Consumer News: Mortgage rates eased again this week

Most children experience big improvements in a clinical trial

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• First FDA-approved gene therapy for hearing loss targets a rare inherited form of deafness

• Treatment restored hearing in most children in trials, with some detecting whispers

• Breakthrough could open door to broader genetic hearing-loss treatments

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved the first-ever gene therapy to treat a rare form of genetic hearing loss, marking an advancement for both hearing research and the rapidly advancing field of genetic medicine.

The newly authorized therapy, developed by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, is designed for children born deaf due to mutations in a gene critical for transmitting sound signals from the ear to the brain.

The treatment works by delivering a functional copy of the faulty gene directly into the inner ear, enabling hair cells to produce a protein necessary for hearing. Without that protein, sound cannot be effectively relayed to the brain.

Clinical results show dramatic improvements

In clinical trials, the therapy demonstrated significant results: 11 of 12 children treated experienced meaningful improvements in hearing, and some were able to detect soft sounds such as whispers.

The improvements were often rapid, appearing within weeks of treatment, and in some cases allowed children to begin developing speech after previously being unable to hear.

Todays approval is a significant milestone in the treatment of genetic hearing loss, said FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary.

Through the national priority voucher pilot program, the agency is accelerating therapies for rare diseases with unmet medical needs while proving we can successfully review even the most complex submissionssuch as novel dual vector gene therapies and combination products requiring coordination across multiple offices and centersin significantly shortened timeframes.

Researchers say the results challenge long-held assumptions about the limits of treatment. While earlier thinking suggested gene therapy would only work in very young children, the trial included teenagers who also showed hearing gains.

A rare condition but broader implications

The therapy targets hearing loss caused by mutations in the OTOF gene, a rare condition affecting an estimated 20 to 50 newborns in the United States each year.

Still, scientists and regulators see broader implications. Genetic causes account for roughly half of all hearing loss cases, and researchers are already exploring whether similar approaches could treat other forms of deafness.

Recent studies outside the U.S. have reinforced that promise. In one large international trial, about 90% of participants with inherited deafness showed significant hearing improvement after gene therapy, including some who achieved near-normal hearing.

Fast-tracked under FDA priority program

The therapys approval was accelerated under the FDAs Commissioners National Priority Voucher program, which is designed to speed review of treatments addressing urgent unmet medical needs.

The program can compress the typical review timeline from up to a year to just a few months, reflecting the agencys increasing emphasis on breakthrough therapies.

Gene therapy has long been viewed as a potential way to treat diseases at their root cause by correcting faulty genes rather than managing symptoms. However, until now, no gene therapies had been approved specifically for hearing disorders.

Regeneron has indicated it plans to continue studying the therapy and explore its use in additional forms of genetic hearing loss. Meanwhile, researchers are working to refine gene-delivery methods and expand treatment to more common types of deafness.

For families affected by rare genetic hearing disorders, the approval offers something that until recently seemed out of reach: the possibility of restoring hearing, not just managing its loss.

Eligible consumers will be compensated automatically

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• A federal judge has granted final approval to a $425 million Capital One settlement tied to its 360 Savings accounts.

• Millions of current and former customers will receive compensation automaticallyno claim form is required.

• Consumers should still verify their account and contact details to avoid delays in receiving payment.

A federal court has given final approval to a $425 million class-action settlement resolving claims that Capital One misled customers about interest rates on its 360 Savings accounts, clearing the way for payments to begin later this year.

The ruling, issued by a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, follows years of litigation alleging the bank failed to raise rates on older 360 Savings accounts while offering significantly higher yields on similarly named 360 Performance Savings accounts.

What the lawsuit alleged

Plaintiffs claimed Capital One marketed its 360 Savings accounts as high-yield while quietly maintaining much lower interest rates than newer accounts, causing customers to miss out on substantial earnings.

The bank denied wrongdoing but agreed to settle, with the revised deal increasing the total payout to $425 million and adding provisions to align interest rates going forward.

Who is eligible for compensation

The settlement covers consumers who held a Capital One 360 Savings account at any point between September 18, 2019, and June 16, 2025.

Both current and former account holders are included, with payments based on factors such as account balance and how long the account was open.

Unlike many class-action settlements, most eligible consumers do not need to file a claim to receive compensation. Payments will be issued automatically using Capital Ones records.

However, there are still a few key steps consumers should take:

Check your eligibility
Log in to your Capital One account or review past statements to confirm you held a 360 Savings account during the covered period.

Make sure your contact information is current
Payments may be sent by check or electronically, so an outdated mailing address or payment preference could delay delivery.

Watch for official communications
Settlement administrators may send notices or updates, including payment timing or instructions. Ignoring these could lead to missed payments.

Be aware of deadlines that have already passed
The deadline to select electronic payment or update details was March 30, 2026, meaning consumers who did not act may receive payment by check if eligible.

When payments will arrive

If there are no appeals, payments are expected to begin around July 2026, though timing may vary depending on processing and verification.

