Insurance claims may be denied without receipts!

Full Story at: CBC News

A couple whose belongings were stolen from their downtown Vancouver condominium garage can’t understand why TD Insurance denied their claim — despite video surveillance evidence, police reports and witnesses that all attest to the crime.

TD Insurance records indicate the claim was refused because Daniel and wife, Sepide, couldn’t prove they owned the tools and other items they claim were stolen.

The Insurance Bureau of Canada (IBC) said it’s common for claims to be denied when claimants have no documentation to prove they owned what they lost.

Insurance Bureau of Canada spokeswoman Lindsay Olson said most Canadians do not have enough photographs or other evidence to document their valuables.  “You have to be able to bring yourself within the contract to say that I had these specific items,” said IBC spokesperson Lindsay Olson.

“It’s not enough to say ‘I had 50 pieces of tools’. You have to be able to say these are the specific items I had – and here are the receipts or the instruction manuals for those, or here are the photographs of them.”

Yet another reason The PERK Card is working so diligently to get rid of paper receipts.  What are your thoughts?

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • PDF
  • Ping.fm
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter
  • email
  • Reddit
  • Add to favorites
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Apple to pay Nokia big settlement plus royalties after losing patent case

Story from Guardian.co.uk.  Full Article Here
Apple will pay Nokia ongoing royalties on each iPhone sold as part of its settlement in the patent case.

The Finnish phone-maker Nokia could receive a one-off payment of more than €800m (£700m) from Apple and receive further royalties of €8 per iPhone sold in future, after winning a long-running patents case.

The company subsequently hinted that it may pursue makers of smartphones using Google’s Android mobile operating system, of which 36m were sold in the first quarter of 2011.

The settlement signed on Tuesday related to patents for mobile technology that helped Apple to revolutionise the phone industry in 2007 when it launched the first iPhone.

Although terms of the settlement were not disclosed, previous patent licensing deals in the phone industry have been worth up to 5% of the price of the device involved. At €8, or $11.50 (£7), they would represent about 4.5% of the estimated average $264 cost price of an iPhone, which Apple sells to retailers and phone networks for an average of $660. Apple has sold 108m iPhones since their launch.

Nokia’s shares rose by 3% as it said that the one-off payment, whose size was not revealed, will have “a positive financial impact” on its upcoming quarterly results.

At the end of May it forecast that its mobile phone division, which for years has been the biggest in the world, would see reduced revenues and might not make a profit for the first time in a decade. The one-off payment should push it back to its usual quarterly profit levels. Ongoing royalties from Apple of about 1% of the average sale price of a handset would be worth about $430m to Nokia this year, analysts estimated.

Nokia may now also choose to sue makers of handsets running Google’s free Android mobile operating system if it decides that they have also infringed its patents.

Nokia’s chief executive, Stephen Elop, said: “This settlement … enables us to focus on further licensing opportunities in the mobile communications market.”

A spokesman for Apple said: “Apple and Nokia have agreed to drop all of our current lawsuits and enter into a licence covering some of each other’s patents, but not the majority of the innovations that make the iPhone unique. We’re glad to put this behind us and get back to focusing on our respective businesses.”

Florian Mueller, an independent specialist and blogger on patent battles, said that “the deal structure – a one-time payment as well as running royalties – suggests a fairly good outcome for Nokia”. He added: “Maybe Nokia could have continued to play hardball and got an even better deal if it didn’t face the challenges it undoubtedly has. But this looks like a fairly important victory.”

He suggested that Apple would benefit if Nokia pursues Android handset-makers, because they have smaller margins and would be less easily able to afford royalties. Android dominates the smartphone market with a 36% share, ahead of Nokia’s Symbian with 27% and Apple’s 17%, according to the research company Gartner.

Financial analysts had mixed views on the outcome. Mikael Rautanen, at Inderes in Helsinki, said: “This is the first positive news from Nokia for a long time. They can both focus on their businesses now, and the dispute was settled to Nokia’s advantage.”

But others remained bearish on the group’s longer-term prospects. “This [the Apple deal] could cause the stock to have a bit of a relief rally, but does very little to address the stark reality that the company is facing,” Richard Windsor, analyst at Nomura, said.

On Monday, Nomura forecast that Nokia will be passed by both Samsung and Apple in the smartphone market worldwide over the next four months, and that its phone business will shrink by about 20% over the next two years as it tries to shift from Symbian to Microsoft’s Windows Phone on smartphones.

“We see no reason to remain anything other than negative on the stock,” said Windsor.

