Consumer News: Back-to-school shopping starts early as families hunt for bargains

The countdown clock to 2032 is ticking

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• A bipartisan Senate bill would create a mechanism to force Congress to vote on a plan to shore up Social Security before automatic benefit cuts take effect.

• The PROMISE Act would establish an independent advisory board to recommend reforms, with Congress required to consider the proposals under expedited procedures.

• Supporters say the measure would end decades of political gridlock, while critics worry it could limit public debate over changes affecting millions of retirees.

For years, lawmakers have acknowledged that Social Security is headed toward a funding crisis while repeatedly failing to agree on a solution. A bipartisan group of senators now wants to change that by making it much harder for Congress to simply do nothing.

The proposed Protecting Retirement Opportunities and Maintaining Income Security for Everyone (PROMISE) Act would establish a formal process requiring Congress to consider legislation aimed at restoring Social Security's long-term finances before the program reaches a critical deadline.

According to the Social Security Trustees' latest report, the retirement trust fund is projected to be depleted in 2032. At that point, payroll tax revenue would still cover most benefits, but recipients would face an automatic reduction of roughly 22% unless Congress acts.

The PROMISE Act does not specify how to eliminate the shortfall. Instead, it is designed to ensure lawmakers vote on a plan rather than continuing to postpone difficult decisions.

A process instead of a prescription

The legislation was introduced by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.), along with a bipartisan group of co-sponsors.

Under the proposal, an independent Social Security Advisory Board would develop recommendations intended to keep the program solvent for at least 50 years. Congress would then be required to consider the recommendations under expedited procedures, making it more difficult for the proposals to stall indefinitely.

The longer Congress waits, the fewer options remain, supporters of the legislation argue, pointing to the shrinking window before benefit reductions would occur automatically.

Unlike previous proposals, the PROMISE Act deliberately avoids taking sides on issues such as raising payroll taxes, increasing the retirement age, or reducing benefits. Those decisions would be left to Congress after receiving the advisory board's recommendations.

What it could mean for citizens

For today's retirees, the legislation would not immediately change Social Security benefits. Instead, it is intended to increase pressure on lawmakers to adopt a long-term solution before the trust fund is exhausted.

For younger workers, the bill represents another acknowledgment that changes to the program are likely unavoidable. While no one knows what a final reform package would include, analysts generally agree that restoring Social Security's finances will require some combination of higher revenue, slower benefit growth, or both.

The bill also serves as a reminder that consumers should not assume Congress will wait until the last minute. Historically, lawmakers have stepped in before benefits were reduced, most notably with bipartisan reforms enacted in 1983.

Critics question the fast-track approach

The legislation has drawn criticism from AARP, which says Social Security reforms should be debated through the normal legislative process rather than under expedited procedures.

The advocacy group argues that changes affecting nearly every American worker and retiree deserve full public scrutiny and worries that a fast-track process could limit debate or lead to major decisions during a lame-duck session of Congress.

Supporters counter that the expedited process is necessary because the traditional legislative process has failed to produce a solution despite years of warnings from the Social Security Trustees.

Whether the PROMISE Act gains traction remains uncertain, but its introduction reflects growing concern on Capitol Hill that the deadline for preserving full Social Security benefits is approaching rapidly, leaving Congress with increasingly limited time to act.

The company denies the charges and said it fully cooperated in the investigation

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), joined by California and Utah, has sued telehealth company Hims & Hers, alleging it shared consumers' sensitive health information with advertising platforms despite promising to protect patient privacy.

• The complaint also accuses the company of deceptive billing, automatically enrolling customers in subscriptions before medical consultations, and making cancellations unnecessarily difficult.

• Hims & Hers denies the allegations, calling the lawsuit an attempt to "generate headlines" and says it intends to vigorously defend itself.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has filed a lawsuit against telehealth provider Hims & Hers, accusing the company of unlawfully sharing consumers' sensitive health information with advertisers while falsely assuring customers their medical data would remain private.

The complaint, filed Wednesday in federal court, was brought by the FTC together with the states of California and Utah. Regulators allege the company disclosed information about consumers' medical conditions and online activity to advertising platforms, including Meta and Snap, to help target ads, even as it marketed itself as a privacy-focused healthcare provider.

According to the FTC, the shared data included information that could reveal consumers' interest in treatments for sensitive medical conditions. The agency contends those disclosures violated both federal and state consumer protection laws.

"Hims & Hers promised users privacy," the FTC said in announcing the lawsuit, arguing that consumers relied on those assurances when seeking medical care through the company's online platform.

Billing and subscription practices challenged

The lawsuit goes beyond privacy allegations. The FTC claims Hims & Hers charged customers for prescription subscriptions shortly after they completed online intake forms, even though consumers were led to believe they would first consult with a healthcare provider to determine whether treatment was appropriate.

Regulators also allege the company failed to clearly disclose when prescriptions would automatically renew and made it difficult for customers to cancel recurring subscriptions before being charged again. According to the complaint, the online cancellation option was difficult to locate, and consumers often were not given adequate notice before refill charges occurred.

The FTC is seeking a court order prohibiting the alleged practices, along with civil penalties and other remedies under federal and state law.

Company disputes allegations

Hims & Hers rejected the government's claims, saying the lawsuit ignores evidence the company provided during what it described as a nearly three-year FTC investigation.

In a statement, the company said the case "disregards substantial evidence" and ignores industry standards governing telehealth. It characterized the lawsuit as "an effort to generate headlines at our expense" rather than a legitimate consumer protection action and said it will vigorously defend itself.

The case serves as a reminder that consumers should carefully review the privacy policies and billing terms of telehealth providers before signing up for services. Experts recommend:

• Reading privacy disclosures to understand how health information may be shared.

• Looking for clear explanations of subscription renewals and cancellation policies.

• Monitoring credit card and bank statements for recurring charges.

• Canceling subscriptions well before renewal dates and keeping records of cancellation requests.

The lawsuit's allegations have not been proven in court, and Hims & Hers will have an opportunity to contest the claims as the case proceeds.

J.D. Power finds improved customer service is the key

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• T-Mobile earned the highest customer satisfaction among major postpaid wireless carriers, while Consumer Cellular and Mint Mobile led their respective MVNO categories.

• Customers who said their problems were resolved with minimal effort were far more satisfied and loyal than those who experienced a difficult service process.

• Fast digital support also mattered: Issues resolved online in less than 10 minutes generated significantly higher satisfaction scores.

Once upon a time, consumer complaints about wireless providers were very common. But that script has apparently flipped, and a new survey suggests improved customer service is the reason.

Consumers are far more likely to stay with a wireless carrier when it is easy to do business with it, according to the latest J.D. Power U.S. Wireless Carrier Satisfaction Study, which found that hassle-free problem resolution has become one of the strongest drivers of customer loyalty.

The study found a sharp divide between customers who felt their issues were resolved with minimal effort and those who did not. Customers who strongly agreed that their carrier made it easy to resolve a problem gave their provider an average ease-of-doing-business score of 786 on a 1,000-point scale, compared with 554 among customers who disagreed. The industry average was 612.

"Ease" increasingly influences whether customers remain with a carrier, J.D. Power said, as consumers place a premium on quick, friction-free service rather than simply comparing prices.

"Wireless carrier satisfaction and loyalty are strongly linked to perceptions of ease of doing business," said Carl Lepper, senior director of technology, media, and telecom at J.D. Power.

Digital support is paying off

The study also found that speed matters. Customers who resolved problems through digital channels in less than 10 minutes reported substantially higher satisfaction than those whose issues took longer to address. That finding suggests investments in online chat, apps, and other digital support tools can improve both customer experience and retention.

