Living on your own means budgeting, and budgeting means figuring out what your necessities are; and lately I’m finding myself constantly looking for ways to save. As I was complaining to a girlfriend about how expensive eating out has become for me she suggested I take on ‘the brown bag challenge’. What is ‘the brown bag challenge’ you ask? Well, ‘the brown bag challenge’ is a month-long initiative to eat consciously and save money by packing a lunch each weekday instead of eating out.

Every morning I get up, get ready and go to work and every day I also buy a large coffee, a breakfast sandwich; and at lunch time I buy something from the mall as well. On average I find myself spending about $12 a day on food. That’s $60 a week, $240 a month! As the cost of living rises I can’t help but think that $240 could really be going into something else, i.e. an emergency savings account or even a vacation fund.

I accepted the challenge. I decided I’d brown bag my breakfast and lunches for a month to see how much I’d save and how much it would cost me. I went to the grocery store and purchased a bag of bagels, some herb cream cheese, some cold cuts, lettuce, tomatoes, some cans of soup and a bag of white bread. For lunch I decided that for most of the days I’d just pack left overs from last night’s dinner (most of which are always packed up and never eaten anyways) or make myself a sandwich and take a can of soup to work. Fortunately for me, I have access to a microwave at work, if you don’t have access; you may want to invest in a thermal container.

The end result? AMAZING! Every week I was spending about $15  on groceries for my brown bag challenge. Some of the stuff I’d buy would last two weeks. At the end of the month I have spent around $60 maintaining the challenge. I saved $180 in a month. And the best part about this challenge is you will never want to stop. Once you see the results and the amount of money you save, why would you ever eat out again? I mean, of course it’s nice to have someone else whip something up for you but is it really worth all that money? I don’t think so.

I challenge all our readers to try at least a week of brown bagging. Tell us how much you saved and if you’ll ever go back to eating out?

I’ve said matters are heating up in Ontario for debt settlements services – you know, the guys who promise 70 per cent savings on debt of $10,000 or more, with one of their front men on TV  being Canadian actor Alan Thicke.

Well, for companies of the sort that Mr. Thicke is pitching, the fat is now in the fire following a press package we here at Credit Canada Debt Solutions sent out last week in league with Doug Hoyes, co-founder of Hoyes, Michalos & Associates Inc., Ontario’s largest independent personal insolvency firm.

Global TV’s News Hour was among the first of many news agencies to express interest in the story about how debt settlement services are charging consumers up-front fees for so-called debt negotiations that can land people in trouble with creditors down the road. That’s because consumers are told by debt settlement agencies to stop paying their creditors and start saving for a low “lump-sum” payment of the entire debt at some future point.

But big questions remain about this process. For instance, how many creditors are willing to wait years for a lump sum payment of only 30 per cent of what is owed? Furthermore, what are consumers supposed to do about banks and creditors who naturally start to call clients about unpaid bills or even start a collection process or legal proceedings against clients deemed to be deadbeats?

Shouldn’t the debt settlement companies be contacting creditors to manage matters? Well, no, according to the debt settlement companies themselves, who say they make no claims to customers that creditors will not stop calling troubled clients.

It seems the debt settlement companies are not too concerned about anxious creditors. And why should they be? By the time the creditors get fed up and launch legal proceedings against the people who owe them money, the debt settlement agencies have collected all or a good portion of their fees up front.

Global TV dedicated a news segment to this whole matter last Monday, inviting Doug Hoyes and me to comment on the situation. You can watch the news segment here:

http://www.globaltoronto.com/video/credit+fixers/video.html?v=2229727319&p=1&s=dd#video

One of the biggest questions surrounding debt settlement services is their success rate in helping consumers. Since corporate cheerleaders like Cambridge Life Solutions President Jorge Fortune claim that the debt settlement process helps many rise above their debt problems, one might ask, just what are Cambridge’s numbers in relation to satisfied clients? But that, as Global TV discovered, is a matter that will remain secret.

Mr. Fortune (quite a name under the circumstances) has lashed out at his critics – including credit counselling agencies like my own, and insolvency experts like Doug Hoyes – for bringing the debt settlement business model into question – the very same business model that has been outlawed in the United States, and regulated in Alberta and Manitoba.

Mr. Fortune says credit counselling agencies and trustees don’t reveal their success rates, with the implication being that debt settlement companies should not have to do so either. But he is dead wrong about the transparency issue.

Doug Hoyes just released a three-year statistical sample of his company’s success rate with clients concerning consumer proposals to settle debt, which hovers around 75 per cent. Here at Credit Canada Debt Solutions, we have always been open to telling others that out success rate in negotiations with creditors averages 70 per cent.

As Doug Hoyes said in his recent blog about the issue – “Over to you, Mr. Fortune.  What is your success rate?”

Not long ago I wrote a blog about something called debt settlement services in Ontario, which due to questionable practices have been coming under fire within the credit and debt services industry, with growing complaints from consumers about how the services are not delivering on the promises they make. Since then, the fires of controversy are building, big time, with a growing contingent of credit counselling services and associations – as well as trustees and financial advisory firms – calling for government scrutiny of debt settlement companies and the way they operate.

Leading the charge is the Canadian Association of Credit Counselling Services, the association’s Ontario counterpart, OACCS, as well as my agency Credit Canada Debt Solutions Inc. (CCDS). In addition, vocal critics in the industry include Bankruptcy Canada, supported by professional trustees, BDO Canada, one of the country’s leading accounting and advisory firms, and Doug Hoyes, co-founder of Hoyes, Michalos & Associates Inc., Ontario’s largest independent personal insolvency firm.

We have all agreed, it’s time for the Ontario government to take a good, close look at debt settlement services, whose promises and practices have already been censured by the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC). Not to mention, debt settlement practices have been outlawed in the United States, and through new legislation they have been highly regulated in Canada – with certain practices banned outright in Manitoba through regulations modeled on an existing Alberta law. Meanwhile, Nova Scotia lawmakers are on their way to enacting similar legislation.

In just the past week or so, CACCS – and we here at CCDS in cooperation with Michalos & Associates Inc. – have approached the news media with a flurry of feature news and opinion pieces calling for serious investigation and analysis of debt settlement companies. The whole story can be found in a news package we distributed, which I am including with this blog.

The following items include a “News Feature – Special Report” covering the controversy in detail, as well as a “Feature News – Sidebar” pertaining to consumers who feel they have been betrayed by debt settlement companies. The news articles were prepared with the assistance of independent writer/journalist Robert McDougall.

Read them, and weep; that is, if hot steam doesn’t otherwise start exiting your angry ears first.

Feature News – Special Report

In the Thicke of things. Controversy mounts around debt settlement services with calls to action for government scrutiny in Ontario.

TORONTO – Behind the bold, red company logo stands the quaffed, smiling Canadian actor Alan Thicke, who is delivering an energetic sales pitch in a TV commercial. He encourages those facing debt problems to take advantage of a “consumer relief program” that offers to reduce overall credit card debt by as much as 70 per cent. The commercial’s tone is reassuring, betraying no sign that behind the TV supers and Mr. Thicke’s confident voice a controversy is mounting – one that cuts to the very heart of Canada’s debt services industry.

At issue is the “nature” of the services Mr. Thicke is helping to sell. But the matter needs explaining, and none in Canada are better equipped to do so than the country’s leading expert on consumer credit and debt issues, Laurie Campbell. She is CEO of the country’s largest and oldest credit counselling agency, Credit Canada Debt Solutions, headquartered in Toronto. As well, she is a former member of the federal Task Force on Financial Literacy and featured author of the blog, For the Love of Money (fortheloveofmoney.ca).

Said Campbell: “The controversy does not specifically or necessarily revolve around Mr. Thicke and the company he represents. The issues are bigger than that, having to do with the nature of practices now being carried out by a whole set of similarly inclined companies operating in Canada – and particularly in Ontario. These companies, which I understand largely stem from the United States, offer what is generally described as debt settlement services. The services also frequently fall under the banners of debt reduction, debt relief, and debt negotiation in advertising sales pitches.

“The perspective is, not too long ago, debt settlement services were outlawed in the United States, and through new legislation they have been highly regulated – with certain practices banned outright in Manitoba through regulations modeled on an existing Alberta law. Meanwhile, Nova Scotia lawmakers are on their way to enacting similar legislation. Given these developments – and in light of an increasing volume of consumer complaints relating to the services – serious questions are being raised in Ontario about why lawmakers in the province have not yet taken the matter in hand,” Campbell explained.

So what is the nature of debt settlement services? First of all, it has to do with the credibility of the claims debt settlement companies are making to consumers. The promises these companies make are being characterized by critics as grandiose. The companies promote savings of up to 90 per cent on unsecured (principally credit card) debt of $10,000 or more, which translates to paying creditors as little as 10 cents per dollar owed. According to many experts in the field, this is a preposterous expectation in most consumer debt cases.

Secondly, there is the matter of how the debt settlement process unfolds. Companies ask that consumers withhold payments from creditors and instead grow personal savings for a lump-sum offer of settlement somewhere down the road.  Meanwhile, all or a majority of service fees are paid by consumers to debt settlement companies before the companies reach deals with creditors, or even before they contact creditors. Critics maintain that through this process, unsuspecting consumers can be left with more debt, less money, and a bad credit rating as debt settlement companies blur issues and fail to negotiate settlements while pocketing up-front fees.

Though debt settlement companies currently are free to pursue their practices in regions of Canada that include Ontario, they are not immune to official censure, or at least, not as far as the federal government is concerned. While it is not within Ottawa’s purview to regulate debt settlement services (that is a provincial matter), the federal government nonetheless is free to voice its opinion about them, and it has done so in no uncertain terms.

Earlier this year, the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC) issued a consumer alert about debt settlement companies that are moving into new markets with suspect claims of easy, big-money-savings for people experiencing debt problems. The FCAC flagged the companies for “pie-in-the-sky” promises. High pressure sales tactics, unrealistic claims about slashing debts, misleading information about protecting credit ratings, and false claims about government involvement or approval were among the FCAC’s criticism of the sales pitches and practices.

At the same time, a number of long-established credit counselling agencies, trustees, and financial advisory firms say they are receiving a growing number of consumer complaints about debt settlement services, particularly in Ontario.

The Canadian Association of Credit Counselling Services (CACCS) – along with its Ontario counterpart OACCS – announced that issues surrounding debt settlement services require urgent attention. Alerts in Ontario also have been raised by Campbell’s agency, as well as by Bankruptcy Canada, supported by professional trustees, and by BDO Canada, one of the country’s leading accounting and advisory firms. As yet, the Ontario Government has remained quiet about the matter even as lawsuits and threats of lawsuits between debt settlement companies themselves and at least one leading bankruptcy trustee proceed apace.

Campbell said that if nothing else, provincial lawmakers should scrutinize the debt settlement business model, which before being outlawed in the United States gained speed across the country just about time the housing bubble collapsed.

Interestingly, U.S. attorney and American Fair Credit Council (AFCC) President Robby Birnbaum had this to say about the history of debt settlement services: “When the mortgage meltdown happened in the U.S., a lot of people who were in the mortgage industry tried to figure out what their next business would be … They saw debt settlement as an option, and they saw it as being an easy conversion for their existing sales staff who knew consumers needed help because of the large amounts of credit card debt.

“At the time, there wasn’t a lot of regulation to protect consumers specifically in debt settlement. There were a lot of companies that very quickly jumped into the debt settlement space, marketing very aggressively, and it became a numbers game – how many consumers you could get to sign up with your business as quickly as possible. Thus came the pie-in-the sky promises, and other deceitful claims,” Birnbaum said.

Debt settlement companies proliferated in America at that time, but federal and state regulators soon took steps to outlaw practices in the interest of protecting consumers from offensive behaviour. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) characterized the core element of the debt settlement service process as “an abusive practice,” according to a recent article in Maclean’s Magazine.

In Canada, a highly vocal critic of debt settlement services is Doug Hoyes, co-founder of Hoyes, Michalos & Associates Inc., Ontario’s largest independent personal insolvency firm. Hoyes took an interest in the matter after receiving negative reports about “debt negotiation” services from a number of people who came to his firm feeling they had been lead astray.

“One company featured prominently in the complaints that came to us,” Hoyes said. “People told me stories about how the company lead them to believe it would handle negotiations with creditors. But as time went on, creditors kept urgently contacting the people owing them money, who were left stressed and confused about the status of their debts. Only months later – with fees paid in large part or in full to the debt services company – did people realize that no debt negotiations had taken place,” Hoyes said.

This compelled Hoyes to conduct an unofficial, independent investigation of the debt services company. The findings brought into question the company’s office plant and employee commitment in Ontario, with suspicions that the offices merely constituted a shell for operations based out of the United States. For publishing his findings in a blog, Hoyes was threatened with a libel suit. But he continues to stand his ground, claiming full documentation of his original findings.

“Circumstances surrounding the offices have changed since I first reported on the issue, and I have addressed that fact publically. But I’m not backing off from what I first discovered. It pains me to think that debt settlement services with roots in the United States have entrenched themselves in Ontario, and are freely partaking of business practices the companies cannot legally pursue in the very country where they are, or were once, headquartered. The situation needs to be officially addressed, and soon.” Hoyes said.

While statistics concerning the efficacy of debt settlement services are not available in Canada, studies relied upon by the FTC and state regulators in America found that less than 10 per cent of consumers typically completed debt settlement programs, according to Maclean’s Magazine. Unofficial reports in Canada have put the figure as low as three per cent.

“The stories I’m hearing about these services are heartbreaking and maddening,” said Campbell. “Debt settlement companies frequently tell clients with debt problems to simply stop making payments on unsecured debts relating to credit cards, personal loans, lines of credit, and the like. Clients are advised to put their money aside in monthly savings and allow it to build to a point where a ‘lump sum’ settlement can later be arrived at with creditors at just a fraction of what is owed – in other words, a ‘pennies on the dollar’ settlement.

“But often as time goes on and the lump sum builds, creditors are left in the lurch, receiving no money in the framework of unreliable – or entirely absent – negotiations on the part of the debt settlement company, which is supposed to manage matters. The creditors continue to contact clients, and the clients grow confused because they think the debt settlement company is on top of the situation. But what really may be happening is the company is trying to buy enough time to get its up-front fees, which are taken off the top from the lump sum as it builds. After that, there is little incentive to help the troubled consumer. This is what happened in America, and now it is happening in Canada.”

Campbell continued: “We’re looking at situations where consumers are paying debt settlement companies thousands of dollars in up-front fees for the privilege of being hounded by creditors and in the end facing possible court action. At the same time, consumers see their credit ratings go up in smoke while still facing the original debt problem they thought would be resolved. There’s news of one case where a person owing $42,000 was charged $7,000 in up-front fees by a debt settlement company, only to be left with the full debt still owing and the $7,000 in fees long gone.” Campbell said.

Campbell emphasized that practices of debt settlement companies are distinctly different from those of not-for-profit credit counselling agencies – such as Credit Canada Debt Solutions. Though debt settlement companies can apply for and receive not-for-profit status in Ontario, the companies are not recognized for exemptions under provincial legislation.

“Unlike debt settlement services, credit counselling agencies in Ontario and across Canada offer something called Debt Management Programs, which take a thoughtful, realistic, longer-term approach to debt resolution. Our counsellors work face-to-face with people, helping them in steps all along the way – often for years – with full transparency of services and progress. I do not see this happening among debt settlement companies,” she explained.

“Moreover, credit counselling agencies are actively engaged in full-scale credit education programs, and devote major resources to the cause of financial literacy through myriad financial coaching and public awareness programs. To these ends, we work with many private and public sector partners, including major financial institutions, provincial and federal governments, educational institutions, and local communities. To my knowledge, debt settlement companies can make none of these claims,” she added.

Campbell said it’s becoming increasingly clear that the debt settlement services business model will not stand in Ontario, or anywhere else in Canada.

“As the Bank of Canada has pointed out, consumer debt in the country has reached unprecedented – even alarming – levels. Under the circumstances, we must all of us in the financial sector and government take extra special care to foster an environment that promotes fair and trustworthy business practices in relation to consumer debt.

“I believe it’s time for the Ontario government – and all governments across our land – to take up the task of protecting consumers from the questionable practices of debt settlement services. I have faith our governments will do so. Canada’s track record for protecting consumers is commendable, and often exemplary. I have no reason to believe that situation is going to change,” Campbell said.

In summarizing the controversy, she pointed out a quote from a recent opinion piece published by CACCS, of which Credit Canada Debt Solutions is a member organization.

“In matters of personal finance where the entire security of families and individuals often is at stake, integrity and respect for the well being of others is essential among those who would call themselves professionals in the debt services field.”

Feature News – Sidebar

Debt settlement services in Ontario leave people feeling cheated and angry.

TORONTO – There is the case of the retired Ontario automotive employee, married, his kids grown and having fled the nest. Over time he had managed to incur debts of more than $75,000. Not hard to do over a lifetime when you’re paying out a mortgage, buying new automobiles every few years, and raising kids and putting them through college. His debt represented a tough nut by most standards. Come retirement, keeping up with the payments and interest simply presented too much difficulty.

Then he saw a commercial on TV with an offer that seemed too good to be true. A debt settlement company proposed to help him reduce his debt to the point where he would pay just pennies on each dollar owed. So he called the company and arranged to let them handle the settlement, which he was told the company would negotiate with creditors some time later in the form of a lump sum payment – creditors would receive the lump sum based on savings he would place in his bank account. Meanwhile, per the debt settlement company’s advice, the man stopped all payments to creditors as he started to build his savings.

What he didn’t realize was that the debt settlement company – through a Power of Attorney agreement – would take fees from his savings up front, and at the same time do nothing to contact his creditors, who naturally grew concerned when the man stopped paying down his debts. It turned out the offer was, indeed, too good to be true.

Months of confusion, with the debt settlement company blurring issues whenever he called, resulted in the man paying out hundreds in debt settlement service fees before at last being presented with a court order from his bank concerning unpaid debts. At the same time, his credit rating took a nose dive. Now the man is left bitter and feeling cheated. Recently, he sought advice from an accredited, not-for-profit debt counselling agency and is considering the only option that may be left open to him – that of taking out a home equity loan on the modest house he has paid for in full, and that he had hoped would provide some security for his children when he and his wife pass on.

His is but one of many complaints that are surfacing about debt settlement services in Ontario, which also fall under the banners of debt reduction, debt relief, and debt negotiation in advertisements. In sales and telemarketing pitches, the companies promise debt savings of up to 90 per cent, a claim that most experts in the debt services field characterize as unrealistic, if not outrageous. Indeed, the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC) not long ago issued a consumer alert about such promises, describing them as “pie-in-the-sky.” Meanwhile, the way the debt settlement process unfolds also is coming under fire.

More typical cases in Ontario have presented themselves.

One Ontario woman tells of circumstances that match the above retiree’s story almost word for word in terms of how the debt settlement process unfolded. Recently separated from her husband, the woman is a single mom and part-time employee facing a critical debt problem. After paying a debt settlement company almost $1,000 in up front fees to handle her case, she was surprised and crestfallen when her bank started calling with collection notices. She now believes her only option is to file for bankruptcy.

Another similar story is told by a Peterborough, Ontario, woman. After being guaranteed debt savings of 45 per cent by phone – with additional promises of possible savings as high as 70 per cent – the woman signed up for a debt settlement program to which she is scheduled to contribute almost $1,300 per month for 36 months. Given that debt settlement companies typically charge about 15 per cent in up-front fee against the total debt settlement, the woman can expect to pay out about $7,000 in up-front service fees over the first few months before building on the lump sum that would be offered to creditors down the road.

Well into the debt settlement program, the woman’s bank started contacting her about lapsed debt payments, and now she feels betrayed by the debt settlement company.

“Stories of this nature grieve and anger me,” said Laurie Campbell, one of Canada’s leading experts in the field of consumer credit and debt. She is CEO of the country’s largest and oldest not-for-profit credit counselling agency, Credit Canada Debt Solutions, headquartered in Toronto. As well, she is a former member of the federal Task Force on Financial Literacy and featured author of the blog, For the Love of Money (fortheloveofmoney.ca).

“Here you have debt settlement companies going after cash-strapped retirees and struggling single mothers in Ontario with big promises, only to deliver grief and chaos through suspect business practices. Is this the kind of business environment we want for our debt services industry in Canada, especially when consumer debt generally is at an all time high? I don’t think so,” Campbell said.

“It’s time regulators took a good, close look at debt settlement practices in Ontario. After all, for almost two years unfair and unacceptable debt settlement services have been outlawed in the United States, with certain practices in Canada now banned outright in Manitoba through regulations modeled on an existing Alberta law. Meanwhile, Nova Scotia lawmakers are on their way to enacting similar legislation. Enough is enough.” Campbell said.

With the summer months approaching, talk of travel to exotic lands is starting to circulate. At work, among friends, even at home everyone wants to know what new and exciting things everyone else will be up to. I have already been put on the spot with the casual convo-starter “so do you have plans for the summer yet?” This makes me cringe as sadly, no, I do not. Maybe I’ll be able to manage that dream holiday down south and then again maybe I won’t.

It’s no secret that vacations can be pretty pricey; even pricier during the summer season when school is out and airlines, hotels and attractions are looking to capitalize on the surge of families hoping for a getaway. A good variation on the traditional vacation is the “stay-cation”, meaning to stay at home and do fun activities closer to home to cut down on costs. Most cities have summer festivals and special events and many of them free of charge. Toronto for example, hosts the Jazz Festival, the International Street Festival and Carabana just to name a few. Check out http://wx.toronto.ca/festevents.nsf for more exciting details.

With our busy schedules, we can easily forget just how much this city has to offer. When was the last time you took your niece to see the polar bears swim at the zoo? Had a good scare at a haunted house on Clifton Hills in Niagara Falls? Learned something new at the ROM or Science Centre? Or drifted down the lazy river at Wild Water Kingdom or Canada’s Wonderland? With or without kids it’s great to get out there and enjoy the summer season. If being a beach bum is more your style, head up to Wasaga Beach for a day trip, down to the waterfront downtown or any neighbourhood park close-by to soak in the rays. Pack a picnic lunch, don’t forget your hat and invite a friend and voila, easy and cheap day of relaxation. One hint however for those park-goers…speedos are strictly beachwear, no exceptions!

Another advantage to playing the role of tourist in your own city is that you can avoid tourist traps more easily. If crowds and postcards aren’t exactly what you had in mind, seek tips from friends and colleagues about where to go rather than depending on your Lonely Planet. Ask about favourite restaurants, good hiking trails, free parking spots; people generally love to share their good finds.

In the end, it’s not as important WHERE you spend your time off as WHO you spend it with. Whether you want to spend some quality family time or some well-deserved alone time, consider staying close to home this summer if you are on a budget. And next time someone asks you what your summer plans are, don’t be afraid tell to them you are going to live it up right here in your own backyard!

Recently I took a lunch at a restaurant with my friend Bob, who’s like a character from a TV sit-com along the lines of Seinfeld or Curb Your Enthusiasm. Though he’s middle aged, Bob’s got a very youthful outlook on life and he’s highly imaginative, always coming up with breakthrough ideas that might make him rich. He tells me his big goal is to become a multi-millionaire before he retires. But I constantly, and usually vainly, try to remind him he’s got some serious hurdles to clear along the way.

His first leap involves getting a grip on his seemingly boundless supply of nervous energy, which I suppose comes with being a creative professional in advertising. He’s a kinetic type, easily distracted, with a sometimes surprisingly short attention span. His thoughts rise and pop like bubbles in a glass of lager. He’s very smart, but he can be quite naïve at times, too, and he’s forgetful. Still, I always get a charge out of our conversations.

“Hey, Laurie, how about this for new product idea,” Bob said as our waiter dropped off a couple of menus. “A twelve-step program that helps anxious people conquer their fears. Let’s call it Fearless for Life, with high-impact, half-hour infomercials, a cool interactive Web site, and a host of program materials – from books to DVDs – with celebrity testimonials thrown in for good measure. With so much fear going around these days, it would sell like hotcakes, don’t you think?”

I took a moment to ponder the idea. I had to admit Fearless for Life had a catchy feel to it. But there were other matters to consider.

“It’s sounds like something a slick spiritual guru like Tony Robbins would come up with,” I said. “I suppose it could make you a fortune. But aside from possible moral questions, there’s one big problem – you’d have to devote more than a few minutes of time to bringing the idea to market. You’d need something like a year or more to get things together  – a herculean commitment for a guy like you.”

Bob’s eyes widened. I had touched a nerve.

“What do you mean?” he protested. “I can commit. I commit to things all the time … I mean, I made it for lunch today, right?”

“Right,” I said. “Whatever happened to your other big idea for the TV show, Bachelor Chefs?”

“Huh?” Bob’s eyes went blank.

“For heaven’s sake, Bob,” I said, a little exasperated. “Bachelor Chefs! You mentioned it to me not more than two weeks ago. You know, the two young guys – the slob and the perfectionist. You wanted to put them on the Food Network. They prepare bachelor grub and argue with one another and get into food fights. It was a funny idea. Don’t tell me you’ve already forgotten about it.”

Bob rubbed his bristly chin and looked up.

“Oh yeah, those guys.” He looked back at me. “That’s a big, big casting challenge, Laurie, especially given the thin pickings for good actors in Canada. I’m no good at casting people … er … I shouldn’t say that. I mean, I’ve got a good eye for actors what with all my experience making TV ads, but casting is always a pain. It doesn’t interest me.”

“Right,” I said. “I rest my case. No commitment. Just excuses.”

“Another thing about Bachelor Chefs,” Bob continued, as though I had said nothing, “it’s small potatoes. We’re talking a season or two of shows on the Food Network. Big deal. Fearless For Life is on another level. Multiple cable network programming. Lots of product extensions. Diet and exercise programs. Vitamin Supplements. Sleep inducing alpha-wave recordings on CDs … I can almost picture my new 80-foot yacht floating in the turquoise waters off St. Lucia in the Caribbean.”

I watched as Bob seemed to float into some sort of equatorial daydream filled with gently swaying palms and shimmering atolls. His eyes were on me, but he seemed to be looking past me. Then I remembered yet another of his big ideas, one he had mentioned to me last fall.

He told me that he and a friend had come up with a high concept for a humorous novelty item created in the spirit of a Twentieth Century marketing phenomenon called the Pet Rock.

Some may recall that during the 1960s in America, a smart guy came up with the idea to box and market simple rocks, treating them as if they were living creatures, and perfect low-maintenance pets. Pet Rocks even came with manuals, instructing owners about how to teach their inanimate little friends to sit, beg, roll over and what have you. It was all a big joke that brought sales in the millions with a little help from some funny national TV advertising.

Similarly, with their eyes on the Christmas sales season last fall, Bob and his friend came up with the idea for a novelty product called Absolutely Nothing, consisting of a small, colourful box containing absolutely nothing, save for an official numbered certificate authenticating absolutely nothing.

Bob and his friend went so far as to trademark the idea, and even mocked up ads around the product as the perfect Christmas stocking stuffer for “the special people in your life who you love – to hate.”A couple of ad headlines promoting Absolutely Nothing as a great gift to give went as follows: “A timeless gift” and  “Now when they say you shouldn’t have, you can say you didn’t. Advertising claims included the amazing guarantee that the product would never need replacing under any circumstances throughout eternity.

Funny stuff, though at the same time utterly cynical.

