Real Life Hamburglar Stole 33 Cases Of Burger King Whoppers From Back Of Delivery Truck

Contrary to what you may have believed your entire life, it turns out that the Hamburglar is not a character limited solely to pilfering beef patties from McDonald’s. How else might one explain how 33 cases of Burger King Whoppers went missing from the back of a truck recently?

Warren, MI police are investigating the crime, which happened while the driver of a semi-truck that was carrying the burgers ended up taking a nap on the job, the Detroit Free Press reports.

“It’s a whopper of a theft,” the city’s mayor, Jim Fouts, told the newspaper.

Here’s how the mystery of the disappearing Whoppers went down: on Thursday night, the driver tasked with transporting the Burger King products attempted to deliver several cases of burgers to the distribution center, but for some reason, he ended up having to wait several hours to complete the delivery.

He fell asleep in the truck and woke up at 2 a.m. to find that his truck’s shipping seal was busted and a few boxes of Whoppers were missing. So locked the truck with a padlock and went back to sleep, officials said. But when he woke up again at 8:30 a.m., at least one thief had struck his cargo, stealing 33 cases of burgers this time.

Police are now on the case of the hamburglars, though they need help with leads and are asking the public to pitch in — after all, “They probably consumed the evidence,” Fouts noted.

‘Hamburglar’ in Warren stole 33 cases of Whoppers [Detroit Free Press]

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Soda Makers Advertise New And Exciting Ingredient: Sugar

Late last year, Pepsi prepared to introduce a new beverage, the old-timey and upscale 1893, or as its trademark application called it, “1893 From the Makers of Pepsi-Cola.” It’s just one of many products taking advantage of a strange trend in soft drinks right now: making products with real sugar is a selling point, something that the industry might not have expected just a few years ago.

Wait…isn’t sugar bad for us? Why are health-conscious consumers turning to more calorific beverages? Even the CEO of PepsiCo, Indira Nooyi, seems to find current consumer preferences a little confusing.

“They are willing to go to organic non-GMO products even if it has high salt, high sugar, high fat,” she told investors on a conference call last year. Nooyi would have expected diet soft drink sales to go up as Americans became interested in “clean” eating,” not full-sugar drinks.

The appeal, though, is that sugar is something that we think of as natural, coming from a plant. There’s a reason why drinks labels take the trouble to say they’re made from cane sugar. Corn sugar High-fructose corn syrup originates in a plant, too, but isn’t something that we routinely cook with.

“The number one fixation on food companies’ minds is ‘clean label,'” a food market expert explained to the Wall Street Journal. Companies are trying to make products in factories in massive quantities, but with “natural ingredients and shorter ingredient lists that look like you made it at home.” Do you have a high-fructose corn syrup bowl sitting on your counter next to the coffee machine? Neither does anyone else.

Products that call themselves “natural,” a label that’s meaningless under current regulations, are popular right now, and attempts to market sweeteners like stevia as plant-derived aren’t taking off. As soft drink sales fall, then, companies want to sell us smaller containers of slightly more expensive sugar-water, at a higher profit.

Soft-Drink Makers Have New Secret Ingredient: Sugar! [Wall Street Journal]

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Pepsi Pushes Release Date For Organic Gatorade Back To 2017

If you’ve been jonesing for a new kind of Gatorade, you’ll have a while longer to wait: after announcing last year that it was working on an organic version of Gatorade that it would unleash upon the masses in 2016, PepsiCo now says it’s pushing back the release date for that planned beverage to sometime in 2017.

“It’s in our road map to do Gatorade with less artificial [flavors], and we are developing a G organic that we are planning to launch next year, and then we plan to evaluate the rest of the portfolio to have better choices for athletes,” Xavi Cortadellas, Head of Innovation at Gatorade told TheStreet.

As for why it’s making a move to the organic side, Al Carey, the CEO of PepsiCo Americas Beverages, said last year that it’s what customers want.