J.D. Power said the research measures customer experiences across the entire relationship with a wireless provider, including value for the price paid, quality of service, trust, ease of doing business, interactions with employees, product offerings, digital tools, and problem resolution.

Carrier rankings

Among the nation's three major wireless carriers, T-Mobile ranked highest in customer satisfaction in the mobile network operator (MNO) postpaid category.

In the mobile virtual network operator (MVNO) segments, Consumer Cellular topped the postpaid rankings for the second consecutive study, while Mint Mobile repeated as the highest-ranked prepaid MVNO. Google Fi Wireless finished second in the postpaid MVNO category, while Visible by Verizon placed second among prepaid MVNOs. Cricket and Straight Talk Wireless tied for third in the prepaid segment.

What couples need to know about financial responsibility, debt division, and protecting their assets

• Open conversations about money before and during marriage can help couples avoid financial surprises and protect their future.

• Understanding the difference between marital and separate debt is key to knowing who may be responsible for repayment.

• Prenuptial agreements, financial transparency, and shared goals can help couples better prepare for potential financial challenges.

Marriage often means building a life together including sharing financial goals, expenses, and responsibilities. But when debt enters the picture, the idea that whats yours is mine and whats mine is yours can become more complicated.

Whether one partner enters a marriage with existing debt, a couple takes on new financial obligations together, or a divorce changes who is responsible for repayment, understanding how debt is handled can help protect your financial future.

While no one expects a marriage to end in divorce, planning ahead and having open conversations about money can make a major difference. Kelly Frawley, partner in the matrimonial and family law practice at Sterlington PLLC, explains what consumers should know about marital versus separate debt, how debt may be divided during divorce, and the steps couples can take to protect their financial standing before and after marriage.

Protecting your finances

No matter what stage youre in with your partner, protecting your finances should always be top of mind.

During a marriage and divorce, spouses should be transparent and forthcoming with information about their finances, Frawley said. The steps to protect your assets should start as early as reasonably possible before the marriage and no later than early in the marriage.

Frawley shared some of her best tips for having open, transparent conversations about finances with your partner:

• Start these conversations before marriage. This includes candid discussions with your partner about their then-current savings, debts, and expenses, as well as intentions about savings and a day-to-day budget.

• Share credit scores. A partys assets and budget might not reflect their complete financial circumstances.

• Consider reviewing your cash flow at least once a year. This could be at the time you gather tax documents to prepare tax returns, or at another time you decide on, to ensure you and your spouse are on the same page about spending, savings, and debt.

Marital vs. separate debt

If your soon-to-be spouse has excessive debt, Frawley recommends tackling the issue as an economic partnership.

A plan to pay down the debt should be discussed, which should include what source of funds will be used to pay it down, she said. One needs to consider that his or her money applied to pay the other partys debt is not likely to be recouped in a divorce, and they should not expect a credit in the event of a divorce.

Also, I suggest you understand the reasons your partner incurred the debt to preempt additional debt being incurred during the marriage.

When it comes to marital versus separate debt, Frawley recommends checking with your specific states guidelines.

Typically marital debt will be a joint responsibility and the parties marital net worth will be marital assets less marital debts, she said. Separate debt might be debt a party incurred prior to the marriage or in connection with his or her separate property.

How can a prenuptial agreement help?

Frawley explained that a prenup agreement can effectively help protect an individual from accruing debt during the marriage.

It is common practice to address the distribution of liabilities in the event of a divorce [in a prenup], she said. Two common approaches include a provision that a party will be responsible for debt associated with their separate property and debt incurred by them before the marriage (e.g., student loans).

Money tips before marriage

Before things become legally binding, Frawley has some money tips to help couples navigate tough conversations.

Discuss goals for savings and retirement, as well as your expected lifestyle, she said. For example, does one partner desire to vacation several times a year, while the other one wants to save for retirement or invest in a secondary home? Ensuring alignment is key; at a minimum, one should understand their partners expectations.