A Florida couple Warren and Maureen Collier of Naples, Florida purchased a 2,700 square foot home for $165,000 back in 2009.  The Collier’s paid cash for the property so that they would own it free and clear of any mortgage as they were retired, and wanted to live worry free.  Several months after the Collier’s moved into their new home Bank of America filed a foreclosure notice that they were going to be taking their home.

The Collier’s attempted to call and get the matter resolved to no avail, and the bank seemed to make things more and more difficult over the long haul.  The Collier’s finally decided to file a lawsuit, but were unable to find a lawyer who would accept the case after trying 25 different law firms.  Finally they were able to locate a lawyer who was willing to challenge Bank of America, and they were able to get the foreclosure case dismissed and the court awarded them $2,534 in attorney fees.  That’s chump change to a bank this size, but apparently they did not want to pay up.

So they hired a foreclosure attorney who was able to win the case against Bank of America, which led to a court order that allowed the sheriff to seize the bank’s assets in order to satisfy the unpaid debt.  They arrived at the bank ready to seize assets, but after an hour of discussion the bank produced a check for double the amount they were owed and issued an apology.  This is how things in America should work, the private citizen fighting back against the wrong doings of a corporation who was trying to take what was rightfully theirs.

Most private citizens would have lost this case to Bank of America and more than likely have been kicked out of their home out of fear trying to fight the bank.  Banks have been botching foreclosure cases for the last few years and most of those cases did not turn out good for the person who owned the property.  When you read a story like this it proves that you need to be diligent and fight against corporations when they attempt to take advantage of you.  Would you have the guts to go this far if you knew that your house was paid for?

Related posts:

1. You Bank Is Out To Raid Your Pockets, Don’t Be Afraid To Fire Them. A lot of people seem to love the banks they...
2. Severals Ways To Start Getting Serious About Saving Money People in America are not saving money as much as...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Kingston was driving the personal watercraft with a female passenger on board when the accident happened, he slammed into the Palm Island Bridge, which connects the MacArthur Causeway to Palm and Hibiscus islands. Both he and the passenger were thrown into the water.  Details have not been released as to what type of injuries Kingston suffered, or the condition of the female passenger that were with him.  You can probably deduce the types of injuries a person would sustain after running into a bridge and high speed on a Jet ski.

This was just another example of some media outlets trying to get the story first rather then get the story right.  Reporting that someone is dead before they are deceased is irresponsible for any reputable media outlet, and the practice needs to stop.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Over the past week or so you might have gotten an email from a company called Epsilon notifying you that your email address may have been accessed without permission.  If you have accounts with several companies that use Epsilon then you probably received multiple emails from the company about the issue.  It was no doubt annoying for some people to get several emails about the same issue from several different companies, and it probably caused more panic than was probably necessary.

Epsilon said Monday that two percent of the companies it counts as clients are affected by the security breach. There is no official list of affected companies that’s available.  Epsilon is in the midst of conducting an investigation of what led to the security breach.  If you’ve ever given your e-mail address to any of the companies they do business with, then you are probably affected by the breach.

If you received the email then you know it says the information that was stolen is limited to e-mail addresses and possibly names.  No bank or credit card information was stolen according to the email sent by the company, so in all reality if that is true then it’s not as bad as it could have been.  There is still some risk involved with this situation though.

A bunch of e-mail addresses in the wrong hands means what’s likely to result is a rise in phishing scams. “Phishing” is an attempt to use e-mail to try to get you to reveal more personal information about yourself. This can include usernames, passwords, Social Security numbers, or account numbers.

Many times phishers are simply guessing and will pick a company that a broad group of people does business with, like PayPal, or a government entity, like the IRS. The threat in the Epsilon case is now whoever gets access to these lists of e-mail addresses knows exactly what companies count you as a customer. That means phishing attempts can be much more targeted and therefore potentially harder to spot because they can masquerade as being from a bank or company such as the ones listed above.

Do not open e-mail from someone you don’t know. That’s pretty simple. But you’ll also need to be extra vigilant now that phishers may know specifically where you shop, what airline you fly, or where you bank. Look at the e-mail address–if it’s purportedly from one of the companies above but ends in something other than .com, especially an international domain like .uk, that’s a good indication it’s a scam since most phishing attempts originate outside the U.S. Also be on the lookout for spelling errors in the e-mail address, URL, or body of the e-mail, or e-mails whose tone sounds particularly urgent.

If you do open the e-mail, don’t click any links. A common phishing practice is to ask people to click a link to update their personal information.  Most people are affected by this because they click on things that they should not in emails, or they fill out fake forms in email that they should not.  Just be careful about what you are clicking on in email and you should be okay.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Charlie Sheen has finally broken the Camel’s back, CBS has stopped production of it’s hit sitcom “Two and a Half Men” specifically because of Charlie Sheen’s behavior.  It is an interesting move because this is by far CBS’s most popular show, and the one that they charge advertisers the most money to advertise on.  Here is an excerpt of the statement released regarding the TV show:

“CBS and Warner Brothers said the raunchy sitcom could no longer continue production after Mr. Sheen made a series of non-sequiturs that expressed disgust with Chuck Lorre, the program’s head producer. Mr. Sheen later trashed Mr. Lorre in an open letter to Hollywood gossip site TMZ. “Based on the totality of Charlie Sheen’s statements, conduct and condition, CBS and Warner Bros. Television have decided to discontinue production of ‘Two and a Half Men’ for the remainder of the season,” the TV companies said in a statement.

Mr. Sheen’s behavior has stopped production on “Two and a Half Men” in the past, and the two media companies have more or less ignored his antics while he did stints in rehab. The decision to halt production on a program that has proved lucrative both in terms of ad dollars and syndication suggests the TV firms believe his behavior has begun to distract the program’s core viewership and could affect he economics of producing the show.”

Original Article Excerpt was taken from:  http://adage.com/article/mediaworks/cbs-halts-production-a-half-men/149089/

The most disturbing part about all of this is why did it take so long for CBS to can the troubled star?  It’s widely known that Charlie Sheen does not been the most upstanding citizen, he has had over 10 incidents since 1990 that would get the average man thrown in jail or at least fired from his job.  His history of abusing women, drugs, and alcohol is well chronicled, and he even shot one of his previous fiancée’s in the arm with a gun!  Here are just a few of the incidents he has had recently:

2005 – Then wife Denise Richards filed for divorce (while 6 months pregnant with their second child) saying he abused drugs and alcohol and has violently threatened her.

2009 – Charlie Sheen was arrested for domestic violence after a fight with wife Brooke Mueller. He was charged with third degree assault, felony menacing and criminal mischief.  “sentenced to 30 days in a rehabilitation center, 30 days of probation, and 36 hours of anger management” and he can’t legally possess a gun for the rest of his life.

2010 – Police came to the Plaza Hotel where he had trashed his room causing $7000 in damages and had gotten into a fight with a “lady friend” aka call girl who was trapped naked in his room. It was found he had been very drunk and was using cocaine.

What was the difficulty in this situation for CBS?  The guy is a scumbag and clearly has a problem.  Sure the popularity of the show and money had a lot to do with it, but is the show not strong enough to carry on without Sheen?  There are plenty of other actors who could probably do an admiral job filling in his vacated role on that show, and it makes no sense that the network kept trying to find ways to keep him on.  It took him directly talking trash about his bosses for them to finally pull the plug.

Related posts:

1. CEO Arrested For Soliciting Sex From An Underage Girl. WTF Was He Thinking? Michael Gilliland, 52, was one of eight people arrested in...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Pornstar Ron Jeremy has his own Rum that is set to hit store shelves sometime this year.  Ron Jeremy is best known as the guy that no one believes is a pornstar because he walks around with a gut and a thick mustache.  He is probably the last person you would think to be a pornstar if you saw him in a grocery store, but that’s what makes him popular.  He is on the 50 Top Porn Stars of All Time list, and his porn career actually landed him roles in non-pornographic films such as The Boondock Saints and The Chase.

It’s not that much of a stretch then to have a successful actor no matter the industry have his own Rum.  In a lot of circles many would consider Ron Jeremy a legend, and the rum aptly named “Ron de Jeremy” may be a top seller once it is finally released.  Here is an excerpt taken from the official website of the adult rum:

“Ron de Jeremy Rum is exceptionally well-balanced 7-year old premium rum from Panama.  It has an inviting light amber color with very attractive copper hues.  The aroma is that of carefully aged rum, with a harmoniously balanced orchestra of oak, fruit and spices.  It opens up smoothly, showcasing a high level of craftsmanship.  The oak comes through robustly and satisfyingly, yet gently enough to allow hints of vanilla and raw sugarcane to reveal themselves.  The finish is elegant and long.”

http://www.rondejeremy.com/

The description of the rum makes it sound like something you would definitely want to drink.  Also, if you noticed the wording in the description interwove a porn theme by saying things like “The finish is elegant and long.”, such wording is only fitting for Ron Jeremy Rum.  There is no release date published for when it will be released, but to get one of the limited edition numbered bottles you have to sign up to be notified.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

College student Josh Le wore the same pair of jeans for 15 months, racking up 330 wears of the $165 Nudie Jeans while studying at the University of Alberta. Every now and then he would give it a sniff-test, and if he detected a slight pong he’d stick them in the freezer for a few hours.

After the lengthy test-period, Le and his professor swabbed the jeans, and then finally washed them. He then wore the jeans for 13 days, after which they swabbed them again—and discovered that bacteria-levels were the same regardless of the length of wear.

Now like most men I am sure there were days when Josh probably had some perspiration down there, and it did not indicate anywhere in the article that he used Febreeze or any other sort of freshener during the experiment.  Who knew just sticking smelly pants in the freezer would all of a sudden make the pants fresh to wear again?  I am going to go out on a limb here and assume that this guy probably does not have a girlfriend because there are not many women who will put up with their man wearing the same pants for 15 days much less 15 months.

Exactly what were they trying to accomplish with this experiment?  Were they looking for people to stretch the value of their wardrobe by wearing the same clothes for months on end, and seeing how smelly they can get before you HAVE to actually wash them?  What is this guy going to do the next time he meets a female?  Boast about the fact that he is the guy who wore the same pair of jeans for 15 months without washing them?  All of this to find out that the same amount of bacteria is on the jeans after three weeks as it is after 15 months, I guess that will help guys recycle their jeans between washes more, but not much use outside of that.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

The Sag has been a part of urban culture for decades, and was started when the general consensus was that you did not want to be a person walking around with “snug” or tight clothing.  The baggy look was making it’s way through hip hop and rap music, which eventually was replicated in culture on the street.  What people found was that clothing was not made by many clothing designers for people who had some sort of hip development, or people who did not have a flat backside.  Because of the rap influence and the lack of clothing that would not be considered “snug” people just started to wear their pants with the waist line across their backside rather than across their waist.

In recent years the sag has gotten lower and lower to the point where it cannot even be called the sag anymore.  Youths today now wear their pants with the waist line strapped across their thighs with a belt in an effort to move the sag to the next level.  Many of them do not even use a belt when wearing it and this causes them to walk around with one hand holding or pulling their pants up while they go about their business each day.  In the old school days the sag never required one to hold his pants in place for fear of them falling down.  Another aspect that you today have implemented is the showing of underwear because of the extreme level of the sag is so low that there is almost no way to hide their under garments.  Once again the origins of the sag did not allow for the showing of underwear, but instead only sagged low enough that the shirt being worn would cover up any underwear from being shown.

A man named Andrew Lewis has watched this evolution of the Sag and decided to make a profit off of it by creating a device called “Subs”.  The creation a mashed-up device that is half garter belt, half suspenders will regulate how low-slung your pants will sag, and fastens around the waist like a belt and is connected to expandable straps that clip onto the pants.  You can buy a set of SUBS off of he internet for $29.95 if sagging is still your type of thing.  Lewis had this to say about his inspiration to invent the item, “Sagging is a huge issue in my community,” he said. “I spent a lot of time observing and I noticed that even for saggers, there is a point which even they’re not comfortable with how their jeans were falling.”