“It’s a consumer interest,” Carey said then. “I think they’re very interested in non-GMO [genetically modified organisms] and organic, and to the degree you can make it meaningful to the consumer — do it.”

Of course, Pepsi isn’t alone on the organic bandwagon: companies like Papa John’s, Hershey’s, Panera, Campbell’s, Schwan, Subway, Aldi, Mondelez, and more all removed or have promised to stop using artificial flavors and additives in some of their products in response to consumer demand for less processed foods.

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Trader Joe’s And Pepperidge Farm Settle Lawsuit Over Sandwich Cookies

The food fight between Pepperidge Farm and Trader Joe’s over Belgian chocolate sandwich cookies has been put to bed, after the two sides agreed to settle their issues out of court.

For those who don’t remember, Pepperidge Farm sued Trader Joe’s in federal court late last year, claiming that the latter’s Crispy Cookies filled with chocolate were way too close to the company’s Milano brand.

The lawsuit sought undisclosed damages and to block Trader Joe’s from selling its sandwich cookie in the future.

So does this mean shoppers will have access to both kinds of cookies? It’s unclear, but seems likely: a lawyer representing Pepperidge Farm told the Associated Press on Wednesday that the two food companies had reached a “mutually satisfactory resolution” and agreed to make no further comments about their fight.

A judge then dismissed the case once Pepperidge Farm filed notice that it was withdrawing its lawsuit.

We reached out to both companies for a statement, and will update this post if we hear back.

Trader Joe’s settles cookie lawsuit with Pepperidge Farm [Associated Press]

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Feds Shut Down Student Loan Debt Relief Operation That Collected $3.6M In Illegal Fees

Federal law bars debt relief services from receiving upfront fees before they’ve even renegotiated a single debt for a customer. But one student loan debt relief operation allegedly took in nearly $3.6 million in illegal fees, only to enroll borrowers in programs that are already available for free.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau announced today that it has taken action against Student Aid Institute and CEO Steven Lamont for illegally demanding hundreds of dollars in upfront fees to help borrowers enroll in federal income-driven plans and misrepresenting that the company had an affiliation with the Department of Education.

According to the complaint [PDF], beginning in 2012 the company began to market, sell, and administer student-loan debt relief services to consumers through telemarketing calls and direct mail.

To entice borrowers to enroll in the program, telemarketers and mailings implied that the organization was endorsed, sponsored by, or affiliated with the Department of Education.

Additionally, employees of SAI told potential customers that they were “eligible to reduce your current payment of $595 to $63 which may save you $63,900 over the term of your student loan.” In reality, the CFPB says the company had no basis to make these claims.

The company typically charged consumers an upfront fee of $395 or $495 as well as a $39 per month maintenance fee once enrolled.

Immediately after consumers signed contracts with SAI, the company withdrew funds from the borrowers’ bank accounts and charged their credit cards for the illegal upfront fees.

Additionally, the Bureau claims that SAI failed to provide customers with privacy notices as required by law.

In all, the CFPB investigation found the alleged scam affected 4,300 borrowers, and collected $3.6 million in illegal fees.

Under the CFPB’s proposed order, SAI must shut down its relief operations, cancel all contracts with customers, and stop charging them.

The company and its operators are also barred from offering, or receiving any payments from, debt relief services, and pay a civil penalty of $50,000 to the Bureau’s Civil Penalty Fund.

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Uber Ditching Email Support In Favor Of In-App Help Options

Uber customers and drivers will no longer be able to reach the company by way of a support email address — a system many customers were frustrated with in the first place — as the company is switching to an in-app tool for troubleshooting and reporting issues.

Uber is phasing out the support@uber.com email address that drivers and passengers have used to report lost items, unruly customers and troublesome drivers, and other issues. Want to know your passenger rating? The app will provide that information instantly with the new feature.

By moving customer support over to its app, Uber says response times will go down and customer satisfaction will go up. In fact, both are already true, Uber claims, adding that customer service has increased 10% since it began rolling out the feature.

