Report Cryptocurrency and investment scams rising in CT US / Public News Service

A new report finds scams in Connecticut and nationwide are rising.

The Better Business Bureau’s 2023 Risk Report noted 762 scams were reported in the state, with over $1 million in losses.

One notable change is the kind of scam taking people in. Previously, online shopping scams ranked highest, but cryptocurrency scams are the front-runner now.

Kristen Johnson, communications director for the Better Business Bureau of Connecticut, said older people across the country are most affected.

“As they get closer to retirement, they oftentimes feel like they are not financially settled and so they’re not where they thought they would be,” Johnson explained. “A lot of times with these investment scams, is they will promise quick return on your investment, which is a hallmark of an investment scam.”

She added get-rich-quick scams can be alluring to people who have not had as much time to save for their retirement. On average, investment and cryptocurrency scams cost Connecticut residents a little more than $8,000. Johnson advised people to research companies and people they’re dealing with to better identify scams. Anyone who has been scammed should report it to Better Business Bureau’s Scam Tracker to prevent others from being swindled.

Though social media is an increasingly common place for scammers to seek a person out, it is not the only place. Johnson pointed out responding to online surveys or different websites can also give an outside party access to your information.

“Think about all the online shopping that we do. Think of all the interaction we have with different websites, our favorite clothing stores,” Johnson outlined. “We’ll give them our email address and then they capture that, and they can share that with third parties.”

People should check to see if websites they frequent share information about them with third parties. This can prevent any other personal information from getting into a scammer’s hands. However, Johnson added a lot of information is already on the internet, making it much harder to get it back.

get more stories like this via email

Time is running out for the public to weigh in on whether AT&T should be allowed to stop offering landline service across most of the Golden State.

The California Public Utilities Commission is holding an in-person hearing in Indio on March 14 and a virtual hearing where people can call in on the 19.

Josh Hart, spokesperson for the grassroots Save Landline Telephones Coalition, said AT&T should not be able to give up its obligations as a Carrier of Last Resort – because many Californians rely on landlines.

“There are a lot of people who live in rural areas where there are no alternatives,” said Hart. “A lot of people who use landlines exclusively are injured by electromagnetic fields and cannot even use cell phones because they experience pain.”

In a statement, AT&T said customers will not lose access to voice service or 911, as the company will continue to provide traditional landline service to customers with no alternative option.

The company declined to say how many landlines it provides – only that 5% of its customers use landline service.

A filing with the CPUC lists hundreds of affected communities. You can also go online, enter your ZIP code, and consult the map of AT&T’s territory.

Hart noted that landlines become a lifeline when power goes out, or when wildfires take cell networks offline.

“If the CPUC approves AT&T’s application, we’re basically saying the market will decide what is profitable for these companies to provide and where,” said Hart, “which, to many of us living in rural areas means that our areas are going to be neglected in favor of the more lucrative urban areas.”

Twenty other states have already approved similar proposals.

However, multiple California counties have come out against it, and 15 members of the state’s congressional delegation recently sent the CPUC a letter of opposition.

get more stories like this via email

Colorado’s standardized health-insurance plan, known as the Colorado Option, is changing how consumers interact with insurance, according to a new report tracking the plan’s development since 2013. Today, an increasing number of Coloradans are choosing the plan, largely because of its value.

Erica Pike, director of policy and government relations for the Colorado Academy of Family Physicians, explained many insurance plans offered after the Affordable Care Act was rolled out in Colorado did not cover comprehensive preventive services, which frustrated doctors.

“And so, looking for a way to incentivize and design a plan that centered primary care was something that we were really hopeful for,” she said.

After lawmakers passed House Bill 1232 in 2021, the Colorado Option was developed with extensive input from consumers, insurers, health providers, rural communities and other stakeholders. In addition to offering preventive care, other primary goals for the new plan were to make insurance easier to understand and more affordable, and to improve health outcomes for historically disadvantaged communities.

Jen is a consumer with diabetes who was cited in the report compiled by the Colorado Consumer Health Initiative. She said choosing a Colorado Option plan made the most sense, in part because Continuous Glucose Monitoring coverage was available with a zero-dollar co-pay in the schedule of required benefits.

“It covered the most prescriptions, and did not require step therapy for Ozempic. And it indicated that I would probably, with prior authorization, be able to stay on the insulins I was on,” she said.

This year, more than 93,000 Coloradans enrolled in Colorado Option plans, more than doubling last year’s enrollment and representing more than a third of all enrollments through Connect for Health Colorado. More insurers are also offering plans, providing much-needed competition in 12 counties.

The Colorado Division of Insurance is scheduled to hold public hearings on the plans later this year if insurers do not meet premium reduction targets, and will evaluate the plan’s progress in both affordability and health equity in 2026.

get more stories like this via email

A bill to grant local cities the ability to regulate autonomous vehicles is getting a lot more attention after the California Public Utilities Commission decided Friday to allow robotaxis on Los Angeles and San Francisco freeways.

The commission granted the company Waymo’s driverless taxi service permission to travel up to 65 miles per hour.

Chris Griswold, president of Teamsters Joint Council 42, represents truck drivers and said he supports Senate Bill 915 over concern about the safety record of autonomous vehicles.

“These vehicles are just stopping for no reason,” Griswold pointed out. “We’ve had emergency vehicles blocked. You had animals run over, you had a lady drug down the street. We can’t trust these companies to just be out on the streets and run wild. We have to have our community leaders regulating these vehicles.”

In October the California Department of Motor Vehicles revoked the operating permit of the company Cruise, which is backed by General Motors, following an investigation after a pedestrian was dragged 20 feet. Waymo is backed by Google and said in a statement the company has “no immediate plans” to put its driverless vehicles on the highways and will take a “careful and incremental approach to expansion.”

Janice Hahn, a Los Angeles County supervisor, said in a statement Angelenos should not be Big Tech’s guinea pigs and declared support for the bill to allow local control.

Sen. Dave Cortese, D-San Jose, the bill’s author, said it would allow cities and counties to regulate autonomous vehicles in the same way they set the rules for traditional taxis right now, but he is not calling for a ban.

“The bill will not allow the ban of AVs or robotaxis,” Cortese explained. “We will ensure every step of the way that the bill embraces the innovation but at the same time make sure that we’re in a position to make it as safe as possible.”

The bill is currently awaiting consideration in the state Senate committees on local government and on transportation.

get more stories like this via email