Is this what we have really come too?  Inventing things to enable the “Sag” to continue it’s trend down the pants leg?  Seeing these extreme saggers walking around looking like penguins because their pants don’t fit is bad enough, but I guess the good thing about these is that they will not have to continually hold on to their pants to prevent them from falling.  I think there is a large subset of society that wishes the “Sag” would just go away, but that is not going to happen any time soon, so “Subs” are probably the next best thing.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

With Christmas not far behind us, it is definitely the time of year where you are looking through your gifts and separating the wants from the don’t wants.  You have probably spent some time in the past few days returning items to a store, or trying to figure out what to do with an unwanted gift.  In many cases the same people will generally give you gifts that you are not that fond of, which leaves you with a dilemma.  Do you just keep the gift and not use it, re-gift it, or take it back to the store?  Well Amazon has a way for you to preemptively stop those gifts from Aunt Jackie making it to your doorstep.

The solution could revolutionize digital gift buying forever. The online retailer has quietly patented a way for people to return gifts before they receive them, and the patent documents even mention examples of poor gifts from the same relatives. Amazon’s innovation, not ready for this Christmas season, includes an option to “Convert all gifts from Aunt Jackie,” the patent says. “For example, the user may specify such a rule because the user believes that this potential sender has different tastes than the user.” In other words, the consumer could keep an online list of lousy gift-givers whose choices would be vetted before anything ships.

The best part about this is that Aunt Jackie will have no idea that you have her gifts automatically filtered to exchange for something else immediately.  The user will even have an option of sending a thank you note to the gift giver to show them your appreciation for purchasing a gift for you.  This will take care of the question of “did you get the gift I sent you” when Aunt Jackie calls to hear how much you love it.

Of course this  has caught the ire of the politically correct crowd who say that this ruins the spirit of gift giving.  They say that it really is the thought that counts because a person took the time to purchase a gift for someone only to have the person reject it.  If you look at it from the perspective of people who feel that way then their argument makes perfect sense, but let’s be realistic here.  People struggle with what to do with horrible gifts they receive from people, and I don’t think throwing it in the trash or re-gifting it are somehow better options.

Some people just do not have an idea of how to buy gifts for other people, polka dot sweaters are not appealing to everyone.  When someone gives a gift to another person they always hope that the other person finds it useful, and can find some sort of use for it.  This system saves the person time and hassle because they don’t have to take it back to the store and wait behind the other 20 people doing returns, just to search for something else that they can use.  It will also save retailers the money on the initial shipping cost and the cost of returns and restocking the items, which will then allow them to pass lower prices on to consumers.

People who complain about what people do with the first they give need to stop giving gifts then.  Once you have given a gift to someone they own it, and what they choose to do with it is their business.  If the person thanked you for the gift and also reciprocated with a gift to you then, that is all that needs to be discussed.  Once this feature is available there will surely be a backlash from the “Miss Manners” crowd, but hopefully Amazon and others who adopt this technology do not cave to the pressure.  The patents were recently registered by Amazon, and no release date has been announced for the availability of this service.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

By now we have all heard that Wesley Snipes was convicted of failing to file tax returns in 1999, 2000, and 2001.  On Thursday Snipes reported to a medium-security prison in Pennsylvania to begin his three year prison sentence for the charges he was convicted of.  In February, a jury convicted Snipes on the misdemeanor charges, but he was acquitted of more serious felony charges of tax fraud and conspiracy. Jurors accepted his argument that he was innocently duped by errant tax advisers.

Defense attorneys in court documents suggested that to sentence Snipes harshly would be to disregard the jury’s verdict.  But prosecutors, in their sentencing recommendation, said the jurors’ decision “has been portrayed in the mainstream media as a ‘victory’ for Snipes. The troubling implication of such coverage for the millions of average citizens who are aware of this case is that the rich and famous Wesley Snipes has ‘gotten away with it.’ In the end the criminal conduct of Snipes must not be seen in such a light.”