“Ultimately, our goal is to create a product that’s so great you never need to contact customer service,” Uber says in the announcement. “In the meantime, we’re doubling down on our technology so that when you need to get in touch, it’s as quick and easy as getting a ride.”

Customers and drivers will be able to follow up on their issues using the app, or via email notifications if that’s still your preferred method.

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Cancer Charities That Scammed $75M From Donors Must Shut Down, Issue Refunds

Last May, an investigation involving federal regulators and prosecutors from all 50 states led to four national cancer charities being charged with swindling consumers out of $187 million in charitable donations. Today, two of those bogus charities — responsible for $75 million in bilked donations — have agreed to close up shop and provide refunds to donors.

The Federal Trade Commission, along with all 50 states and the District of Columbia, announced today that Cancer Fund of America (CFA), Cancer Support Services Inc. (CSS), and James Reynolds, Sr. — the man behind both groups — will settle  will settle charges that the organizations claimed to help cancer patients, but instead, spent the overwhelming majority of donations on their operators, families and friends, and fundraisers.

According to the original complaint [PDF], the two charities, along with the Children’s Cancer Fund of America Inc. (CCFOA) and The Breast Cancer Society Inc. (BCS), used telemarketing calls, websites, direct mail and materials distributed by the Combined Federal Campaign – which raises money from federal employees for non-profit organizations – to solicit donations from consumers in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

The complaint purports that the deceptive scheme was set in motion by James Reynolds Sr. in 1987 and since then has regularly duped consumers into believing they supported a genuine charity.

From 2008 to 2012, the organizations deceptively raised $187 million in donations by portraying themselves as legitimate charities and told prospective donors that funds would be used for help cancer patients by providing direct support and needed medical assistance.

“These were lies,” the complaint states. “Not one of the Defendants has operated a program that provides cancer patients with pain medication to alleviate their suffering, transports cancer patients to chemotherapy appointments, or pays for hospice care. Moreover, the vast majority of donors’ contributions have not directly assisted cancer patients in the United States or otherwise benefitted any charitable purpose.”

In reality, the FTC and state officials, claim the four charities spent just 3% of the donations on actual cancer patients.

The rest of the money was spent on inflated salaries, cars, trips, luxury cruises, college tuition, gym memberships, jet ski outings, sporting event and concert tickets, and dating site memberships for the company operators, their family members, and friends.

The charities “operated as personal fiefdoms characterized by rampant nepotism, flagrant conflicts of interest, and excessive insider compensation, with none of the financial and governance controls that any bona fide charity would have adopted,” according to the complaint.

The organizations were more generous with friends and family members, providing salaries nearly five times what they actually provided in aid to patients.

In addition to lining their own pockets, the charity operators allegedly padded the wallets of professional fundraisers who were hired and often received 85% or more of every donation.

To hide the high administrative and fundraising costs from donors and regulators, the complaint alleges the organizations falsely inflated their revenues by reporting in publicly filed financial documents more than $223 million donated “gifts in kind” distributed to international recipients.

Children’s Cancer Fund of America Inc. and The Breast Cancer Society Inc. agreed to settle with the FTC and states in May 2015.

According to the settlement order [PDF] with CFA and CSS, the charities will be dissolved and their assets will be liquidated. Any funds from the liquidation will go toward satisfying a $75 million judgement. Those funds will then be returned to the consumers who donated to the organizations between 2008 and 2012.

Reynolds’ portion of the judgement is suspended following the surrender of certain personal assets, including art, statues, a boat, and guns. In addition to contributing to consumer refunds, the order bans Reynolds from working for, managing, or receiving payments from non-profits in the future.

“The FTC and our state enforcement partners have ended a pernicious charity fraud that syphoned hundreds of millions of dollars away from well-meaning consumers, legitimate charities, and people with cancer who needed the services the defendants falsely promised,” Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in a statement Wednesday. “Today’s settlement, along with those announced earlier, shut down the sham charities once and for all and banned the individual perpetrators for life.”

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist