overcharge
Latest
AT&T customers can get unwanted charges refunded only until May 1st
If you vaguely recall getting a text from AT&T within the past three months about some sort of a refund for unwanted charges, call this toll-free hotline ASAP: 877-819-9692. A rep can tell you if you're eligible for part of the $80 million AT&T handed over to the FTC when the company settled a complaint accusing it of "mobile cramming." That's what you call the practice of sending and charging subscribers for horoscopes, ring tones, etc. without their consent. The carrier reportedly charged customers "hundreds of millions of dollars" for those spammy third-party subscriptions. Once you know you're eligible, file for a refund quickly (either on the phone or online), because you can only do so until Friday, May 1st.
Ask Engadget: how long should I first-charge a battery?
We know you've got questions, and if you're brave enough to ask the world for answers, then here's the outlet to do so. This week's Ask Engadget inquiry is from Bernard, who wants an answer to the age-old question of ensuring you get the most out of your batteries. If you're looking to ask one of your own, drop us a line at ask [at] engadget [dawt] com. "It's said that you should always leave brand-new electronics plugged in for 'a few hours' after being fully charged, but how do you decide that period of time? Is there a calculation depending on the capacity of the battery, or what? Help me, please!" Nowadays, do you even need to? While memory effect was an issue on NiCad batteries, Lithium Ion units don't suffer from the same issue. It could also be tied to the belief that most chargers only re-juice batteries up to 95 percent, but we can't find any authoritative proof on the matter. Let's turn it over to the electrical engineers and battery experts who read Engadget on a regular basis so we can sort this out, once and for all!
Wrath 101: Emalon the Storm Watcher
So ends the age of the weekly loot piñata. The Wintergrasp raid instance, somewhat inappropriately called the Vault of Archavon, has a new tenant who isn't quite the pushover Archavon the Stone Watcher has been since the launch of Wrath of the Lich King. The Vault of Archavon was essentially every Level 80 player's weekly lottery and near guaranteed shot at Emblems. It was the most compelling reason to capture Wintergrasp as the raid was only available to the faction in control of the zone. Enter Emalon the Storm Watcher, a new raid boss with Patch 3.1 who drops Ulduar and Season 6 loot. Emalon's difficulty is ramped up considerably from Archavon and -- if initial forays are any indication -- hard enough to give seasoned raiders like our own Matt Low an aneurysm.Unlike his meek neighbor Archavon, Emalon actually requires a bit of strategy and situational awareness. He also comes with four bodyguards, the Tempest Minions, who are integral to the fight. As can probably be inferred from his name and his crew, Emalon the Storm Watcher's primary source of damage is lightning, or Nature damage. It won't be necessary to stack resistance, just an understanding of the fight, his abilities, and knowing what to do and avoid. You can visit Emalon by turning into a corridor on the right just before heading into Archavon.
Best Buy sued over shady intranet site
Tsk, tsk. Looks like Best Buy will indeed be paying up for the misdeeds involving that dodgy intranet we saw a few months back. Connecticut's attorney general announced a lawsuit against the big box retailer and accused it of "deceiving customers with in-store computer kiosks and overcharging them." Attorney General Richard Blumenthal was quoted as saying that the store "gave consumers the worst deal with a bait-and-switch-plus scheme luring consumers into stores with promised online discounts, only to charge higher in-store prices." The suit seeks "refunds for consumers, civil penalties, court costs, a ban on the practice, and other remedies," and while Best Buy spokespersons are vigorously denying the allegations, Connecticut's consumer protection commissioner even said that there was "certainly an element of deception here." Reportedly, the in-store kiosks were somehow an "alternate way to get information about products," but when that information ends up costing your customers more than they should be paying, we doubt the judge will look kindly upon it.
