backed financing for such purchases.

• Industry groups warned the measure could disrupt rental markets, while housing advocates praised it as a long-awaited intervention.

Investors have always purchased homes as rental property to provide an extra income stream. But the practice went into overdrive during the 2009-10 housing market crash, when foreclosures flooded the market with cheap single-family homes.

Private equity firms moved in with cash and scooped up many of the homes, effectively taking them off the market and keeping home prices high. Now, thats about to change.

President Donald Trump has signed a sweeping executive order banning private equity firms and other large institutional investors from buying single-family homes, a move the White House said is designed to curb rising housing costs and restore access to homeownership for middle-class Americans.

The order directs the Treasury Department, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to take coordinated action to prevent private equity firms from acquiring single-family homes. Among other steps, the administration will bar such firms from using federally backed mortgages, restrict bulk purchases of homes financed through government-linked programs, and require enhanced disclosure of residential real estate holdings by large investment entities.

New data reveal the market is already shifting back to favoring buyers.There were an estimated 47.1% more home sellers than buyers in the U.S. housing market in December (or 631,535 more, in numerical terms)the largest gap in records dating back to 2013, according to real estate broker Redfin.Thats up 7.1 percentage points from a month earlierthe largest monthly increase since September 2022and up 22.2 percentage points from a year earlier.

Small landlords not affected

Administration officials said the policy is narrowly targeted at large-scale investors and does not apply to small landlords or individuals who own a limited number of rental properties. The White House also emphasized that the order would not force firms to sell existing holdings, though it encourages agencies to study incentives for divestment over time.

Housing advocates applauded the announcement, saying institutional investors have distorted local markets, particularly in fast-growing metropolitan areas. However, the private equity industry reacted sharply.

Trade groups warned that restricting investor participation could reduce the supply of rental housing and lead to higher rents, especially in communities where homeownership rates are already low.

Economists were divided on the likely impact. Some said the order could modestly increase housing availability for first-time buyers, while others cautioned that broader affordability problems including limited new construction and high interest rates would remain unresolved.

The executive order takes effect immediately, though legal challenges are widely expected.

Similar to the VW "Dieselgate" scandal, it's a black eye for Benz.

Mercedes-Benz will pay a $150 million settlement for concealing emission-cheating devices on its cars and trucks. Consumers who owned one of the affected models will get $2,000 each.

In the settlement with 48states and two U.S. territories, prosecutors said that Mercedes manufactured, marketed,advertisedand distributed nationwide more than 211,000 diesel passenger cars and vans equipped with software defeat devices thatoptimizedemission controls during emissions tests, while reducing those controls outside of normal operations.

The states allege the defeat devices enabled vehicles to farexceedmanylegallimits of nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions, a harmful pollutant that causes respiratory illness and contributes to the formation of smog. Mercedes allegedly engaged in this conduct to achieve design and performance goals, such as increased fuel efficiency and reduced maintenance, that it was unable to meet whilecomplying withapplicable emission standards.

Mercedes concealed the existence of these defeat devices from state and federal regulators and the public. At the same time, Mercedes marketed the vehicles to consumers as environmentally-friendly and in compliance with applicable emissions regulations.

Time to pay up

Thesettlement requires Mercedes-Benz to pay $120 million to the statesimmediatelyupon the effective date of the settlement. Anadditional$29,673,750 will be suspended and potentially waived pending completion of a comprehensive consumer relief program.

The consumer relief program extends to the estimated 39,565 vehicles,which as of Aug.1, 2023,had not been repaired or permanently removed from the road in the United States. Mercedes must bear the cost of installing approved emission modification software on each of theaffected vehicles. The company must provide consumers with an extended warranty and will pay consumers $2,000 per subject vehicle.

The company must alsocomply withreporting requirements and reforms toitspractices, including a prohibition on any further engagement in unfair or deceptive marketing or sale of diesel vehicles, misrepresentationsregardingemissions and compliance.

Todays settlement follows similar settlements reached previously between the states and Volkswagen, FiatChryslerand German engineering company Robert Bosch GmbH over its development of the cheat software. Automaker Fiat Chrysler and its subsidiaries paid $72.5 million to the states in 2019. Bosch paid $98.7 million in 2019. Volkswagen reached a $570 million settlement with the states in 2016.

Read the complainthereand the judgementhere.

New warnings link low drink prices to rising chronic disease worldwide

• The World Health Organization says alcohol and sugary drinks are getting too cheap, and thats bad for public health.

• WHO wants governments to significantly raise and redesign taxes to make these drinks less affordable and reduce disease.

• Higher taxes can improve health and raise money for health services, helping prevent obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and injuries.

Sugary drinks and alcoholic beverages might seem like everyday treats, but according to a new announcement by the World Health Organization (WHO), their low prices are doing more harm than youd think.

The WHO recently released global reports showing that cheap sodas, sweet drinks, and alcohol are contributing to rising rates of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, some cancers, and injury especially among young people.

The reason? In most countries, taxes on these products are too low or poorly designed to keep up with inflation and income growth, so theyve become more affordable over time and that encourages people to drink more.

Health taxes are one of the strongest tools we have for promoting health and preventing disease," Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General, said in a news release.

"By increasing taxes on products like tobacco, sugary drinks, and alcohol, governments can reduce harmful consumption and unlock funds for vital health services.

