Consumer News: Consumers are turning to AI for holiday shopping, but retailers may not be ready

The products were sold at independent pet stores and online

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Fromm Family Foods is recalling nearly 5,900 cases of two canned dog food products because they may contain pieces of metal.

• The affected products were sold at independent pet stores and through online retailers in the United States and Canada.

• No illnesses or injuries have been reported, but consumers should stop feeding the recalled food and return it to the retailer.

Fromm Family Foods has recalled two varieties of canned dog food following complaints that the products may contain metal fragments.

The Wisconsin-based company said the recall covers 3,852 cases of Fromm Turkey Pt Wet Dog Food and 1,973 cases of Fromm Diner Classics Milos Meatloaf Pt Wet Dog Food. The products were distributed through neighborhood pet stores and online retailers in the United States and Canada.

According to the recall notice posted by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the company initiated the recall after receiving complaints about metal contamination. No illnesses or injuries associated with the products had been reported as of the announcement.

How to identify the recalled dog food

The recall applies only to the following products:

• Fromm Turkey Pt Wet Dog Food: 12.2-ounce cans with UPC 072705118700, lot code EP2A3306 551006, and a best-by date of 03/2029.

• Fromm Diner Classics Milos Meatloaf Pt Wet Dog Food: 12.5-ounce cans with UPC 072705132324, lot code EP2A3306 551029, and a best-by date of 03/2029.

Fromm said no other products are included in the recall.

Metal pieces can cause serious injuries

A dog that swallows metal may experience choking, vomiting, loss of appetite, lethargy, or stomach discomfort. Sharp fragments can cut the animals mouth or gastrointestinal tract.

Larger quantities of metal may also cause digestive problems, a partial blockage, or an intestinal obstruction, according to the company. Pet owners whose dogs ate the recalled food and are showing symptoms should contact a veterinarian.

What consumers should do

Consumers should immediately stop feeding the recalled products to their dogs and return the cans to the retailer where they were purchased.

Fromm said it identified the error that led to the contamination and has implemented corrective measures intended to prevent it from happening again.

Consumers with questions can contact Fromm Family Foods at 800-325-6331, Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Central time. Questions may also be emailed to info@frommfamily.com.

Unfortunately, buying a home is even more expensive

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• The typical U.S. asking rent reached $1,962 in July, up 2.3% from a year earlier.

• Rent growth accelerated to its fastest pace in more than a year as construction of new apartments slowed.

• Renters can still find deals: Nearly 40% of Zillow rental listings offered a concession, such as free rent or reduced deposits.

The typical asking rent in the United States is approaching $2,000 a month, and tenants may soon have fewer opportunities to negotiate as the supply of new apartments declines.

The typical rent rose to $1,962 in July, an increase of 2.3% from a year earlier, according to Zillows latest rental market report. That was the fastest annual growth rate in more than a year.

The increase follows two years in which a wave of apartment construction gave renters more choices and pushed landlords to offer incentives. Zillow said that supply boost is starting to fade as fewer new projects enter the pipeline.

Multifamily construction permits in the second quarter were 31% below their most recent peak in 2022. If construction continues to slow, the rental market could tighten further as existing units are absorbed.

Renters have benefited from one of the most favorable supply surges in decades, Zillow Chief Economist Mischa Fisher said in the report. He warned that the supply advantage is fading and rent growth is beginning to accelerate.

Deals remain available

Despite the increase in rents, concessions remain widespread. In July, 39.8% of rental listings on Zillow offered some type of incentive, up from 35.9% a year earlier.

Concessions can include a free month of rent, reduced security deposits, free parking or waived application fees. They are most common in markets that recently added large numbers of apartments.

Charlotte had the nations highest concession rate at 68.1%, followed by Denver at 67.2% and Dallas at 65.6%. Raleigh, Austin and Nashville also had concession rates above 60%.

Those figures suggest renters in heavily built markets may still have negotiating power, even if the advertised monthly rent has not declined. Consumers comparing apartments should calculate the total cost over the full lease term because a concession may make one property cheaper than another with a lower advertised rent.

Conditions are significantly different in markets where construction has not kept up with demand. San Francisco posted the largest annual rent increase among the metropolitan areas in Zillows report, rising 9.7% to $3,372. Rents increased 7% in San Jose to $3,782 and 5.1% in Chicago to $2,253.

Some markets recorded rent declines. Typical rents fell 1.8% in San Antonio and 0.9% in both Denver and Austin. Tampa rents declined 0.5%.

Renting still costs less than buying

High home prices and mortgage rates above 6.5% are also helping maintain demand for rental housing. Many consumers who might otherwise buy a home are remaining renters because monthly mortgage payments have become less affordable.

Zillow estimates that a household needs annual income of $78,488 to comfortably afford the typical rental. Buying a typical home requires income of nearly $99,800a difference of more than $21,000.

The typical renter spends 26.8% of household income on rent, according to Zillow. That is below the 30% level commonly used to identify households burdened by housing costs, although affordability varies sharply by market. Renters in New York spend an estimated 40.9% of their income on rent, while the figure is 37.1% in Miami and 34.1% in Los Angeles.

Single-family rentals are also becoming more expensive faster than apartments. Their typical rent climbed 3% to $2,314, compared with a 1.7% increase for multifamily housing, where the typical rent reached $1,786.

Zillow forecasts multifamily rents will rise about 1.9% for all of 2026, while single-family rents are expected to increase about 2.9%. Both rates would remain below their long-term averages, but the narrowing construction pipeline suggests the unusually renter-friendly conditions of the last two years may be drawing to a close.

Coding mistake may have lowered scores sent to lenders for about 4 million consumers

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Equifax has agreed to create a $100 million fund to settle claims that a coding error caused it to send inaccurate credit scores to lenders.

• The error may have affected about 4 million consumers who applied for mortgages, auto loans, credit cards or other credit during a three-week period in 2022.

• Eligible consumers are expected to receive notices explaining how to claim a cash payment, but the amount of individual payments has not been determined.

Equifax has agreed to a $100 million class-action settlement over allegations that a coding error caused the credit bureau to provide inaccurate credit scores for millions of consumers.

The proposed agreement received preliminary approval Aug. 17 from U.S. District Judge Leigh Martin May in the Northern District of Georgia. A final approval hearing is scheduled for Jan. 22, 2027.

The lawsuit alleges that Equifax miscalculated some credit scores sent to lenders between March 17 and April 6, 2022. The problem occurred as consumers were applying for mortgages, auto loans, credit cards and other financial products.

Approximately 4 million people may be included in the settlement class, according to attorneys representing the consumers. In some cases, scores reportedly fell by more than 20 points, potentially affecting whether applicants were approved and how much interest they were charged.

Equifax has denied violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act or engaging in wrongdoing. The settlement does not constitute an admission of liability.

The credit agency has agreed to write some pretty big checks lately. Earlier this month, Equifax agreed to a $2.2 million settlement to resolve duplicate collection reports.

A short-lived error with potentially costly consequences

Equifax acknowledged in 2022 that a technology error affected the calculation of some credit scores and related information. The company has said the underlying information in consumers credit files was not changed.

However, the score delivered to a lender can play an important role in determining whether an applicant qualifies for credit and the terms offered. Even a relatively small score change can be important when an applicant is near a lenders cutoff for approval or for a lower interest rate.

The lawsuit alleged that the inaccurate scores may have caused some consumers to be denied credit or offered loans at higher rates. It also accused Equifax of relying on outdated systems and inadequate testing procedures.

Equifax has maintained that most scores did not change substantially. The company previously said fewer than 300,000 consumers experienced a change of 25 points or more and argued that lenders consider many factors besides a credit score.

How much could consumers receive?

The $100 million settlement fund will be used to make cash payments to eligible class members and cover court-approved legal fees, administrative expenses and the cost of notifying consumers.

Payments are expected to be distributed on a pro rata basis, meaning the amount each person receives will depend on the money remaining after expenses and the number of valid claims submitted. No individual payment estimate has been announced.

The fund is non-reversionary, according to the consumers attorneys. That means money left after the claims process will not be returned to Equifax.