Typically, though, absolutely nothing was done to carry through on the novel idea once the initial excitement about it waned, distraction set in, and Bob and his friend went on to try to develop pop songs that would make them millions.

I looked Bob over again in the restaurant. Seeing that he was still lost in his reverie, I loudly enunciated the words, “absolutely nothing.” This startled Bob, and he instantly returned to the real world.

“What?’ he mumbled. “Did you say something?”

I nodded no. “It’s nothing,” I said.

He picked up a menu. “We should order. I’m famished.”

“Yes, let’s order. But can I offer you a few simple words of advice today, Bob?”

“Absolutely.” He was scanning the menu now.

“Okay. You tell me you’ve got a goal to become a multi-millionaire, but have you ever even once written this goal down?”

He cast me a sideways glance, with a bit of a frown attached.

“Huh?”

“Huh, nothing,” I said sternly. “Goals, especially lifetime financial goals, are serious matters, requiring a serious commitment. They need to be written down, mapped out, and with timelines set in stages. Studies show that people who treat financial goals this way are eight to ten times more likely to achieve success than people who do not.”

“Really?” Bob said distractedly, his eyes turning to the menu again.

“Really,” I said. “Trust me on this. You know I’ve been in the business of giving others financial advice for a long time. I see what setting goals and following through on them can do for people, especially those who are far away from a happy financial reality. The people I see who succeed are not scattered in their approach to their needs and desires, and the goals they set. They are focused. They are committed.”

I went on: “You could take a lesson here Bob. You’ve got tons of talent and great ideas. What you need is focus. I suspect you’d already be a multi-millionaire had you developed a strict regimen for setting and meeting goals a few years ago.”

“Really?” Bob reprised, once more in a distracted way. He looked up from the menu. “Say Laurie, have you tried the tuna here?”

There was a pregnant pause. He blinked. I blinked. Then I sighed, and rolled my eyes a little before reaching for a menu myself. What can you do about some people?

Absolutely nothing.

“Trouble is brewing within the debt services sector of Canada’s financial industry. Behind the image of Canadian actor Alan Thicke selling debt settlement services on TV, controversy is mounting around the acceptability of the business model upon which such services are based, and what far-reaching impact these services may be having on a growing number of Canadian families and individuals who are struggling to free themselves from troublesome debt.” Click here.

To tip or not to tip. That is the question that should not be asked by anyone – however frugal – who is treated to good food and good service at a sit-down restaurant. If you’re happy with your dining experience, withholding a tip is not acceptable in my book. And the notion of reducing or withholding a tip in order to save money is just plain tacky. If a tip in any way hurts a person’s pocketbook, then that person should not be dining out to begin with.

On the other hand, if the service and/or food at a restaurant is poor to bad, then customers ought to be free to reduce or withhold tips since gratuities are discretionary matters. Indeed, any tip is by definition a donation purely and freely based on the generosity of the giver. Or, at least that’s what I was raised to believe. However, in today’s topsy-turvy world, one can no longer be too sure of anything.

Just ask the American couple who not long ago refused to tip surly waiters at a pub in London, England. After finishing a meal and paying their tab without including a gratuity, the couple attempted to exit the pub but were physically restrained by the pub’s manager and employees. When the couple refused to relent, bobbies were called, and the tourists were treated to a ticket that included a hefty fine. Evidence if their crime was spelled out in black and white – the gratuity had been automatically added to the pub bill.

Then there is the recent case of the recalcitrant young couple in Pennsylvania who withheld a tip at a restaurant because they had to wait an hour and a half for their order. Not only were they cornered by restaurant staff, they were arrested on a charge of theft and fingerprinted by police because  – again – the restaurant bill clearly showed the gratuity was part of the fee for services. The fact that thuggish staff admitted to the slow service made no difference in the matter. At the time, one member of the staff said, “We were busy. We work our butts off for low wages. Who do these people think they are?”

I have to ask myself, what are we coming to on this planet when we are compelled on a mandatory basis to thank others for giving us grief? It’s outrageous – and outright nuts. In fact, in many places of the world, including my home province of Ontario, Canada, tipping is mandatory for parties of usually six or more. In Ontario, this is in accordance with something called the Automatic Tips Act of 2010, which I understand is up for review and might be eliminated. Good thing.

My thinking is, if owners and staff at restaurants believe they ought to receive more money for the services and fare they provide, then they ought to up their prices or put more effort into meeting customers’ desires and keeping people satisfied, rather than forcing them to pay more under the guise of a gratuity. Anything called a mandatory tip is a ridiculous oxymoron.

I have to ask, whatever happened to meritocracy in our society – and to pride of professionalism – not to mention the idea that keeping customers happy is the time-proven basis for growing and keeping business? From what I can see in Canada, the vast majority of restaurant goers are more than happy to shell out tips for good service and good food. It’s practically an automatic function for which there is no need for an automatic billing.

Of course, this necessarily sparks the question as to what constitutes fair tipping. The answer is that – across most of Canada at least – it is customary to tip about 15 percent on the total bill before tax, and to tip 20 per cent in exceptionally pleasing circumstances. I would label as a cheapskate any satisfied customer who tips less than 10 per cent.

Be that as it may, I have one last tip to impart to restaurant goers. Give thanks for your dinner only when thanks are in order – unless, of course, you are otherwise threatened with arrest, imprisonment, and perhaps execution.

I’d love to take credit for the discovery of this online scam on my own but I’d have to give the rightful shout out to Ms. Judge Judy and her epic courtroom cases and Sharron Curry the Director of Corporate Fraud Investigations of Wal-mart Stores Inc. for her detailed insight on this topic.

