Spirit Flight Canceled After Woman Refuses To Leave Bathroom

Passengers on a Spirit Airlines flight from Florida to Cartagena, Columbia will arrive at their destination an entire day later than planned after their original flight was canceled when the plane’s pilots exceeded their maximum flying time, a result of delays caused by an unruly passenger who refused to leave the aircraft’s bathroom. 

The Spirit flight had been boarded for its departure from Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport Wednesday morning when it was delayed a short time for a maintenance issue, a spokesperson for the airline tells Consumerist. While maintenance officials worked to fix the routine issue, passengers were allowed to leave the plane and wait in the gate area.

During re-boarding, a passenger was seen carrying an open can of beer. The woman was notified that she couldn’t bring the drink on the plane, as it was in violation of rules. When asked to dump the drink, the woman allegedly threw the can at the flight attendant and pushed past the crew member, and locked herself in the plane’s bathroom, the spokesperson said.

A video of the incident obtained by WSVN shows the woman standing in the door frame of the bathroom yelling at crew members and other passengers.

“Oh, so they want to attack me,” the woman can be heard saying. “Wait until the police come.”

The Spirit spokesperson tells Consumerist that crew members and fellow passengers tried to get the woman to leave the plane, as they only had about 10 minutes to push back before the crew would reach their maximum flying time under federal regulations.

“Everybody asked her, ‘Please, get off,’ because we had 10 minutes to push off,” one passenger tells WSVN. “They were ready to push off, literally ready to push off. She’s the one that stopped the whole thing.”

Ultimately, the woman reportedly left the plane before officers from the Broward Sheriff’s Office arrived, but not before the flight crew reached their maximum flying time.

Spirit was able to re-book most passengers on a 10 a.m. flight to Columbia Thursday. Those who could not be accommodated on the later Spirit flight were placed on flights with other airline, the spokesperson said.

“We regret that one person was able to adversely affect a flight for the rest of the customers and we are doing everything we can to get those customers to Cartagena,” the rep tells Consumerist.

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Congratulations Wisconsin, You Can Sell Your Homebaked Cookies Like Everyone (Except New Jersey)

Three Wisconsin entrepreneurs have the sweet taste of victory in their mouths today after a judge ruled that a law banning the sale of home-baked goods doesn’t fly under the state’s constitution.

The bakers filed a lawsuit [PDF] last year challenging the state law that says they must have a licensed commercial kitchen in order to sell baked goods. Wisconsin was one of only two states to have such a ban; New Jersey is the other.

Late yesterday in Lafayette County Circuit Court, Judge Duane Jorgeson found that the ban had “no real or substantial connection” to protecting the public because there has been no known instance of anyone ever falling ill from improperly baked goods, even though it’s legal to sell home baked goods in 48 states.

“I don’t see that there is a rational basis for the statutory scheme and I frankly don’t see any evidence of any real risk of harm to the public in general,” Jorgenson said, via WISC-TV.

According to attorneys for the plaintiffs, the judge also said the ban continued to exist because of the lobbying efforts of special interest groups, like the Wisconsin Bakers Association, who weren’t excited about competing with home bakers.

“Judge Duane Jorgenson rightfully stated that the primary effect of this ban is to protect established businesses from competition,” said Erica Smith, an attorney with the Institute for Justice. “Not only is protecting other businesses from competition un-American, but it is also unconstitutional. The Wisconsin Constitution protects the right to earn an honest living, and we are pleased the court agrees.”

The bakers sound like they’re ready to head to the kitchen and start whipping up some new business.

“He put a lot of thought to our issue, and the fact that we have been hitting barriers for a long time trying to bake out of our home kitchens, it’s a victory for those of us in kitchens throughout Wisconsin,” Lisa Kivirist, one of the plaintiffs, told WISC-TV.

Meanwhile, the state says it will appeal the decision.

Making food at home can be a big business; most notably, New Jersey native Martha Stewart, who started her culinary career with a catering company she operated out of her basement at Turkey Hill Farm.

If you’re thinking of a side hustle involving delicious cookies and cake, here’s some more info from the Small Business Association on how you can start baking.

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Mr. Met Accused Of Physically Impossible Rude Gesture

For 53 years, baseball-headed mascot Mr. Met has entertained the fans of New York’s newer baseball team. Yet even mascots have their breaking points, and last night Mr. Met surprised riled-up fans by giving them the finger after an especially frustrating 7-1 loss to the Milwaukee Brewers.

This leads us to an important question: Is it technically possible for a mascot or cartoon character who has three fingers and a thumb to make that gesture? You be the judge.

@Mets http://pic.twitter.com/tYuSIp8gCG

— Tony T (@tonyt3535) June 1, 2017

Yet this was New York, and the meaning of the mascot’s gesture was clear.

The Mets released a statement on Twitter, the same social media platform where the gesture itself went viral.

Statement from the New York Mets. http://pic.twitter.com/bRVvqZoqg8

— New York Mets (@Mets) June 1, 2017

The team told the Associated Press that while Mr. Met as a character has not been fired, the employee who was wearing the costume at the time has been relieved of mascot duties.

We have reached out to Mr. Met’s closest colleague, the Phanatic of the Philadelphia Phillies, for their comment on the matter. We will update this post if we hear back from the Phanatic.

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

Smuckers Recalls Three Brands Of Flour Over Possible E.Coli Contamination

The two-month-old recall of potentially E. coli-contaminated flour in Canada is makings its way across the border, as Smuckers announced the recall of three brands of flour shipped to the U.S. 

Smuckers Foods of Canada announced Wednesday the recall of Golden Temple, Swad, and Maya flour products sold in the U.S. after determining they could be contaminated with E. coli 0121.

According to a notice posted with the Food and Drug Administration, the flour was produced by Ardent Mills, the same producer of the Robin Hood brand flour distributed and recalled in Canada in March.

While Smuckers says that it is currently unaware of any illnesses related to its products, Food Safety News reports that the newly recalled products were made with the same Canadian wheat that Ardent Mills used in previously recalled flour products.

Those products — which include a variety of brands — have been linked to at least 30 cases of e. coli contamination in Canada, according to the Public Health Agency of Canada, which is still investigating the outbreak. Despite the dozens of illnesses, Food Safety News reports that it is unclear just how much flour has been recalled, as a spokesperson for Ardent Mills says the company has been too busy with recall activities to estimate how much flour has been recalled.

“Given our focus on cooperating with the CFIA in its investigation, we have not taken time to estimate the amount of product that has been subject to the voluntary recalls,” the Ardent Mills spokeswoman said.

The affected Smuckers products were packaged in 20-pound paper bags and distributed nationwide to 19 distributors and two small retailers. Smuckers urges customers who have the products at home to dispose of them immediately.

The following products are covered by the recall:

Product Description	Size	UPC Code	Lot Codes	Best By Date
Maya® Durum Wheat Atta Flour	20 lbs	0 20843 10001 9	6 286 548 6 287 548	No BIUB on Bag No BIUB on Bag
Swad® Durum Atta Flour Chappati Flour	20 lbs	0 51179 16030 9	6 294 548 6 299 548 6 300 548 6 308 548	No BIUB on Bag No BIUB on Bag No BIUB on Bag No BIUB on Bag
Golden Temple® #1 Fine Durum Atta Flour Blend	20 lbs	0 59000 40540 7	6 286 548 6 299 548	Best if Use By Jan 2018 Best if Use By Jan 2018
Golden Temple® Durum Atta Flour Blend	20 lbs	0 59000 41556 7	6 287 548 6 288 548 6 294 548 6 295 548 6 300 548 6 301 548 6 306 548 6 307 548 6 308 548	Best if Use By Jan 2018 Best if Use By Jan 2018 Best if Use By Jan 2018 Best if Use By Jan 2018 Best if Use By Jan 2018 Best if Use By Jan 2018 Best if Use By Feb 2018 Best if Use By Feb 2018 Best if Use By Feb 2018

 

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Report: Charter Said No To Verizon Buyout Offer Because It Wasn’t Enough Money

For months, Verizon’s own leaders have been stoking the rumor mill with comments about just how ready the wireless giant is to acquire someone, anyone they currently compete with. It seems that wasn’t just talk, but that Verizon actually tried to make a play on Charter before being rebuffed earlier this year.

The Wall Street Journal reported back in January that Verizon and Charter had started talks, but it seems those have now fizzled.

The New York Post now reports that Verizon did in fact make a deal, offering Charter something between $350 and $400 per share and putting the value of the entire company at $100 billion — but Charter said no.

It’s not that Charter’s completely uninterested in a merger, sources told the Post; it’s that Charter’s not quite ready at this time… and that it didn’t think $100 billion was enough.