Consumers do not appear to be able to file claims yet. If the settlement receives final approval, a settlement website and claim procedure are expected to provide information about eligibility, deadlines and payment options. Potential class members may also receive notices by mail or email. Attorneys for the class say the agreement is the largest class-action settlement reached under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Consumers should be cautious of unexpected messages promising an immediate Equifax payment. A legitimate settlement administrator should not require a processing fee or ask for payment to submit a claim.

Hidden fees are common, respondents admit

By Mark Huffman of ConsumerAffairs

• Nearly half of recent movers surveyed said they experienced problems, including hidden fees, price increases, damaged belongings or poor communication.

• Although 81% believed they could recognize a moving scam, only 27.6% verified a movers licenses, insurance or official records.

• Large upfront deposits, unclear pricing and a refusal to provide written details are among the strongest warning signs.

Moving may be harder to recognize than many consumers believe, according to a new survey that found a significant gap between peoples confidence and the precautions they take before hiring a mover.

The 2026 Consumer Moving Survey, commissioned by North American Van Lines, questioned 500 people in the United States and Canada who had moved within the previous two years. The respondents were split evenly between the two countries.

More than eight in 10 respondents 81.4% said they were confident they could identify a moving scam. Nevertheless, 45.2% reported encountering at least one problem during their most recent move.

The most common complaint was the addition of fees that had not been disclosed beforehand, reported by 20.6% of respondents. Another 19.6% said their final bill was significantly higher than the original quote.

Other problems included difficulty contacting the company after booking, unexplained delivery delays and damage for which the mover refused to accept responsibility.

The findings do not mean that every service problem involved fraud. However, they illustrate how unclear contracts and inadequate research may leave consumers vulnerable to both dishonest operators and unexpected costs.

Warning signs consumers recognize

When asked what would cause them to reject a moving company immediately, 35.6% pointed to unclear pricing or unexpected fees. Poor or missing online reviews concerned 31.8%, while 20.2% cited pressure to book immediately to preserve a quoted price.

Only 12.4% identified the absence of a physical address or verifiable license information as their primary reason to reject a mover.

A request for a large upfront deposit produced the most concern when respondents were asked to select the strongest sign that a mover might be untrustworthy. Nearly 39% chose that warning.

Other red flags included a movers refusal to provide information in writing, a suspicious or limited review history and an unusually low estimate.

A deposit is not necessarily evidence of fraud. Consumers should, however, ask how it will be applied, obtain the cancellation policy in writing and be wary of companies demanding full payment or a large sum before the move.

Many consumers rely too heavily on reviews

The survey uncovered what the company described as a credential gap. While 60.6% used online research to evaluate movers, only 27.6% checked licensing, insurance or other official records.

Nearly four in 10 relied only on online reviews. Another 12.6% based their decision largely on the estimate and their first impression, while 20.6% conducted little or no research.

Reviews can provide useful information, but they can also be purchased, manipulated or generated using artificial intelligence. Consumers should check reviews across several platforms and look for repeated wording, sudden clusters of positive ratings or accounts with little other activity.

Consumers hiring a company for an interstate move can verify its registration, complaint history and U.S. Department of Transportation number through the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. State consumer-protection or transportation agencies may regulate moves conducted entirely within one state.

How to reduce the risk

Consumers should compare written estimates from at least two or three companies rather than accepting the first quote. The survey found that 21% hired the first mover they located, while just 17.2% personally compared three or more companies.

Before agreeing to a move, consumers should determine whether the business is the actual carrier or a broker that will sell the job to another company. They should also request proof of licensing and insurance, confirm the company has a legitimate physical address and obtain all charges in writing.

Consumers should never sign blank or incomplete documents. They should keep copies of the estimate, inventory, bill of lading, receipts, emails and text messages. Photographs of belongings before loading can also help support a damage claim.

If a mover demands additional money after loading the shipment or refuses to deliver belongings unless the consumer pays more, the incident should be reported promptly to the FMCSAs National Consumer Complaint Database. Complaints involving local moves can be filed with the appropriate state consumer-protection agency.

The surveys main lesson is that recognizing obvious warning signs is not enough. Checking official credentials, comparing companies and demanding clear written terms may provide considerably more protection than confidence or online reviews alone.