Placeholder Content Image

Motorist fined $4000 for dodgy driver's license tactic

<p>A prominent Sydney lawyer has warned Aussie drivers against falsely nominating someone to take on their demerit points after one of his clients was fined $4000 for the illegal act. </p> <p>Speaking to <em>Yahoo News Australia</em>,  Sydney lawyer Avinash Singh said that there has been a significant spike in the practice in recent months. </p> <p>"In 2024, Transport for NSW (TfNSW) commenced a crackdown on false nominations of drivers," he told <em>Yahoo</em>.</p> <p> "There has been a widespread trend of people agreeing to take demerit points for other drivers.</p> <p>"The person nominated will usually charge a fee to take the demerit points. Often they are on international licences and may not even be in the country."</p> <p>He then explained the case of one of his clients who was issued a $4,000 fine for trying to offload their demerit points. </p> <p>"The reason the fine was so expensive was because the vehicle was registered as a company vehicle and the company had a record of previous offences," he explained.</p> <p>"As such, it was subject to the penalties for a corporation, which are significantly greater than that of an individual ($1,500)."</p> <p>He said the matter was listed at court where the $4,000 fine "could have been increased to $22,000".</p> <p>Singh managed to fight the fine on behalf of the driver, but warned that authorities are increasing their surveillance on this illegal act and have urged Aussies to remain vigilant. </p> <p>The tactic has gained popularity over the past few years, with the illegal service often being advertised on social media and the price of one demerit point going for anywhere between $30-$150.</p> <p><em>Image: Facebook/ Yahoo</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

New rules to crack down on dodgy taxi practices

<p>New technology is being rolled out on Wednesday, which will make it more difficult for taxi drivers to overcharge their customers. </p> <p>The country's largest taxi payment provider, Cabcharge, is introducing a new system which will link  cab drivers' payment terminals with their meters. </p> <p>The move has been made in attempt to crack down on dodgy taxi practices. </p> <p>Under the current system the two are not connected, so dishonest drivers may disregard the distance and fee on the meter and input a higher sum on their payment terminals, charging customers more money. </p> <p>The crack down has been approved Australia's most extensive taxi network which includes operators such as 13cabs, Silver Service and Black & White Cabs. They are also encouraged to display a sticker that says "We proudly accept Cabcharge."</p> <p>Speaking to<em> 2GB </em>on Monday, Nick Abrahim the CEO of NSW Taxi Council said that the technology was "welcomed news", which will help strengthen customer trust. </p> <p>"We want people, whether they're going to a sporting event or a concert or whatever it is, not even to worry about the transport issues. We want them to go out and make sure they're having a good time," he said. </p> <p>"The majority of drivers are out there, they want to do the right thing they want to look after passengers, but we know there are a handful of those drivers that unfortunately think they can flout the law and get away from it... [this] sends a strong message to that handful of drivers."</p> <p><em>Image: Shutterstock</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Dodgy tactic to keep driver's licence growing "out of control"

<p>A criminal lawyer has exposed an alarming trend, which has caused more and more people to seek legal advice. </p> <p>Over the past year, there has been an increase in the number of drivers off-loading their demerit points to strangers in exchange for cash, as Aussies desperately try to keep their licences. </p> <p>The illegal tactic is often advertised on social media, where users attract those looking for someone to falsely nominate and palm off their demerit points to. </p> <p>The price of one demerit point can go for $30-$150, and criminal lawyer Jahan Kalantar revealed that more people are seeking legal advice after getting involved in the trend. </p> <p>"This used to be a very tiny part of my practice, I do about eight to nine consultations a week on this," he told <em>7News Sunrise</em>. </p> <p>"This is becoming really out of control."</p> <p><a href="https://au.news.yahoo.com/dodgy-drivers-licence-tactic-used-by-millions-growing-out-of-control-044254123.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><em>Yahoo Australia</em> </a>shared a screenshot of a chat obtained from Facebook, which showed a person responding to an ad someone put up about selling their demerit points. </p> <p>"What fine is it?" the person advertising asked. </p> <p>"Speeding," the person replied. </p> <p>"Yeah I can sort it out for you," they said. </p> <p>When asked how it would work the advertiser replied: "If it's under 5 points it's $80 a point". </p> <p>There are tough penalties for those who choose to falsely nominate another driver, and for those who trade their demerit points for cash. </p> <p>In Victoria, offenders face fines of $9,000, while those in NSW and Queensland cop a maximum penalty of $11,000. </p> <p>In addition to hefty fines, imprisonment is also a risk, with one high-profile incident in 2006 landing former federal court judge Marcus Einfeld in prison after he was caught falsely declaring another driver for his speeding fine. </p> <p><em>Images: 7NEWS/ Facebook</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

"Dead dodgy": Outraged shopper uncovers sneaky Coles practice

<p>One disgruntled shopper has called out Coles for their "deceptive" tactic to mislead customers about their special deal prices. </p> <p>After finding that prices online were often mismatched to prices in store, regular Coles shopper Rowan Element got into the habit of checking if the price of an item was the same on the specials tag and its original tag, with the initial price often exaggerated on the specials tag to make the promotion appear more appealing.</p> <p>On Thursday, Element discovered one Coles store in Canberra employing this sneaky practice with the original tag conveniently hidden behind the promotion.</p> <p>"I bought this humble pack of sliced mushrooms, they were on special 'two for $6.50' or $4 for one. When I moved the specials tag the price was $3.50... It is not the first time that I’ve noticed something like this," she told <a href="https://au.news.yahoo.com/coles-customer-catches-supermarket-in-dead-dodgy-practice-062334548.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><em>Yahoo News Australia</em></a>.</p> <p>"Clearly Coles put the price up to make the 'special' look better but forgot to take off the original price ticket."</p> <p>After taking the mushrooms to the checkout and being charged $4 for the one pack, Element asked to speak to a manager and called out the "deceptive advertising".  </p> <p>Staff provided a refund for the mushrooms and allowed the shopper to keep the produce before "literally running" to remove the offending tag from the shelf.</p> <p>Despite the small price discrepancy, the shopper believes the issue lies with the dishonestly of the supermarket giant, rather than with the small 50 cent disparity. </p> <p>"Sadly I think it's what we've come to expect from large corporations determined to make massive profits at the expense of their customers. There's total disregard for morality of their behaviour... It's dead dodgy" she said.</p> <p>Coles confirmed to <em>Yahoo News</em> the price tag in question at the Canberra store has been "corrected", however, it did not respond to questions regarding accusations that the supermarket was doing it on purpose.</p> <p>"Coles takes clear and accurate pricing information on tickets very seriously," a spokesperson said. "We always aim to ensure that our specials represent value for our customers and have confirmed that the special tickets were indeed correct in these instances."</p> <p><em>Image credits: Yahoo News / Shutterstock</em></p>

Money & Banking

Placeholder Content Image

“That sounds dodgy”: Ben Fordham slams “bizarre” Voice to Parliament voting rules

<p dir="ltr">Ben Fordham has slammed the “bizarre” rules Aussies will have to abide by when casting their vote in the Voice to Parliament referendum.</p> <p dir="ltr">The confusion over the rules for the upcoming vote was sparked when the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) suggested that ticks will be counted as Yes votes but crosses will not be counted as No votes.</p> <p dir="ltr">On referendum day, which is widely expected to be October 14th, Aussies will be asked to write either “yes” or “no” in English on the ballot paper to the question, “A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?”</p> <p dir="ltr">On Wednesday, AEC commissioner Tom Rogers was asked by <em>Sky News</em> host Tom Connell how Australians will be asked to vote on the ballot.</p> <p dir="ltr">“It’s a bit simpler than a normal election, it’s a yes or no — are you accepting anything inside the box?” Connell said. “A tick, a cross, a yes, a number one? How broad will you allow this, given the intention of people is going to be pretty clear, you’d think?”</p> <p dir="ltr">Mr Rogers said it was a “great question”, saying, “Now there are some savings provisions, but I need to be very clear with people – when we look at that, it is likely that a tick will be accepted as a formal vote for yes, but a cross will not be accepted as a formal vote.”</p> <p dir="ltr">“We’re being very clear with people, part of our education campaign will talk about this, the materials in the polling place so people can look at it. But please, make sure you write ‘yes’ or ‘no’ clearly on the ballot paper in English. That way you can assure yourself that your vote will count.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Ben Fordham went on to slam Rogers’ comments, saying the ticks and crosses system would favour the Yes vote. </p> <p dir="ltr">“How bizarre,” he said. “A tick counts as yes but a cross does not count as no. That sounds dodgy. If you’re going to count the ticks, you’ve got to count the crosses, don’t you? Otherwise the yes camp has an advantage. Surely he would see the unlevel playing field here. But apparently not.”</p> <p dir="ltr">Fordham said the AEC “has one job”.</p> <p dir="ltr">“We’re giving them $365 million to hold the referendum,” he said. “Tom Rogers is on more than the Prime Minister, he earns $600,000 a year. How hard is it to get this right?”</p> <p dir="ltr">Opposition leader Peter Dutton also slammed the voting rules, urging Anthony Albanese to draft legislation to make it clear what will be accepted on the voting ballot.</p> <p dir="ltr">“It’s completely outrageous, to be honest,” he told 2GB.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I mean, if a tick counts for Yes then a cross should count for No. It’s as clear as that. Otherwise it gives a very, very strong advantage to the Yes case. I just think Australians want a fair vote. They want to be informed.”</p> <p><em>Image credits: 2GB / AEC</em></p>

News

Placeholder Content Image

ATO cracks down on landlords submitting dodgy tax returns

<p>The Australian Taxation Office (ATM) has plans to crack down on landlords submitting dodgy tax returns after an interview found nine in 10 made mistakes and wrongfully claimed expenses.</p> <p>Those working at home, including those who run home-based businesses and people who earn via short-term rental sites like Airbnb or Stayz, will also be under the thumb this year to file returns correctly, in a new bid to eliminate tax fraud.</p> <p>The review comes in the wake of a major funding boost to the ATO, announced in the 2023 federal budget, which saw an $89.6 million injection.</p> <p>The ATO claims there was a tax gap of $9 billion in the 2019-2020 financial year.</p> <p>Taxpayers paid 94.4 per cent of the whole amount theoretically owed to the Commonwealth, with deductions for rental expenses, including those incorrectly claiming negative gearing deductions, contributing $1.4 billion to the gap.</p> <p>Australian Tax Commissioner Tim Loh said the ATO will be taking action in 2023.</p> <p>"We encourage rental property owners and their registered tax agents to take extra care this tax time and review their records before lodging their return," Loh reportedly told <em>The Age</em>.</p> <p>"You can only claim interest on a loan used to purchase a rental property to earn rental income – don't forget, if your loan also includes a private expense, such as for a new car or a trip to Bali, you can only claim an interest deduction for the portion relating to producing your rental income.”</p> <p>Loh warned Australians who work from home and advised against the “copy and paste" tax return method.</p> <p>He said, ” We know a lot of people are working back in the office more compared to last year”, and the method the ATO uses to calculate working from home expenses has now changed.</p> <p><em>Image credit: Shutterstock</em></p>

Money & Banking

Placeholder Content Image

This New Year, why not resolve to ditch your dodgy old passwords?

<p>Most of the classic New Year resolutions revolve around improving your health and lifestyle. But this year, why not consider cleaning up your passwords too?</p> <p>We all know the habits to avoid, yet so many of us do them anyway: using predictable passwords, never changing them, or writing them on sticky notes on our monitor. We routinely ignore the <a href="https://theconversation.com/choose-better-passwords-with-the-help-of-science-82361">recommendations for good passwords</a> in the name of convenience.</p> <p>Choosing short passwords containing common names or words is likely to lead to trouble. Hackers can often guess a person’s passwords simply by using a computer to work through a long list of commonly used words.</p> <p>The <a href="https://nordpass.com/most-common-passwords-list/">most popular choices</a> have changed very little over time, and include numerical combinations such as “123456” (the most common password for five years in a row), “love”, keyboard patterns such as “qwerty” and, perhaps most ludicrously, “password” (or its Portuguese translation, “senha”).</p> <p><span>Experts have long advised against using words, places or names in passwords, although you can strengthen this type of password by jumbling the components into sequences with a mixture of upper- and lowercase characters, as long as you do it thoroughly.</span></p> <p>Complex rules often lead users to choose a word or phrase and then substitute letters with numbers and symbols (such as “Pa33w9rd!”), or add digits to a familiar password (“password12”). But so many people do this that these techniques don’t actually make passwords stronger.</p> <p>It’s better to start with a word or two that isn’t so common, and make sure you mix things up with symbols and special characters in the middle. For example, “wincing giraffe” could be adapted to “W1nc1ng_!G1raff3”</p> <p><span>These secure passwords can be harder to remember, to the extent you might end up having to write them down. That’s OK, as long as you keep the note somewhere secure (and definitely not stuck to your monitor).</span></p> <p>Reusing passwords is another common error – and one of the biggest. Past data leaks, such as that suffered by <a href="https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/blog-post/linkedin-2012-hack-what-you-need-know">LinkedIn in 2012</a>, mean billions of old passwords are now circulating among cyber criminals.</p> <p>This has given rise to a practice called “<a href="https://www.wired.com/story/what-is-credential-stuffing/">credential stuffing</a>” – taking a leaked password from one source and trying it on other sites. If you’re still using the same old password for multiple email, social media or financial accounts, you’re at risk of being compromised.</p> <h2>Pro tip: use a password manager</h2> <p>The simplest and most effective route to good password hygiene is to use a <a href="https://www.choice.com.au/electronics-and-technology/internet/internet-privacy-and-safety/buying-guides/password-managers">password manager</a>. This lets you use unique strong passwords for all your various logins, without having to remember them yourself.</p> <p>Password managers allow you to store all of your passwords in one place and to “lock” them away with a strong level of protection. This can be a single (strong) password, but can also include face or fingerprint recognition, depending on the device you are using. Although there is some risk associated with storing your passwords in one place, experts consider this much less risky than using the same password for multiple accounts.</p> <p>The password manager can automatically create strong, randomised passwords for each different service you use. This means your LinkedIn, Gmail and eBay accounts can no longer be accessed by someone who happens to guess the name of your childhood pet dog.</p> <p>If one password is leaked, you only have to change that one – none of the others are compromised.</p> <p>There are <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_password_managers">many password managers</a> to choose from. Some are free (such as Keepass) or “freemium” (offering the option to upgrade for more functionality like Nordpass), while others charge a one-off fee or recurring subscription (such as 1Password). Most allow you to securely sync your passwords across all your devices, and some let you safely share passwords between family members or work groups.</p> <p>You can also use the password managers built into most web browsers or operating systems (with many phones offering this functionality in the browser or natively). These tend to have fewer features and may pose compatibility issues if you want to access your password from different browsers or platforms.</p> <p>Password managers take a bit of getting used to, but don’t be too daunted. When creating a new account on a website, you let the password manager create a unique (complex) password and store it straight away – there’s no need to think of one yourself!</p> <p>Later, when you want to access that account again, the password manager fills it in automatically. This is either through direct integration with the browser (typically on computers) or through a separate application on your mobile device. Most password managers will automatically “lock” after a period of time, prompting for the master password (or face/finger verification) before allowing access again.</p> <h2>Protect your most important passwords</h2> <p>If you don’t like the sound of a password manager, at the very least change your “critical” account passwords so each one is strong and unique. Financial services, email accounts, government services, and work systems should each have a separate, strong password.</p> <p>Even if you write them down in a book (kept safely locked away) you will significantly reduce your risk in the event of a data breach on any of those platforms.</p> <p>Remember, however, that some sites provide delegated access to others. Many e-commerce websites, for example, give you the option of logging in with your Facebook, Google or Apple account. This doesn’t expose your password to greater risk, because the password itself is not shared. But if the password is compromised, using it would grant access to those delegated sites. It is usually best to create unique accounts - and use your password manager to keep them safe.</p> <p><span>Adopting a better approach to passwords is a simple way to reduce your cyber-security risks. Ideally that means using a password manager, but if you’re not quite ready for that yet, at least make 2022 the year you ditch the sticky notes and pets’ names.</span></p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p> <p><span><em>This article first appeared on <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/this-new-year-why-not-resolve-to-ditch-your-dodgy-old-passwords-172598" target="_blank">The Conversation</a></em>.</span></p>

Technology

Placeholder Content Image

“Worst fan ever” among Shonky award winners

<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">An electric composter, sugary snacks for toddlers, and a bladeless fan have one surprising thing in common: they made the list for this year’s Shonky Awards.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">CHOICE, Australia’s top consumer advocacy group, has been naming and shaming the country’s worst products and services - and this year’s contenders are just as dodgy.</span></p> <p><strong>A fan with no wind power</strong></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">One product that made the winning list was Kogan’s SmarterHome Bladeless Fan. Retailing at $150, the fan scored only 44 percent in CHOICE’s testing and was beaten by fans costing less than a third of the price.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">It has been sold through various retailers, including Catch.com.au, Kogan, Big W, and Harvey Norman.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“This fan is imitating more effective bladeless fans on the market without the power or puff,” CHOICE expert tester Adrian Lini </span><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.choice.com.au/about-us/media-releases/2021/november/the-worst-fan-ever-choice-shonkys" target="_blank"><span style="font-weight: 400;">said</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“The product fails for its knock-off shonkiness and it’s shoddy performance.”</span></p> <p><img style="width: 500px; height: 281.25px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7845589/shonky1.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/e9850e8978e3414482c008dab500c10b" /></p> <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">Expert tester Adrian Lini with the Shonky Award-winning fans. Image: CHOICE</span></em></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The advocacy group also found that a range of fans using the same or similar designs were being sold under the brands Fenici, Dimplex, and Zhibai.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“The volume of air pushed out by this fan was so low that it looked like an error in measurement,” Mr Lini said.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“For the entirety of the test, it could barely reach 0.04 cubic metres per second.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“It pretty much has no output whatsoever, and that’s why the score is so terrible.”</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Most fans tested against it reached 0.3 cubic metres per second - making them seven times more powerful in terms of wind power.</span></p> <p><strong>A $2000 composter</strong></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Another “winner” of this year’s award was Breville’s FoodCycler, marketed as an easy way to turn household scraps into odourless, nutrient-rich “eco-chips”.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">However, when CHOICE home economist Fiona Mair put the device to the test she found it was a wasteful, expensive, and complicated appliance.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“Why would you want to spend money on an appliance to reduce your food waste going into landfill when you can already buy something that virtually costs nothing to do the same thing?” Ms Mair </span><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/home/interiors/choice-reveals-16th-shonky-awards-winners-booming-bnpl-sector-cops-lashing/news-story/1c62632fe42b49e8cff6d5300a628d28" target="_blank"><span style="font-weight: 400;">said</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">After calculating the running costs of the FoodCycler over five years, CHOICE estimated that a consumer would drop $2,000 across the device’s lifetime. On top of the $499 purchase price, there would also be energy costs ($86 a year) and replacement filters costing $233 a year.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“We think Breville are taking advantage of people who are wanting to look after the environment,” Ms Mair concluded.</span></p> <p><strong>A “sugar bomb” for toddlers</strong></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Another dud product was Kiddylicious Strawberry Fruit Wriggles, which contain more sugar than Allen’s Snakes and cost $150 a kilo - despite being marketed as a healthy snack for toddlers.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“Toddlers are being targeted with a shonky sugar bomb and parents deserve better,” CHOICE audience editor Pru Engel said. </span></p> <p><img style="width: 500px; height: 281.25px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7845590/shonky2.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/84f2d6cf990e4c22a52051bf3ef1bd77" /></p> <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">CHOICE editor and mum-of-two Pru Engel with her son, and a bag of Fruit Wriggles compared against an equivalent amount of Allen’s snakes and sugar. Image: CHOICE</span></em></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Other recipients included the Airline Customer Advocate, a free “service” that essentially forwards customer complaints back to airlines, and buy-now-pay-later provider Humm, which made the cut for its “dubious checks and balances”.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“These are our 16th annual Shonky Awards and it amazes me that we have to keep giving them out,” CHOICE’s chief executive, Alan Kirland, said.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“It’s easy to avoid getting a Shonky Award. Don’t promise things you can’t deliver, don’t rip your customers off and don’t sell unsafe products.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“Sadly, we keep finding businesses that fail these basic tests.”</span></p> <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">Image: CHOICE</span></em></p>

Home Hints & Tips

Placeholder Content Image

Why women are more likely to have dodgy hip implants or other medical devices

<p>The past year has seen <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-26/implant-files-shine-light-on-medical-device-industry/10521480">wide concern</a> about the safety of medical implants. Some of the worst scandals have involved devices for women, such as textured <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/directly-linked-to-patient-harm-worldwide-recall-of-textured-breast-implants-20190725-p52ai9.html">breast implants</a> with links to cancer, and transvaginal mesh implants, which were the subject of a <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Community_Affairs/MeshImplants/Report">senate inquiry</a>.</p> <p>But women are harmed not only by “women’s devices” such as breast implants and vaginal mesh. Women are also more likely to be harmed by apparently gender-neutral devices, like <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/1653996">joint replacements</a> and <a href="https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/JAHA.118.010869">heart implants</a>.</p> <p> </p> <p>In recently published <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/hypa.12483">research</a>, I explored the reasons for this. I found gender biases at all stages of design and use of medical implants.</p> <p>Proposed changes to how devices are regulated, such as introducing <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-27/pelvic-mesh-implants-tracking-medical-devices/9588070">a national register of all implants</a>, will make it quicker to identify dodgy devices. But this will not address gender bias in how devices are designed and used.</p> <h2>Bias starts with design, then lab testing</h2> <p>Biological and social factors <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3013263/">can affect</a> how women present when injured or ill, and how well treatments work. Often, device designers <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17483107.2018.1467973">do not take these differences into account</a>.</p> <p>The lab tests used to make sure implants are safe often ignore the possibility women could have <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935106001745">different reactions to materials</a>, or their activities could <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/jor.23374">place different loads on implants</a>.</p> <h2>Bias continues with clinical trials</h2> <p>Some medical device companies <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/science/2011/may/16/medical-devices-lack-clinical-data">have exploited regulatory loopholes</a> to get devices to market in the UK without clinical trials. Even when trials take place, women <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11999-015-4457-9">are not always included</a>. Or researchers <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11999-015-4457-9">do not analyse the data for gender differences</a>.</p> <p>Regulators such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States and Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2645146">often approve devices</a> without data split by gender on how well devices perform or how safe they are.</p> <h2>Then there’s the doctor-patient relationship</h2> <p>The gender of the doctor and patient can make a difference to what women learn about their implant. The <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/hidden-curriculum-surgeons-women-gender-equity-20180508-p4ze0w.html">very low numbers of women in surgery</a> mean female patients often see male surgeons. And there is <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S073839910900264X">some evidence</a> male doctors tend to treat female patients in a more paternalistic and less patient-centred way.</p> <p>Then there’s the issue of whether surgeons raise important safety issues with their female patients. For example, some surgeons <a href="https://journals.lww.com/clinorthop/Fulltext/2004/11000/Surgeons_Rarely_Discuss_Sexual_Activity_with.37.aspx">feel uncomfortable</a> discussing whether it’s safe to have sex after a hip implant, especially with female patients. This is important as some sexual positions <a href="https://www.arthroplastyjournal.org/article/S0883-5403(13)00561-5/fulltext">are safer</a> than others.</p> <h2>Let’s look at one example, a hip implant</h2> <p>The DePuy ASR (articular surface replacement) hip implant caused serious complications for <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d2905">patients around the world</a>, <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2079-4983/6/3/486/htm">including Australia</a>, such as inflammation, painful growths, dislocations and metal toxicity.</p> <p>Despite <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-31/class-action-over-defective-hip-replacements-settles-for-%24250m/7288350">media coverage</a>, few were aware this hip implant was <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11999-015-4227-8">more than twice as likely</a> to fail in women.</p> <p>In the case of hip implants, the same models are available for women and men, implying these devices are gender neutral. Most models come in a range of sizes, with some having <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098301518361606">better outcomes for women</a>. But women are not small men, and there are gender differences in basic activities involving the hip, <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12147-016-9151-z">such as walking</a>.</p> <p>When <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0954411913483639">women stand up from sitting</a> or <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0883540313005615">have sex</a>, the fragile edges of their hip sockets tend to bear greater loads than men’s. This “edge loading” increases the risk hip implants will wear down and release dangerous metal particles.</p> <p>These differences would not matter if lab tests showed equal safety of hip implants for men and women. However, evidence is not collected on this. In fact, international standards for lab tests that measure rates of wear in hip implants ignore gender differences, and only test <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0954411913483639">normal walking</a> rather than more stressful activities, such as running or having sex.</p> <p>The FDA, TGA and other regulators often approve new hip implants based on their similarity to already approved models. This <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1211581">happened</a> with the ASR hip implant. Regulators did not need new data, let alone evidence the hip was equally safe for women and men.</p> <h2>It’s a concern internationally</h2> <p>Internationally, there is increasing concern about the regulation and safety of medical implants. An international group of journalists released a <a href="https://www.icij.org/investigations/implant-files/">damning report</a> late last year. The <a href="https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/device-approvals-denials-and-clearances/510k-clearances">FDA’s 510(k) process</a>, which approves new devices based on their similarity to existing ones, allows approval of some high-risk implants <a href="http://bleedingedgedoc.com/the-fdas-overhaul-of-the-510k-process/">without additional evidence</a>.</p> <p>The situation is no better <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d2973.extract">in Europe</a>, where commercial agencies do the approvals. This system has been criticised for approving devices <a href="https://medtech.pharmaintelligence.informa.com/MT095225/EU-must-tackle-clinical-trials-shortfalls-as-current-lack-of-evidence-is-quotappallingquot">without good data</a> and for <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d2973.extract">lacking transparency</a> when it comes to implant recalls.</p> <p>The FDA has taken some steps to address gender bias, <a href="https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/evaluation-sex-specific-data-medical-device-clinical-studies-guidance-industry-and-food-and-drug">issuing guidance</a> for companies to provide data on their devices in women and men. However, this is not binding. A study of devices approved after its introduction found <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2645146">only 17%</a> included data analysis by sex.</p> <h2>How could we improve things?</h2> <p>In Australia, scandals with implants have led to <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-tgas-proposed-breast-implant-ban-exposes-a-litany-of-failures-and-fails-to-protect-women-120281">calls for bans</a> and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-27/pelvic-mesh-implants-tracking-medical-devices/9588070">registries</a>. These are good ideas, but will not prompt new devices to be designed with women in mind, nor improve patient communication.</p> <p>Surgeons need to raise topics important for their patients to know about surgery, however uncomfortable it makes them feel. Current efforts to improve the <a href="https://www.surgeons.org/about-racs/about-respect">culture of surgery</a>, and to attract trainees <a href="https://ama.com.au/sites/default/files/documents/RACS_diversity_and_inclusion_plan.pdf">who better reflect</a> the communities they serve may help. But there is a long way to go.</p> <p>Regulators like the TGA and FDA can influence device design by requiring data on the safety and performance of all new (and modified) devices in both women and men. The FDA experience <a href="https://medicine.yale.edu/news/article.aspx?id=15444">shows</a> these requirements must be binding if they are to work.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121363/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: http://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em>Written by <span>Katrina Hutchison, Postdoctoral research fellow, Macquarie University</span>. Republished with permission of </em><a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/why-women-are-more-likely-to-have-dodgy-hip-implants-or-other-medical-devices-121363" target="_blank"><em>The Conversation</em></a><em>.</em></p>

Body

Placeholder Content Image

Have you been stung by this dodgy Coles supermarket scam?

<p>Aussies are being warned about the latest scam that is stinging supermarket shoppers.</p> <p>Coles shoppers have been sent a fake text message from the scammers, informing them that they have won $1000 credit cards.</p> <p>The ‘winners’ were then instructed to claim their prize within 24 hours by handing over personal details.</p> <p><iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fcoles%2Fposts%2F1977144675682871&amp;width=500" width="500" height="612" style="border: none; overflow: hidden;" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allow="encrypted-media"></iframe></p> <p>With many customers confused by the legitimacy of the text messages, the Coles Facebook page has been bombarded with screenshots of the scam asking if the texts are from the supermarket.</p> <p>“Hi Coles, I just got this message on my phone and it looks like a scam. Can you verify please?” wrote one person.</p> <p>"Take it this is a scam? And no, I didn’t put it under Coles in my phone that came up all by itself,” another added.</p> <p>Some savvy shoppers were able to see through the scam immediately by noticing various mistakes, such as the message being addressed to the wrong name.</p> <p>“If only my name was Anita,” wrote Jody Cookson after receiving the message.</p> <p><iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fcoles%2Fposts%2F1977172652346740&amp;width=500" width="500" height="594" style="border: none; overflow: hidden;" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allow="encrypted-media"></iframe></p> <p>Coles posted on their Facebook page to remind customers to be “alert to potential scams via text messages, phone calls and emails".</p> <p>“Many scams use our logo, pretend to be representatives of Coles and promote Coles Gift Cards or other gift cards in an attempt to appear legitimate,” a spokesperson for the supermarket wrote.</p> <p>“Coles will never request personal or banking details in unsolicited communications and legitimate businesses or government agencies will never request payment in gift cards.”</p> <p>Have you been sent this text message scam? Let us know in the comments below.</p>

Technology

Placeholder Content Image

The letter you don't want to receive – ATO cracks down on dodgy tax returns

<p>If you end up receiving this letter in the mail, then don’t ignore it as you could be in trouble. The ATO has started cracking down on dodgy tax return claims in order to take back $1.1 billion in revenue. Which means, many Australians can expect to receive ‘data matching’ letters this year.</p> <p>The letter can be sent for several reasons. Maybe the tax payer forgot to include a PAYG summary, or maybe Centrelink payments that are classed as income were not declared.</p> <p>“The first point is don’t panic,” said Etax senior tax agent Liz Russell.</p> <p>“It means that someone has lodged a tax return that the ATO believes may not contain all the information or may contain incorrect information. The ATO is fed information from different institutions and then they do a data match with the tax return.”</p> <p>But regardless of why you were on the receiving end of this letter, don’t ignore it. The implications of doing so could mean that your tax return may be “adjusted based on assumptions”, which could end up losing you “hundreds, if not thousands of dollars”.</p> <p>But not every tax return goes through the process of being data-matched. The ATO compares tax returns through hi-tech data analysis with those lodged by people who share similar circumstances to decide whether the claim is suspicious.</p> <p>“If a refund from their perspective looks reasonable within the occupation and range, they’re probably not going to spend a lot of time chasing something up because it’s not cost-effective,” she said. “They’re certainly doing anything that falls outside the expected ranges.”</p> <p>While more people were receiving these letters, it doesn’t mean that the number of people doing the wrong thing has increased. But rather, the ATO now has access to improved technology. “Computer systems are getting much more sophisticated every year,” she said. “They’re [not] matching all tax returns because there would be a lot more letters.”</p> <p>According to Ms Russell, many people were not aware that the ATO can audit returns from two or three years after it is lodged. And if you end up finding this letter in your mailbox, you have 28 days to respond – so contact them as soon as possible.</p> <p>“If they don’t hear from you in that time they will reassess you no matter what, so you have to do something if you don’t believe it’s correct, and even if it is correct and you’ve done it inadvertently, you should contact the ATO to see if any penalties are reduced,” she said.</p> <p>When it comes to the ATO determining a penalty, there are two methods that are used. They can either apply penalty units which are at $210 each, or they use a formula which is determined by how severe the breach is.</p> <p>If you aren’t cautious enough, the formula can result in a penalty of 25 per cent of the amount owed, with recklessness sitting at a penalty of 50 per cent and intentional disregard at 75 per cent.</p> <p>“The data matching I think works in the taxpayer’s favour to some extent, because a lot of institutions are getting info to the ATO earlier all the time, the ATO will actually correct your return without telling you,” she said. </p>

Money & Banking

Placeholder Content Image

5 signs you've stepped into a dodgy restaurant

<p>Here are five signs you’ve stepped into a dodgy restaurant.</p> <p><strong>1. It’s completely empty</strong></p> <p>It is a brave diner who walks into a completely empty restaurant… This doesn’t necessarily apply if you are in a remote town or a really quiet suburb, but if there’s one restaurant in the middle of a busy strip that has no customers, it’s probably for a good reason.</p> <p><strong>2. It’s obviously a tourist trap</strong></p> <p>This follows on from point one – it’s much easier to fob a bad restaurant off on tourists. Locals will be burned once and not go back again, but you can draw in a lot of one-time visitors who won’t have to come back. It’s quite easy to spot a restaurant that’s geared just to tourists. Look out for tacky decorations, local ‘themes’, garish drinks specials or the absence of any local diners.</p> <p><strong>3. Everything looks dirty</strong></p> <p>It’s a pretty simple equation – we like to eat in places that are clean. And if the dining room or bathrooms are obviously dirty, then you don’t even want to imagine what the kitchen looks like. A restaurant should look and smell clean and fresh all throughout. Look for dirty marks on the walls, questionable cutlery or a floor that looks like it’s never seen a broom.</p> <p><strong>4. There are no prices on the menu</strong></p> <p>Recently, a number of tourists have complained about being ripped off in decent restaurants because there are no prices. This usually happens in countries where they don’t speak the language, and the waiters will rattle off a list of dishes, assure them everything will be reasonably priced and then bring out tonnes of food. At the end, the unhappy customer is presented with a very large bill that they may not even be able to decipher. Make sure you know exactly what you’re getting into.</p> <p><strong>5. The staff seem disinterested in you</strong></p> <p>When you walk into a restaurant, it’s nice to be greeted with a friendly ‘hello’ (or ‘bonjour’ or ‘ciao’ or ‘ni hau’) and shown to a table. If the staff barely look up when you walk in the door, there’s a good chance you’re in for a substandard experience. The staff should be attentive and helpful (though not over the top), and give you the impression that they actually like working there. Good service can elevate an average restaurant to a great one.</p> <p>Have you ever been to a dodgy restaurant?</p>

Travel Tips

Placeholder Content Image

Dodgy catch to Flight Centre’s price match guarantee

<p>We may have some of the most powerful flight and hotel search tools at our fingertips online, but many people still prefer the personal touch, enlisting a travel agency to help them get the best value holiday possible. But one agency’s promise of the “Lowest Airfare Guaranteed” has been called into question after a shocking customer complaint, <a href="http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/travel/flight-centre-beats-price-by-1-adds-on-49-fee/news-story/240ed3fcbc54c2840be730ea24ceb853" target="_blank"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">news.com.au</span></strong></a> reports.</p> <p>Michael, who asked to keep his last name private, filed a complaint with the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) after the agency “beat” a competitor’s price by $1, only to slap an “optional” fee of $49 on top.</p> <p>“Their lowest price guarantee is a consumer rort,” he wrote in the complaint. “I called up to get a flight quote and do a price match. [The consultant] quoted $852 and I provided a Bestjet quote of $742. [He] then said, ‘Flight Centre policy as of the new financial year is [...] customers doing a price match have to pay $49 on top.’</p> <p>“He said, ‘Many of our customers pay this $49 to guarantee the lowest price up until their flight.’ At no point did he mention this $49 payment is voluntary. My question is, how many customers wishing to do a price match have been misled by this and paid the $49?”</p> <p>Unfortunately, it seems Michael’s experience wasn’t a one off. Writing on <a href="https://www.productreview.com.au/" target="_blank"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">ProductReview.com.au</span></strong></a>, a customer named Alan described a similar incident.</p> <p>“Requested a flight ticket to Thailand today at my local Flight Centre, to which I submitted a printout of an online quote [for] $600.32,” he wrote. “The consultant informed me that they would match the price, but I had to pay a booking fee on top at a price of $49 ... [The] consultant said [Flight Centre] would better the price by $1, but I was required to pay a $49 booking fee.</p> <p>“I was given no choice to opt out of paying this fee, therefore that made the price $48 more expensive than I was quoted at another site.</p> <p>“I have [been] dealing with my local centre for probably the last six or seven years, but I am afraid they have lost me. I always try to purchase locally, but this smacks as a rip off. I went home and purchased the ticket online for $600.32. Not happy.”</p> <p>When approached for comment, a spokesperson for the agency asserted it was “not true”, and that the $49 “Captain’s Package” fee was an optional add-on. “They deliver additional benefits that our people and many of our customers value, including things like Price Drop Protection, Rapid Refund, $150 credits towards accommodation bookings (which is part of the $99 package) and a lower travel insurance excess,” they told news.com.au.</p> <p>“Customers often choose to add them to their flight bookings because of the great value they deliver. They are not required to though and we regularly re-enforce this to our people. The customers’ ability to choose a package is also highlighted in the promotional literature and in numerous public announcements that we have made.”</p> <p>Have you ever had a similar experience with Flight Centre or another travel agency? Or do you prefer to do all the travel planning yourself? Share your thoughts with us in the comments below.</p>

News

Our Partners