Snipes suggested he was unfairly singled out by prosecutors, which has merit in the case.  Too often the government and legal system officials don’t care about handing out punishments fairly, but would rather harshly punish someone who is famous to send a message to the common man that no one can buy their way out of jail time.  This is the most misguided view of the way things work in this country, and for those handling his sentencing to think that they are sending a preventative message to the common man they are sorely mistaken.

Citizens have now started to realize that in many cases smaller crimes are overlooked if you are poor and don’t have that much money to your name.  Plaxico Burress and Wesley Snipes are just two in a line of famous people who have been given sentences not consistent with what the average citizen would receive for the same crime.  The most disturbing part of the Snipes case is that one of the jurors revealed that at least three other jurors had already decided that Snipes was guilty before the trial even began.

There are plenty of people out there who have not filed their taxes for years, and will blatantly walk around and tell people that they have not filed.  Even when these people get caught they are generally fined, and forced to pay the back taxes owed with interest.  They very rarely go to jail, and if they do it’s not for three years.  The fact that violent criminals and pedophiles in some cases do not go to jail for three years is astounding, but to make an example out of someone because the public thinks he got off easy is a sad narrative.

Was Wesley Snipes stupid for having bad tax advisers and not staying on top of his personal finances?  Of course, but he did not deserve to go to jail for three years of his life over it.  It has nothing to do with the fact that he is in movies and famous, but we all hire tax professionals to take care of those things because they are experts.  This practice of now persecuting the rich and famous to make a point is going to continue because prosecutors who win these cases make a huge name for themselves.  Don’t you think the guy who put Wesley Snipes away for three years would be a hot commodity on the job market?

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Many may not be aware, but there are many stupid, outdated, and non nonsensical laws that a person can be arrested for.  In some states it is illegal to spit on the sidewalk, while in others like Texas it is illegal to take more than three sips of beer while standing.  I am sure if you go to just about any bar in Texas, you will be able to find a person in a bar standing and gulping beer without being hauled away by the cops.  There is one such law in Louisiana that is being used by law enforcement to “catch” criminals, but some question how ethical the tactics being used are.

56-year-old Ola Mae Kelly knows walking on the street can be dangerous, and sometimes walking on the sidewalk can be equally so.  Years ago, Kelly was walking on the sidewalk when a man grabbed her from behind and dragged her away. Since then, the life-long Shreveport resident has made it a habit to walk in the street. It makes her feel safer.  At about 4:15 p.m. Aug. 16, Kelly was walking down East 75th Street, in the street, unaware she was breaking a city law that makes it illegal for citizens to walk in the street if there is a sidewalk. Kelly was surprised when a police car coming the opposite way, slowed and turned around after passing her.

She was even more bewildered when the encounter with officer Gerald McKinney resulted in injuries to her face, shoulder and knee — and her arrest.  Arrests almost exclusively were made in black neighborhoods; no arrests were made in mostly white neighborhoods.  Carter points out many arrests for walking in the street result in getting wanted criminals off the streets and behind bars. Case in point: 46 percent of citizens arrested for walking in the street by Shreveport police over the last five years were charged with two or more crimes.

A disturbing trend h as started to develop around this law, in 2005 one person was arrested for walking on the street.  That number ballooned to 75 arrests in 2010 and the year is not even over.  It is understandable that there would be more black people arrested since they are primarily enforcing this in black neighborhoods, and the cops have obviously decided to use this law to harass people.  In this case Kelly had no warrants, so why did the cop end up beating her down and hauling her off?  The fact that the officer passed her and chose to turn around and confront her for walking in the street was questionable as well.  I do not see the though process or logic, police officers know that most people do not have any idea they are breaking the law walking next to the side walk instead of on it.

The issue is not even the fact that the officer is enforcing the law as dumb a law as it is, but the sheer fact that police officers are not in the rich parts of Shreveport stopping people in rich neighborhoods for the same offense.  The double standard is what makes it an issue, and it is almost a lock that there is someone running on the side of the road in affluent neighborhoods people see it everywhere already, Louisiana is probably not much different.  The law needs to be enforced evenly in all areas and neighborhoods, or take off the books as a law.  This is the only way they will get some resolution and the public out cry will be diminished.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.