With final approval now secured, the Capital One 360 Savings settlement is moving into the payout phase. While no claim is required, consumers should take simple stepslike confirming account details and watching for updatesto ensure they receive any money theyre owed.

The average repair bill is now about $415

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• U.S. drivers are facing record-high check engine repair costs driven largely by aging vehicles

• The most common repairreplacing a catalytic convertercan cost more than $1,300

• Average vehicle age has reached a record 12.6 years, increasing the likelihood of expensive fixes

When the check engine light comes on, do you ignore it or take your vehicleto a mechanic? The data suggest its mostly the former, not the latter.

Americans are paying more than ever to fix check engine light problems as the nations vehicle fleet continues to age, according to a new CarMD report.

The companys latest Vehicle Health Index, based on more than 31 million diagnostic records, found that older cars are driving a rise in costly repairs, even as some overall average costs fluctuate.

Americas vehicle fleet is getting older

The average age of vehicles on U.S. roads has climbed to a record 12.6 years, a trend that is contributing to more frequent and expensive repairs. As cars get older, major components wear out, increasing the likelihood of high-ticket fixes tied to check engine warnings.

"Keeping up with routine maintenance and addressing dashboard warning lights early are two simple ways to help keep your vehicle running safely and efficiently as it ages," said David Rich, CarMD vice president of automotive technology. "Even small issues can reduce fuel economy, which is something drivers are paying close attention to as gas prices rise."

Among the most commonand costlyrepairs is replacing a catalytic converter, which now averages about $1,348 including parts and labor. That repair typically affects older or poorly maintained vehicles and often stems from unresolved issues such as faulty spark plugs or oxygen sensors.

Other frequent repairs include replacing oxygen sensors (about $254), ignition coils and spark plugs (around $400), and mass air flow sensors (about $323). At the lower end, some issueslike a loose gas capcan cost little or nothing to fix if addressed early.

Heres a list of some average repair costs, according to CarMD:

1. Catalytic Converter, $1,511

2. Oxygen (O) Sensor, $287

3. Ignition Coil & Spark Plug(s), $480

4. Mass Air Flow (MAF) Sensor Replacement, $346

5. Ignition Coil, $256

6. EVAP Canister Purge Control Valve, $172

7. Fuel Injector(s), $572

8. ABS Wheel Speed Sensor, $314

9. Thermostat, $324

10. Spark Plug(s), $299

The average repair costs $415

Despite the rise in expensive individual repairs, overall average check engine-related repair costs declined slightly in the most recent data, falling about 3% to roughly $415. The drop was largely driven by a 5% decrease in parts prices, though labor costs increased by about 1.4% due to more complex and time-consuming repairs.

CarMD analysts say the growing complexity of modern vehicles is also contributing to higher labor costs, as technicians require more time and expertise to diagnose and fix problems.

The report warns that costs could climb again if tariffs or supply chain pressures push parts prices higher.

Automotive experts emphasize that ignoring a check engine light can lead to more severe and more expensive problems. Addressing issues early, they say, remains the best way for drivers to avoid escalating repair bills as vehicles continue to age.

A new survey finds a lot of skepticism

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Only 2% of consumers say they would buy from an AI-recommended brand without researching it first.

• Nearly all shoppers (98%) take extra steps like reading reviews or searching online before making a purchase.

• The findings highlight a major trust gap as AI becomes more embedded in shopping.

As artificial intelligence becomes a bigger part of how people discover products and brands, a new survey suggests it is far from replacing traditional research habits.

Just 2% of U.S. consumers say they would purchase from an unfamiliar brand based solely on an AI recommendation, according to a new study from Idea Grove. By contrast, 98% of respondents said they verify the brand through other sources before making a decision.

The findings point to a clear divide between how consumers use AI and how much they trust it.

AI helps shoppers find options, but doesnt close the deal

AI tools like chatbots and recommendation engines are increasingly shaping the early stages of the buying journey, helping consumers discover new brands and narrow choices.

But the survey shows that most shoppers still rely on traditional signals such as online reviews, search results, media coverage, and a companys website to confirm whether a brand is credible.

AI is accelerating discovery, but its not replacing decision-making, the report suggests.

That pattern is consistent with broader research showing consumers use AI as a research assistant rather than a final authority. Many shoppers turn to AI for comparisons or suggestions, then verify information elsewhere before completing a purchase.

Trust remains the biggest hurdle

The reluctance to rely solely on AI recommendations underscores ongoing concerns about trust, accuracy, and transparency.

Consumers appear to treat AI suggestions as a starting point, not a guarantee of quality. Instead, they seek out familiar trust markers that predate AI, such as customer reviews and independent validation.

This skepticism is not new, but it is becoming more significant as brands invest heavily in trying to appear in AI-generated recommendations.

Implications for brands and consumers

For businesses, the message is clear: being recommended by AI tools may boost visibility, but it wont automatically translate into sales.

Companies still need to build credibility through strong online reputations, clear information, and positive customer feedback.

For consumers, the trend reinforces the importance of verification in an AI-driven marketplace. Even as technology streamlines shopping, the responsibility for making informed decisions largely remains with the buyer.