What WHO is recommending and why it matters

The WHO isnt just pointing fingers its offering a solution. Its reports call for governments to raise and rethink taxes on alcohol and sugary drinks, so their prices reflect the real cost they impose on health systems and communities.

Here are some of the issues the WHO highlighted:

• Many harmful drinks escape taxation: While sodas are often taxed in about 116 countries, other high-sugar products such as fruit juices, sweetened milks, and ready-to-drink coffees often arent. That means people can swap to these options without a tax penalty.

• Alcohol remains too cheap in many places: Even though around 167 countries tax alcoholic beverages, taxes often havent kept pace with the cost of living or incomes. Wine, for instance, isnt taxed at all in some countries.

• Low taxes mean more consumption: And more consumption is linked with preventable diseases and injuries that burden families and health systems alike.

What consumers need to know (and do)

So, what does this mean for consumers?

• Prices may rise:If your country adopts stronger health taxes, you could see higher prices on soda, sweetened drinks and alcohol in the coming years. Thats partly the point costing more can help curb overconsumption.

• Health benefits may follow:Higher prices have been linked with lower consumption and better health outcomes in places that have tried similar taxes.

• Awareness matters: Knowing how your government taxes these products can empower you to support policies that promote public health or make informed choices about how much and how often you indulge.

In short: this isnt just about prices at the checkout. Its about shaping habits and protecting health one tax at a time.

Experts share how to spot risks, set limits, and guide teens toward healthier tech use

• Experts say chatbots can support learning and creativity, but relying on them for emotional support or advice can pose risks for teens mental health and development.

• Warning signs of problematic AI use include emotional reliance on chatbots, distress when access is limited, and pulling away from real-world relationships.

• Clear limits, open conversations, and encouraging offline relationships help teens build a healthier relationship with AIwithout fear or overreaction.

For todays teens, turning to an AI chatbot for answers or even comfort can feel as natural as texting a friend. But for parents, the rise of AI as a source of advice and companionship brings understandable concerns about emotional development, mental health, and online safety.

While AI tools can offer convenience and support, experts warn that unchecked use may sometimes do more harm than good. Thats especially true if teens begin relying on chatbots instead of trusted adults, friends, or mental health professionals.

To help parents make sense of it all, ConsumerAffairs spoke with Adam Chekroud, co-founder and president of Spring Health, and Alvin McLean, dean of the JFK School of Psychology and Social Sciences at National University. They share expert-backed guidance on how parents can stay involved, recognize red flags, and help teens build a healthier relationship with AI without fear or overreaction.

Risks of asking AI for advice

The experts shared some of the top risks associated with teens using AI for advice or companionship:

• Mistaking AI-generated responses for legitimate clinical guidance

• Becoming overly reliant on chatbots for validation or support using them as a substitute for human connection or professional care

• Eroding trust in professional mental health care

Because chatbots are always available and nonjudgmental, they can unintentionally reinforce avoidance of difficult emotions or conversations, McLean explained. There is also the risk of misinformation, oversimplified advice, or responses that lack nuance around mental health, relationships, or self harm, which can be especially harmful for adolescents who are still developing critical thinking skills and emotional regulation.

Confusing AI tools with therapists also raises privacy concerns, increases the likelihood of missed clinical red flags, and can erode trust in professional mental health care over time, Chekroud continued.

Is there healthy AI use?

The short answer: yes.

Healthy use looks curious and functional, such as asking questions, brainstorming ideas, or using AI for schoolwork or creativity, McLean said.

Healthy exploration of AI occurs when teens use it to satisfy curiosity, support learning, or gather information and can question, explain, or fact-check the responses they receive, Chekroud said. In these cases, AI is one tool among many, not a primary source of guidance or emotional support.

Signs of problematic use

On the other hand, parents should know the signs of problematic AI use to look for:

• Secrecy about AI use

• Excessive time spent chatting

• Emotional attachment to the chatbot

• Distress when access is limited

• Relying on AI for reassurance, advice, or connection they would typically seek from people

• Increased isolation

• Reduced interest in real-world relationships

• Noticeable changes in mood or behavior

Warning signs can include withdrawal from friends or family, using the chatbot as a primary source of advice for personal or emotional issues, or expressing that the AI understands me better than people do, McLean said.

Setting boundaries around AI use

The experts agree that its important for parents to set boundaries and limits around their kids AI use, highlighting that AI is not a substitute for human connection.

Parents should set clear expectations around when, why, and how AI tools are used by their children, McLean said. This can include time limits, device-free periods, and guidelines that AI should not be used for mental health advice, relationship decisions, or crisis support.

Teens are still developing judgment and may interpret AI-generated responses as facts or truth, Chekroud said. Reinforcing that AI is a supplementnot a replacementfor human connection, trusted adults, or professional care helps reduce the risk of emotional reliance and misuse.

Life outside of chatbots

One of the biggest pieces of advice for parents: reinforce to kids that there is life outside of AI chatbots.

Encouraging extracurricular activities, shared family time, and in person social experiences helps reinforce that meaningful connection comes from human interaction, McLean said. Modeling balanced technology use and having regular conversations about emotions, stress, and decision-making also reduces the likelihood that teens will turn to AI as their primary outlet.

Another tip from Chekroud: normalize awkwardness.

Teens often turn to AI because it feels safer than being vulnerable with people, he said.Parents can reinforce that awkwardness is part of learning and growth, not a sign of failure.