Nokia’s shares are still down about 25% since 30 May, representing a €5.5bn fall in market capitalisation for one of Europe’s biggest technology companies.

The case settled on Tuesday was filed in 2009 by Nokia, which said it had filed a patent 10 years ago that covered the use of touchscreen technology in phones.

Ironically, announcing the iPhone in 2007, Steve Jobs, Apple’s chief executive, said of the multi-touch screen interface: “Boy, have we patented it!”, in a warning to would-be rivals.

Elop said: “We are very pleased to have Apple join the growing number of Nokia licensees. This settlement demonstrates Nokia’s industry-leading patent portfolio and enables us to focus on further licensing opportunities in the mobile communications market.”

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • PDF
  • Ping.fm
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter
  • email
  • Reddit
  • Add to favorites
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Would you pay $50 to try on a pair of ski boots?

Customers at some [Australian] ski shops are being slugged a $50 “fitting fee” to try on ski boots.

The charge is refunded if they buy a pair of ski boots in-store, in a trend likely to be mimicked by other specialist retailers hard-hit by internet discounting.

Snowsports Industry of Australia chief executive Eric Henry yesterday said retailers had to pay high wages for specialist boot-fitters, who could spend two hours helping customers try on boots.

“Their time is valuable,” he said. “People will wander into a shop and spend an hour or two with the boot fitter, then go out and buy them off the internet.

Full Article: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/retailers-fight-online-rivals/story-e6freuy9-1226036488252

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • PDF
  • Ping.fm
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter
  • email
  • Reddit
  • Add to favorites
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Carbon Footprint Label on Products?

A new concept – The Carbon Footprint Labeling system – is spreading worldwide at an incredible speed. A simple way of informing consumers that their purchasing choices do make an environmental impact, the Carbon Footprint Label is affixed to the sides of participating products to show the amount of CO2 emissions created in the making of that product.  The label would show how many grams of carbon dioxide were emitted during production, from sourcing raw materials, to manufacturing and transporting the products to stores. For example, a box of powdered laundry detergent may show a carbon footprint of 750 grams, while a bottle of concentrated liquid may display a footprint of 650 grams respectively.

In order for products to carry the label, companies have to undertake a comprehensive carbon audit of the supply chains, to ensure an accurate display of facts.  Should this labeling system be adopted (or better yet, mandated by the government), it would be a great way to encourage consumers to shop green products – in turn, putting pressure on the makers of consumer goods to reduce their carbon footprint.  Should this happen, companies may find themselves competing, not only on price and quality, but on the “green-ness” of their products.

A quick Google, and this writer found a few different organizations trying to fill the void.

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • PDF
  • Ping.fm
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter
  • email
  • Reddit
  • Add to favorites
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Larger Tax Refunds – If only I had the receipt!

We originally posted this article on August 20th, 2010.  However, with tax season upon us, it is worth a re-post.

Tax time!  The mere mention of such a thing sends shivers down my (and probably your) spine.  Probably your least favorite time of year, and it only gets compacted by the fact that many eligible deductions go unclaimed because the corresponding receipts are nowhere to be found.  Revenue Canada and the IRS will not accept a credit card or bank statement for deductions, so for many of us, a box of receipts is required to satisfy the appetite of the ever-daunting “Tax Man”.  And while I’m unsure what the requirements are in the USA or anywhere else, in Canada, any tax related documents must be kept for 7 years in the event of an audit.

Now for some disturbing truth.  Much of today’s technology prints a receipt on “thermal” paper.  Retailers love the technology because it is a lot faster than the old (impact) style of printers (the ones that make a lot of noise when printing), and therefore, less wait time for their customers.  The disturbing part is that thermal ink/paper fades (without even touching it) after about 3-4 years.  This leaves you with a blank piece of paper and a larger tax bill should the government ever come knocking.

It goes without saying (but I’ll say it anyways), that The PERK Card’s mission is to be supported at every retail outlet in the world and eliminate the paper receipt altogether.  And while all efforts will be made to achieve this goal, we highly urge you to think about the above in the meantime.  Our system also supports manually uploading a receipt that you have scanned into your computer.  While the next time you purchase something, you may think to yourself: “Why can’t this go to my PERK account automatically?” – at least you won’t be wondering if your deductions from 5 years ago can withstand an audit.  You’ll be able to easily access your receipts and recall them on demand.

So…who wants to do their taxes now?  Alright, we won’t get carried away and believe the answer to that is “yes”, but at least next tax season will be a little easier!

  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • PDF
  • Ping.fm
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter
  • email
  • Reddit
  • Add to favorites
  • FriendFeed
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Next Page »

Stay Connected