Last weekend while watching Judge Judy reruns I came across a very interesting case. This episode revolved around an Ebay Scammer that was being sued by a teenager’s mother after a fraudulent online purchase was made. The poor victim of this scam thought she was purchasing a bunch of brand new cell phones for a very good deal (everyone loves a bargain) so naturally she didn’t think twice about the legitimacy of her purchase. After making her payment she received a shipment of photos of the cellphones she had thought she purchased. Yup, she paid about $400 for PHOTOS of cellphones, not actual physical phones but pictures of cell phones. The Ebay scammer had written somewhere in some fine print in her product description that “this is for the pictures only” and therefore felt like she hadn’t scammed anyone. This is just one scenario of how online frauds execute their scams.

This type of trickery is referred to as Online Auction fraud. According to the RCMP: Online auction fraud includes fraud due to the misrepresentation of a product advertised for sale through an Internet auction site, the non-delivery of an item purchased through an Internet auction site or a non-payment for goods purchased through an Internet auction site.

Here are descriptions of the most common fraud seen at auctions, summarized from the article written by Sharon Curry.

Misrepresentation: One of the oldest tricks in business. Just what it sounds like. Or more accurately, the merchandise ISN’T what it sounds like. Value, authenticity or condition may be overstated, sometimes wildly.

Failure to ship merchandise: The merchant takes your money and runs, leaving you nothing but a lighter wallet for your troubles.

Failure to pay: Through the use of fake money orders, bounced checks, stolen credit cards, or a number of other techniques, the buyer gets the goods and leaves the merchant with nothing in return.

Shilling: Artificially inflating the price on an item by use of fake bids from phony user IDs or accomplices.

Bid Shielding: Using high bids from phony accounts to run up the price and scare off potential buyers, the actual bidder then retracts the higher bids, getting the item at a much lower price than he would have otherwise.

Piracy and counterfeiting: The sale of pirated music and software or counterfeit art, phony jewelry or gems, and forged collectibles.

Internet Fencing: Selling stolen goods through the auction.

Triangulation: The seller offers to send you the item (usually new, brand name goods) on approval. They then use stolen credit cards to order the item shipped to you. You pay for the goods (in cash) after receiving them, and get a visit shortly thereafter from the police. Credit card fraud and theft.

The “Buy and Switch”: The buyer gets the merchandise and returns a similar item that has been damaged, or a fake, with the claim, “It isn’t what I expected.” The seller refunds their money, and is left with broken and unresellable product.

Fee stacking: Fees, usually “related” to shipping costs, are added to the cost after the sale has been made.

Loss or Damage Claims: Not always fraudulent. After all, things do get broken in transit. Often these claims are a result of the buy and switch, or careless handling by the buyer.

Shell Auctions: No merchandise exists. The sole purpose of the auction is to get money or credit card numbers from unwary buyers.

Like always, we ask our readers if they’ve ever come across an online scam like this? Please tell us your stories, let’s help spread awareness.

After the many responses to my last blog about new age scamming I received all these new stories about  “Online Dating Scams” people had found themselves tangled in.  No one wants to think they could be taken advantage by an internet dating scam, and yet hundreds of thousands of people are every single day. Unlike the “mystery shopper” scam I wrote about in my last blog, these scams are a bit more personal and rather than feed off people’s desire for fast cash, they feed off people’s desire for romance.

I’d like to start this blog off by saying if you meet someone online and they sound too good to be true, they usually are. I don’t mean to be the bearer of bad news but although the World Wide Web can be a beautiful place and there are rare stories of online love blooming into an eternity of romance there are also many stories of how vicious and counterfeit the web can be…and in the world of online dating you have to be able to spot the snakes in your grass or else its inevitable to get bitten.

These scam artists purposely chose photos of attractive individuals so they can lure their victims into a web of lies while having them naively blinded by their extremely good looks.  It’s some pretty twisted stuff but unfortunately it happens every day, breaking not only thousands of hearts but thousands of bank accounts. They sign up with popular (and trustworthy) dating sites and do research on their to-be victims to maximize their impact. They approach them with similar likes and dislikes and begin the courting process. Most singles who have tried meeting people from online dating sites report that they come across hundreds of fake profiles who after a few flirty conversations have been asked to either cash their new beau’s cheque or proceed with a money order for them, some have reported that they’ve been asked for money to assist in emergencies relating to sick relatives or even their own illness. These online impostors will go to extraordinary lengths to win their victims trust. The story varies somewhat with each internet dating scam, but the intention remains the same: robbing you of your hard earned cash.

Ladies & Gentlemen… If somebody asks you to wire them money online – no matter what the reason, no matter how reasonable or sad it sounds just DON’T!  There are thousands of reported victims who are investigated (some even charged) for fraudulent activities all of which they had no idea about. Don’t be one of them. You should never EVER transfer money or give out personal information to a complete stranger. They say talk is cheap but in this case it can be very expensive!

So the next time an Angelina Jolie looking hottie messages you or that muscular overly romantic overseas doctor pursues you, take a moment and analyze the signs and don’t fall victim. And when it’s all said and done… I’d rather try the supermarket the next time I’m single and ready to mingle.

Dear Readers, have you ever met a fake online dater? How far did it go before you cut ties? I’d love to hear stories from our readers. Spread the word and let’s stop these online heartbreakers.

I know about someone in Arizona – let’s call her Nonie, age 59 – who is a spend freak, a conspicuous consumer if ever there was one. On any given day, she will get out and about in the city of Phoenix and drop tons of money on stuff she doesn’t need, and in most cases will only put to use maybe once or twice, if at all. In fact, according to reports, much of what Nonie buys is simply horded away.

For example, her beloved niece – let’s call her Julie (of college-age from Toronto) – visited her aunt late last summer. During the visit, Nonie got it into her head that she would buy Julie a new, high-end point-and-shoot digital still camera, which pleased Julie because she had taken up an interest in photography. But in the process of buying Julie the camera, Nonie caught sight of a video camera that appealed to her in the display case of the store. So, on a whim she bought it for herself, with absolutely no thought given to when and where she might use it. This, on top of the fact that Nonie is rather inept with digital toys, according to Julie.

In all, Nonie spent about $900 at the camera store. But the spending did not end there.

Later that same day, Nonie and Julie visited a Wallmart. Nonie stated the trip would be brief; she just had to pick up a couple of throw pillows. Well, once inside the store, her quest turned into an interminable shopping spree wherein Nonie purchased her pillows, an Ottoman, a floral dress, and – yet another gift for Julie – a pair of sandals for spring. This little foray by credit card added another $500 to Nonie’s expenditures, bringing the total bill for the day to about $1,400.

There’s more to the story.

Last Christmas, Julie visited her aunt again, later reporting to me that to this point in time Nonie had only once used the video camera she bought the previous summer. She used it to film – in a very jittery way – a potted rose on the porch of the little wood-frame house she rents in Phoenix. The video clip, Julie said, is about 20 seconds long, which amounts to a very expensive production given the camera’s original $500 price tag. Meanwhile, Julie noted that the closet in her aunt’s bedroom was so chock full of garments and shoes that Nonie would be lucky to find the floral dress she earlier purchased in Julie’s presence. There was no sign of the Ottoman Nonie had purchased in the summer, though the throw pillows were in evidence on a shelf in Nonie’s laundry and storage room, which was piled high with other goods, many still unopened in their original packages.

The capper to Julie’s second visit to her aunt’s place is that Nonie’s spending behaviour had not diminished one bit. If anything, it had increased. Day by day, she took Julie out on more shopping junkets, though Julie to her credit declined most of the new stuff her aunt offered to lavish upon her.

Now, Nonie apparently can afford to spend the way she does only because she has a healthy nest egg resulting from the sale of a home she once inhabited with her late husband in Portland, Oregon, as well as money that came to her through a life insurance policy belonging to her husband, who passed away three years ago. Nonie has never mentioned a figure, but Julie suspects that her aunt has – or at least had – a net worth reaching well up into seven figures.

Julie believes the nest egg is fast dwindling. Nonie is childless and lives alone, but her rent, new car payments, credit card bills and living and health expenses are adding up in Phoenix. She has not worked a single day since her husband passed away. She is on anti-depressants. She doesn’t exercise, and socializes infrequently, with friends and family dispersed far and wide throughout North America. Her diet is abysmal, consisting mostly of coffee and nutritional milk shakes from cans. On top of it all, she is taking OxyContin (a medication roughly equivalent to heroin) for pain from a back injury.

Now, it is important to understand that Nonie’s husband – who Julie says was as a great, dearly loved guy – fought a long fight with cancer during the time he and Nonie called Portland their home. Being a talented nurse with a lot of experience, Nonie was there by his side tending to him throughout the ordeal. When at last he passed on, she was devastated, and has since regularly fallen into deeply depressive moods from which she has a very hard time freeing herself. Meanwhile, according to Julie, only since the passing of her husband has Nonie taken to wreckless spending.

To me, the last point is most telling.

Simply put, there is a big hole in Nonie’s life, and she is attempting to fill it with material things. Not only that, the hole appears to be so deep that even the supposed wisdom and common sense that should come with being a seasoned nurse have gone by the wayside.

Naturally, Julie, who loves her aunt deeply, is very worried about the situation. Julie asked me early this year for advice about what to do, and I responded frankly. After some 44 years as a non-profit credit counselling service, Credit Canada Debt Solutions has dealt with many situations similar to those of Auntie Nonie. In almost every case, decisive intervention by family and/or loved ones, therapists and professional counsellors must be undertaken with no time to lose.

I told Julie tough love probably was in order with Nonie, whom Julie described as a loving individual, but who is stubborn, opinionated, and proud. She is a woman boasting a stellar career as a nurse who has devoted her life to helping others out of a sense of compassion. In this light, I almost instantly discerned that Nonie is a woman who feels it is her calling to take the whole world on her own shoulders. In the process, she has failed to see that there sometimes comes a time when the heroine, too, needs rescuing. Right now she cannot get past what is ailing her all by herself.

Nonie, I said, needs help on two levels. First she must immediately seek therapy and/or the sustained company – for however long it takes – of family and friends for the grief she has not yet been able to overcome. Such aid requires a new outlook from the point of view of Nonie’s psychological and physical health. In addition to working through her emotional pain, Nonie also needs to establish a sound regimen for diet and exercise. Plus, I would say purely from a common sense, laymen’s standpoint that thought should be given to a review of her drug therapy, particularly in relation to OxyContin, which as the news reports of late are telling us is so highly addictive.

On a second, vitally important level, Nonie should seek qualified financial counselling before her nest egg disappears. It is essential for her to establish and follow a monthly and yearly budget that she unfailingly adheres too as she enters her silver years.

As I say, all this may require measures of tough love. Family members and/or friends and counsellors may have to use frank means to shock Nonie into recognizing her state of affairs. This does not mean being sanctimoniously judgmental and meanly critical. It just means engaging in an honest dialogue about the objective circumstances that are dragging Nonie down. For instance, it would be wise to challenge and perhaps assist Nonie in tracking her spending for even just one month, then openly discuss the findings.

She could be in for a big surprise about matters of which she has been largely unconscious.

It could be an important step in the direction of showing Nonie that sometimes it’s the nurse, too, who needs care.