For comparison, Charter spent about $55 billion on acquiring Time Warner Cable and another $10 billion on Bright House Networks when it completed that three-way deal in 2016. Although that merger was approved by regulators just over a year ago, the lengthy and complicated process of bringing all three brands’ operations under one roof is still going on. Sometimes messily.

Verizon has absolutely been on the prowl this year. In January, the Post noted that Verizon really wanted to buy some big cable company, which at this point basically means Comcast and Charter, or possibly distant second-place options Cox or Altice.

In April, Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam made it very clear that Verizon wanted to buy pretty much anyone it could, telling Bloomberg he’d be happy to enter talks with Comcast, Disney, CBS, or anyone else who came knocking.

Analysts, likewise, pounced right after the election to encourage as many big telecom mergers as possible in the current, business-friendly regulatory environment we now face.

by Kate Cox via Consumerist

Kmart Victim Of Second Hack Attack In Three Years

Even with fewer stores and sales floors full of boxes, Kmart is still an attractive target for ne’er-do-wells: The retailer has found itself on the receiving end of another hack attack, just three years after its last security breach.

Sears Holding Corp. revealed Wednesday that it was the victim of a security incident involving unauthorized credit card activity following some customer purchases at Kmart stores.

The company did not provide details on how long the attack took place or what specific stores were affected by the breach. However, Kmart did notify customers of the breach via email Wednesday. It’s unclear if that letter went to all customers or just those thought to be affected.

After such a recent hack attack, you might be wondering how Kmart, and Sears Holdings, could not be prepared for a second go-around. As it turns out, the malicious code used to used to infect Kmart’s store payment data systems was undetectable to current anti-virus systems and application controls, says Sears Holdings.

Sears Holdings says that it immediately launched an investigation into the incident and hired third-party forensic expert to review its systems and secure the affected network.

“Once aware of the new malicious code, we quickly removed it and contained the event,” Sears Holdings said. “We are confident that our customers can safely use their credit and debit cards in our retail stores.”

Based on its investigation, Sears Holdings believes that no personally identifying information — such as names, addresses, Social Security Numbers, or email addresses — was obtained.

However, the company does believe that some credit card numbers have been compromised. But because the company rolled out new EMV (also known as chip-and-PIN) point-of-sale systems last year, it believes the exposure of cardholder data that could be used to make counterfeit cards is limited.

So far, the company says there is no evidence to suggest that kmart.com or Sears customers were impacted by the hack.

“Given the criminal nature of this attack, Kmart is continuing to work closely with federal law enforcement authorities, our banking partners, and IT security firms in an ongoing investigation,” Gareth Glynne, senior vice president of retail operations, said in a letter to customers. “We are also actively enhancing our defenses in light of this new form of malware.”

Wednesday’s breach announcement comes nearly three years after the last attack on Kmart’s payment system. In Oct. 2014, the company revealed that its systems had been breached the month before.

In that incident, Kmart noted that in-store payment systems were infected with malware, and an unknown number of credit and debit card numbers were stolen. But like the new breach, an investigation suggested that no personal information was affected.

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

United Facing $435K Fine For Allegedly Flying A Plane That Wasn’t In Airworthy Condition

United Airlines may have to fork over $435,000 to the Federal Aviation Administration after the agency accused it of flying an aircraft that wasn’t in airworthy condition almost two dozen times.

The FAA alleges that United mechanics switched a fuel pump pressure switch on a Boeing 787 to resolve a problem that a crew had noticed two days before. But the airline didn’t perform a required inspection of the work before putting the plane back into service, the FAA says.

According to the agency, the airline flew the plane on 23 domestic and international flights before it completed the required inspection on June 28, 2014.

And two of those flights allegedly happened after the FAA notified United that it hadn’t performed the inspection.

“Maintaining the highest levels of safety depends on operators closely following all applicable rules and regulations,” said FAA Administrator Michael Huerta. “Failing to do so can create unsafe conditions.”

United wants to meet with the FAA to talk about the situation. A spokesman for the airline declined to answer questions about when that meeting would take place and about the airline’s response to the proposed penalty when contacted by The New York Times, but noted that safety is a “top priority.”

“We took action after identifying the issue and are working closely with the FAA in their review,” the spokesman said, without offering details.

United isn’t the only airline to attract the baleful eye of the FAA for maintenance related matters: Southwest Airlines was fined twice in 2015 over aircraft repairs.

And back in 2014, the Department of Justice sued Southwest for failure to pay a $12 million civil penalty it levied over improper repairs. The airline eventually agreed to pay $2.8 million to settle that lawsuit.

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist