SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Community activists are urging California lawmakers to reject two bills that would limit local control in order to clear the way for 5G small-cell wireless equipment near homes, schools and businesses.

Supporters of the bills have cited the economic benefits of improved high-speed broadband. However, multiple cities are fighting the 5G rollout, citing concerns about health, safety and property values.

Doug Wood, founder and director of the nonprofit Americans for Responsible Technology, opposes both bills.

"It gives the telecoms free rein to install this equipment pretty much wherever they want, and puts unreasonable time limits on a city's permitting process," he said. "The only people benefiting from these bills are the telecoms, not Californians."

Senate Bill 556 would require municipalities to make space available at low rates for communications service providers. It passed the Senate and is now in two Assembly committees. And Assembly Bill 537 would force cities to go to court if they want to deny a permit for a location. It has passed in several Assembly committees with bipartisan support.

The telecom companies have argued that installing 5G statewide will give low-income communities a leg up. But Larry Ortega, with the nonprofit Community Union, said wired municipal broadband is a better option. He added that these bills do nothing to address cost to the consumer.

"You know, many of our kids are not going to afford 5G," he said, "so, there's going to be an increase in cost, which is the primary barrier in the digital divide."

In terms of health concerns, a 2018 study from the National Institutes of Health found radio frequency radiation - used in cell phones and 5G antennas - caused heart and brain tumors in male rats. However, the Federal Communications Commission has declared cell phones safe. Detractors say the standards the FCC used to make that determination are decades-old and flawed.

get more stories like this via email

Online scams are growing in scale and sophistication, affecting millions and creating economic losses estimated at $1 trillion globally in 2023.

The upcoming Global Anti-Scam Summit in Arlington, Va., will bring experts together to develop strategies to combat the threat.

Jorij Abraham, managing director of the Global Anti-Scam Alliance, said as scams continue to surge, inflicting financial and emotional harm, there is an urgent need to work together.

"The big challenge is that we have to work across the different industries and across borders because scammers are getting very, very professionalized," Abraham pointed out. "We see scammers usually doing the same scam in 80 different countries and there the challenge is really putting them behind bars."

The summit is scheduled for Nov. 12-13.

Abraham advises people to consult friends and family before acting on suspicious texts or emails. According to the FBI, scams targeting Americans age 60 and older led to more than $3.4 billion in losses in 2023, though many cases go unreported.

The FBI also warns the public about scammers exploiting the 2024 U.S. general election for financial fraud. Abraham noted scams are becoming among the most reported crimes.

"We are continuously being bombarded by scammers who are trying to get our identity or our money," Abraham observed. "The goal of the summit is to discuss how can we reduce the approaches by scammers, trying to make sure that they are less successful and in the end actually are trying to really catch the scammers."

The FBI's report found tech support scams to be the most commonly reported type of elder fraud in 2023, affecting nearly 18,000 victims over age 60. Investment scams, however, were the most financially damaging, resulting in more than $1.2 billion in losses. The FBI said the fraud often involves cryptocurrency schemes targeting older Americans' finances.


get more stories like this via email

Millions of Californians buy used cars still under a manufacturer's warranty - but consumer groups say those warranties are now essentially unenforceable.

It's the result of a ruling Thursday by the California State Supreme Court. The panel of judges agreed with car manufacturers that the state's so-called "lemon law" only applies to new cars.

"You won't be able to tell the manufacturer, 'Hey, you have to fix my car or I want a refund.' The manufacturer can just blow you off," said Rosemary Shahan, president of the nonprofit Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety.

Owners of these used vehicles could be faced with big unanticipated repair bills if the manufacturer opts not to honor the remainder of the warranty. The court ruling means they will no longer have a right to a refund or replacement vehicle.

Shahan said she thinks that now the California Legislature should step in. She said other states already have acted to better protect used-car buyers.

"A number of other states have used car 'lemon laws,' where they mandate warranties," she said, "and they say if you pay a certain amount for a used car, that the warranty has to last for a certain period of time, and you have the right to get a refund or replacement."

The case, Rodriguez v. Fiat Chrysler of America Inc., has been in litigation for several years. Lemon-law experts say it is unclear whether this decision covers what are known as "certified" used vehicles - promoted by the manufacturers as "like new."

get more stories like this via email

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story misstated the nature of additional flood insurance requirements. It is optional in most, but not all, cases. (10:45AM MST, October 28, 2024)

Since Hurricanes Helene and Milton devastated Florida, more than 49,000 insurance claims have been denied, leaving thousands of residents in financial uncertainty as they attempt to rebuild.

According to data from the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation, many companies denied claims related to flood damage, a peril not typically covered under standard homeowners' insurance policies.

Mark Friedlander, corporate communications director for the Insurance Information Institute, explains that many denied claims result from homeowners not having separate flood insurance, which is required for policyholders with Citizens Insurance and those with mortgages in high-risk zones.

"Standard home, condo and renters policies do not include flood damage," Friedlander pointed out. "If you're filing a flood loss with your property insurer, it's going to be denied. Another issue is not meeting the deductible; that's another big category of denials."

For instance, he noted if you have a $10,000 windstorm deductible and your damage is $8,000, there will be no claim payout. He added the threshold has led many homeowners to find themselves without compensation for damages falling just short of deductible limits. He emphasized property owners should consider purchasing separate flood-insurance policies to be fully financially protected.

For residents whose claims were denied, Friedlander advised considering Federal Emergency Management Agency assistance as a partial alternative. He revealed some homeowners intentionally file claims they know will be denied to meet FEMA requirements.

"In order to qualify for FEMA emergency grants, you must prove to FEMA that you did not have insurance coverage for the loss," Friedlander stressed. "The only way to do that is to get a denied claim. You need to show the letter from your insurer to FEMA as part of the application process for the grant."

Florida's high cost of property insurance added another layer of difficulty, with annual premiums averaging $5,527 dollars for a home valued at $300,000. The premium is more than twice the national average, creating a financial strain for many. Despite the recent hurricanes, Friedlander reassured residents Florida's insurance market remains resilient, crediting recent legislative reforms.


get more stories like this via email