FTC And PC Rental Companies Settle In Spying On Users Case

SternisheFan writes with news of a settlement in a case of Rent-to-Own firms grossly violating the privacy of their customers. From the article: "Seven rent-to-own companies and a software developer have settled federal charges that they spied on customers, ... The companies captured screenshots of confidential and personal information, logged keystrokes, and took webcam pictures of people in their homes. Their aim was to track the computers belonging to customers who were behind with their payments. 'An agreement to rent a computer doesn't give a company license to access consumers' private emails, bank account information, and medical records, or, even worse, webcam photos of people in the privacy of their own homes,' says FTC chairman Jon Leibowitz. 'The FTC orders today will put an end to their cyber spying.' Developer DesignerWare produced the software that was used to gather the information, PC Rental Agent. The package included a 'kill switch' designed to disable a computer of it was stolen, or if payments weren't made. However, an add-on program called Detective Mode could log key strokes, capture screen shots and take photographs using a computer's webcam, says the FTC in its complaint (PDF)."

Comments

They probably just had good lawyers

[adosch]

I've never personally used a rent-to-own service, but I can't imagine it's much fun when your marketed crowd is people who can't afford things outright, then specifically deadbeats who have zero intention of ever buying it and will go to great lengths to try and keep your merchandise.

But there's some shady about this whole story that just doesn't make a lot of sense. Why on earth would a rent-to-own company have a whole development team designing all this for them? I think there was a bit of wrongful intent on the company to want to try and steal some PII; maybe not use it themselves, but sell that information, sure.

Now being tied up with a legal battle, it's now easy for their lawyers to pull out the scapegoat that it was all about protecting their investment and assets. As much as I buy that, that's what the repo-man makes a living for. And if you're losing that many computer assets of non-payment or delinquency, then start selling bottom-line PCs and bring some pimple-faced Best Buy let-go in to oversell and dramatize the hell out of them for you. Or better yet, just stop selling them altogether.

Re:lengths companies go to

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Well it just goes to show the lengths some companies will go to in the persuit of profit.

Worse, it demonstrates the incredible toothlessness of the penalties for doing so, as long as you do it correctly(the fact that the victims of sleazy rent-to-own places aren't exactly people who matter or are likely to lawyer up very effectively)...

I suspect that there's a reason why societies that frown on and/or execute usurers have historically been so common.

Renting a Computer?

[Sponge Bath]

In the age of new $400 laptops, who rents a computer for home use? Rental companies (furniture, appliances, etc) are like payday loan companies: their sole purpose is to prey on the poor and uninformed. The profit is in penalties and reclaiming the product to lease to the next sucker. These transactions are designed to fail and trap the unsuspecting.

Re:Renting a Computer?

[ledow]

As someone who has, quite literally, had to tear the sofa apart to find enough pennies for the cheapest loaf of bread in the shop so my girlfriend and I could eat that week, ONLY IDIOTS.

I've been in very undesirable financial positions both through faults of my own and not, and I tell you that I never once rented an appliance or gadget. Lots of companies have the same kind of "penalty" for not having money, starting with banks for instance. That's not the problem here - the problem is IDIOTS who rent an unnecessary gadget.

Firstly, they are among the FIRST things you give up on and sell off. Honestly. They are not a necessity, and if you can afford the money to keep a broadband connection going, you're not desperate enough to rent a machine to run on it. TV, PC, phone. Get rid of them. If you haven't, you're not "in trouble", you're just temporarily "skint/broke" which is another thing entirely.

Secondly, if you have to rent one, you have to work out how much it costs and it ALWAYS costs you more to rent rather than buy outright (like any of those "pay weekly" catalogues and anything else of that nature). Hell, from some places, it's cheaper to get a loan on an item of jewellery (and even just one of those pay-day) and pay back the loan+interest than it is to rent or even lease a PC.

Thirdly, if you're in that position, and you do think you NEED to RENT a LAPTOP for whatever reason, you're an idiot. You can save money by going to the library and using theirs.

If you can't do that, take up an old PC from a boot sale or ask companies/schools that are throwing them out. Hell, you'll learn Linux rather than pay £200 Windows tax on a machine if it actually mattered. But, again, you don't really need a PC and if you do, you "need" an Internet connection much more for half the reasons those type of people state (e.g. "saving money on energy suppliers", etc. - you will NOT save enough money to buy a laptop and always-on connection, so don't give me that crap).

But a laptop, especially, is not required - if your job requires you to have roaming access from anywhere, they will pay for it. The only reason to have a laptop over a PC is absolute necessity for the task at hand (and thus will be provided), or complete narcissism. They are more expensive, less durable, less powerful and more expensive to repair.

I have little sympathy for those who rent such things, or even those who rent basic appliances. What sympathy I have is only for their intrusion of privacy, not for their situation.

My mum rented a TV for 30 years (different models, but basically the same rental) until one broke once and the company gave us hassle, and my brother and I worked out how much we'd spent on it. It was enough to re-buy a new TV every two years over that period and still have money left over. We'd quite literally have had 15-20 fully-working TV's (even after accidents, breakages, etc.) somewhere in the house if we'd put the same money into a box and bought a TV whenever it was enough.

The TV went back and we bought a new TV the same day, which last 5 years until dad changed it for another one for the price of what would have been 1 years rental (and there was nothing wrong with the 5-year-old one either and went to my brother's house).

Renting appliances is stupid. Even renting houses is stupid but that's an order of magnitude more expensive and buying a house requires a credit history and, thus, you can see that not everyone will ever be able to buy rather than rent. But renting, you are just pissing your money away and paying off someone else's mortgage for them, plus 10%. And, yes, I rented for many years.

Renting cars? You're insane. Renting appliances? God, shoot me now.

Everybody: If you find yourself renting objects because you "can't afford it", if you find yourself paying into Christmas clubs because "you can't afford it", if you find yourself signing contracts for monthly payments because "you can't afford to buy it" and then try to

Re:Renting a Computer?

[dsvick]

You're absolutely right, not everyone has the cash to purchase even inexpensive things outright, however, going through the rental companies is an absolutely horrible idea. I've never rented from one myself but was close quite some time ago when my girlfriend of the time and I were thinking of renting one of those cool video cassette player things... Even with their rent to own programs the amount of money you will end up spending is often three or four times the cost of the buying the product outright. Sure it is spread over time but even then the payments are not as low as you may think.

Have you ever seen any of their adds, did you notice how inexpensive it all sounds, a computer rental for $8, a desk for it for $4, even a nice comfy chair for a few bucks more. However, if you look at the small print, these prices are the weekly rates, by the time you total it all up and add in whatever other fees they tack on, I would bet you're at the point where you could save your money for a few months and go buy your own.

They suck you in with the glossy adds and the seemingly low rates, then when you find out the truth your sitting in the store with the shiny new PC in front of you and it's quite hard to turn down. After all, you only need to pay the rental for a year or two and it'll be yours. People that get sucked into these things and the payday loans are just widening the gap you mentioned

Re:Renting a Computer?

[vlm]

But renting, you are just pissing your money away and paying off someone else's mortgage for them, plus 10%.

Especially during the bubble, but still in many locations, it does not work like that. Usually renting is cheaper than owning.
Its been a decade+ since you can profit by renting money from the bank vs renting a house from a loanowner.

Housing market is still controlled by speculators. When (if?) investors take over, then you'll be able to buy for less than renting.

Its not much different than stocks. When you hear "dotcoms only go up" just like "house prices only go up" and people buy purely on hope of speculative gains, then talking about the rules of Graham and Dodd style long term value investment is pointless.

Fundamentally, "cash worth one house" and "one house" are equivalent, correct? So why would renting one, be a better deal than renting the other? Or rephrased, imagine I had enough money in the bank to buy a house... why would I invest it in privately owned bank stock and have the bank loan it, rather than just buying a house with it...

Re:Renting a Computer?

[CastrTroy]

I agree with everything you say, except the part about laptops being more expensive. Compared to a desktop, complete with a screen, mouse, and keyboard, you would probably pay more for the desktop. You can get a netbook for $200. That's good enough to send a few emails, browse the web, write up a resume and find yourself a better job. Plus you can carry it around, which means that you can go to the public library, coffee shop, or McDonald's and use their internet connection so you don't have to pay for that either.

Re:Renting a Computer?

[Paradise Pete]

Even renting houses is stupid

That's hardly a universal truth. Setting aside that renting in the US would have paid off handsomely in the last half dozen years, in many parts of the world renting make more sense.

In my own situation I pay ~US$320 a month for a modest three bedroom home. I could buy the house. The owner wants ~US$96,000. Why in the world would I buy it when I can rent it for a third of a percent of that?
(and that's the norm. The owner's asking price and rent are in line with the market as a whole).

Re:Renting a Computer?

[jeko]

I suspect the poster is talking about a long-term auto lease, which is a notoriously poor financial decision, as opposed to renting a car for a few days.

Re:Renting a Computer?

[Ceseuron]

I agree with most everything here, except for two points.

First off, car renting is not an insanity. I do own a car, which I take obsessively good care of. In situations where I don't want the mileage, wear and tear, and fuel expenses of my "not-so-fuel-efficient" Mustang GT, I will opt to rent a car. I did it not too long ago for a 350 mile drive (one way) and I'll be renting another car again when I fly for a business trip.

Secondly, renting a house isn't a stupid idea. I've done the "American Dream" routine of home ownership and, after my experience, I will never buy another house again. To sum up my experience in a concise manner, I bought a house back in 2007. Countrywide (now Bank of America) approved me based on my credit score and all that crap for a loan amount of up to $250,000. Not wanting to over-extend myself and preferring to err on the side of responsible home buying, I purchased a home for $155,000 on a fixed rate 35 year loan. The first year or so was good. Then property values started dropping fast. Light speed fast. Before long, the same floor plan I had purchased was going for $74,000 but I kept making my house payment. Then our glorious leaders in government started throwing around this ludicrous notion of "too big to fail". Bank executives ran to Washington DC with hands out and spewing fear mongering prophecies of another "Great Depression" if they didn't receive billions and billions of dollars of government (a.k.a. taxpayer) money. Banks then sat on the money they received, refusing to modify anyone's loan, and foreclosures went through the roof. After all, when you've already been given a shit ton of money as a reward for royally screwing the economy, billions more on top of that in taxpayer funded "insurance" against your garbage loans and toxic assets, why not simply repossess all the homes and profit twofold when the economy improves and you can sell them off at a premium again? Profit!

I approached Bank of America right around the time similar homes to mine were going for $60,000 and asked for a modification and, over the next year and a half, sent reams of paperwork in for the modification process. I learned all about banks and their new "bait and switch" philosophy fast. Most people have already heard about what happens during the modification process, but basically you send in paperwork and the bank conveniently loses it. If you call about your modification, you get told everything's awesome and they'll let you know soon. Then they tell you a week later that they didn't receive some or all of your paperwork. Or it got lost. Or their dog ate it. And it goes in circles. Even sending paperwork via UPS and FedEx, with delivery confirmation, does no good. About six months into this fiasco, I gave up. I stopped paying the mortgage payment and instead put the money into savings for the next year and I let the bank foreclose on the place. They sold it at public auction for $54,000 when last I heard about it. And, because the state I live in is what's considered a "single action" state where Bank of America only gets one action against a homeowner (e.g. foreclosure), they can't collect the difference.

So that about sums up my home buying experience and why I think renting isn't an insanity. I've heard all the tirades about how letting them foreclose was a bad idea, that I should have held onto a worthless property and hope I broke even in 20+ years IF the housing market ever recovered, and I can honestly say I just don't care. If what was supposed to happen in a "free market" economy actually did happen, and banks were allowed to fail regardless of their size, and our leaders didn't buy into the fear mongering and sent the banks packing to clean up the mess they created, then I'd have been more inclined to stay in the place. As it stands now, I've adopted a new mantra. If I can't afford to buy it outright in cash, I won't buy it at all. I'll be clearing my financial house of all

Re:Renting a Computer?

[shemyazaz]

After renting for 30 years you have accomplished nothing. You own nothing. The money is gone. What are you going to do when you are too old and infirm to afford that $320 monthly payment? Buying a house is investing in your own financial future. In the end you will have a tangible asset.

Re:lengths companies go to

[CastrTroy]

I wonder how there is even a market for laptop rentals in today's society. First, a laptop can be bought flat out for $400 and that will get you a not too bad laptop. On top of that, most computer stores will offer some kind of financing. I know a guy who worked at Futureshop. He said he was quite amazed how bad the credit ratings were of the people they gave out store credit cards to. You can go to dell right now and get a laptop for $15 a month. I don't see how any rental company could compete with that.

Re:lengths companies go to

[h4rr4r]

I bet the people these place prey on do not know that.

You can actually get a reasonable machine for less than $350, refurb for maybe $100 less.
Yes, they really are that cheap now.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834246633

Direct your outrage

[onyxruby]

Direct your outrage on this on to the people who let them get away with this. They settled for no fines or penalties. When the watchers let the scumbags get off with a slap on the wrist the message is clear.

Re:Direct your outrage

[amoeba1911]

What slap on the wrist? There was no slap on the wrist at all, they had to pay no fines, no punishment. I'm not sure how they got away with this.

This is gross invasion of privacy. A slap on the wrist would be a small fine, or some monetary award to their customers... or at the very least a letter of apology to their customers. No, they didn't get a slap on the wrist, they got the equivalent of: "you should stop doing that".

Here's how I see it: you rent a room or house to someone, and install cameras to watch the person doing private things, record all their phone calls... you get caught.... the police come over and say "you should stop doing that" and they leave. There is not even a slap on the wrist, this is simply unacceptable. Who did they bribe to get this?

Re:Devil's Advocate, At Your Service

[vlm]

What if the users explicitly agreed to this spying in their rental contracts?

Contracts written by lawyers but signed by the illiterate? You're not dealing with educated customers, or even trained customers.

Also there are plenty of "rights" you categorically cannot sign away in a contract. Its not as simple as Disney movie magic where the evil witch can write anything on a piece of paper and once the victim signs it, it has to happen that way.

Also there's usually a lemon law provision. Renting something you know is not private enough to use online for medical and financial transactions equals being ripped off. Thats not a laptop, thats a laptop minus all commerce and privacy. Now if they marketed it as a gaming and (free-)pr0n appliance rather than a general purpose PC, then maybe...

Re:lengths companies go to

[Reverand Dave]

I bet the people these place prey on do not know that.

That's pretty much the foundation of these rent to own business. That's why they are set up primarily in low income neighborhoods. People think they are getting a good deal by paying $10 a week for their TV but end up paying 200% over what they could have got it for otherwise.

Renting a place isn't stupid

[Sycraft-fu]

Buying a home is something that is a good idea, but only in some circumstances. If you don't meet the circumstances, then renting is a good idea since you need to have some place to live. Basically you need to:

1) Be able to afford it. You can nearly always find a rental for less than it costs to buy. If you can't afford the mortgage payments on a normal 30 year fixed mortgage, then owning is a bad idea.

2) Be willing to stay for 5 years or more. Buying costs money. If you buy a house and leave soon after, you will lose money on the deal. You normally need to stay for 5ish years to make it a good proposition.

3) Have the savings to deal with repairs of necessary things that might come up. Depending on your skill and physical ability, some things you can do yourself, but either way you are responsible for repairing your house so you need to be able to do that.

If you meet those criteria, then ownership is a great idea. I have owned my house for about 9 years now and I am very glad I do. But renting can be the right answer in many situations.

Also in terms of cars renting a car for a permanent daily thing is stupid but that isn't how most people do it. Car rental is when you temporarily need a car for something, either because you are in another city or you need a truck but don't own one or the like. It is quite sensible in those cases, rather than buying.

Class action

[phorm]

It's also a good reason why clauses blocking class-action are bad, and should be illegal.
People in these sort of situations generally CAN'T afford a lawyer to fight the abuse that IS happening. However they can form a class action. They might not get compensated financially, but they can punish the offending company and force them to clean up their act.