Well. I am still not yet convinced I should allow the big companies to sell a 15 HP mower to me at the 23 HP mower price. Since I had to replace a blown motor on my mower, I have a special interest in this topic. My mower cuts so nicely now with a 25HP (or less; I will never know) motor, originally there was a 17HP (or less, again, who knows for sure) motor in there. I think I spent over $1000.00, just for the engine. Now, if that motor turns out to be 20HP, I got shafted, but you are right I may never know for sure; as long as I am happy, according to Rusty, why should I care if it is 15HP or 35HP? "By the way, many, many engines are put out with various stickers on them. Nothing wrong with that as long as it does not exceed what SAE rating is. In other words, 46 series engines were originally 20 hp but were also sold as 16.5, 17.5, 18, 18.5, 19 hp" If this is true, ^that up there, then what is the harm if you buy a 16.5 HP engine and you get a 20 HP engine? I don't think the lawyers would chase after this scenario, and I don't think this is what this case is about. I don't like lawyers much either, but if it weren't for the lawyers our kids would be playing with toys painted with lead based paint, or maybe with other dangerous chemicals. Hmm? And this is the the present day! What would you do, if say, you take your wife out to dinner on a special occasion, you both order the prime rib and when it arrives, it looks thin. Not paying much attention you eagerly cut and bite into a nice chunk and after about 5 minutes of chewing you finally admit to yourself that the prime rib is not in fact prime rib but it is likely a cut of flank steak. What do you do? Prime rib was advertised. Prime rib was ordered. Flank steak was received. It is meat, it all comes from the cow, it is all the same. It will fill you up as well as the prime rib would fill you up. So do you complain, or, just shut up and finish dinner, pay the prime rib price, and go about your merry way? No, this isn't a typical scenario where a lawyer is needed, but what if this restaurant did this switch-a-roo every friday and saturday night as an advertised special? Well, then a lawyer might need to get involved depending on the details of the restaurant. I think the point is clear. The point is, we expect to get what we pay for.

I was really hoping to find a class-action lawsuit I could join - not so much for the money but more to assuage the fury that I feel when I think of how unhappy I am with my "premium" piece of junk Kitchenaid stove. In 2018, when we renovated our kitchen, we decided to “go big” on the appliances, and went with Kitchen-Aid. Up until then, we had been using the old same stove and fridge that came with the house 14 years prior. Neither of the old appliances was a premium brand but they had served us well, and neither had even once required a call to the repairman. Other than the fact that no amount of levelling will allow the door to properly close, I have been fairly happy with the refrigerator. My greatest anticipation, however, lay with the prospect of a new stove with a self-clean feature. Oh BOY! No more sticking my head in an oven covered in corrosive goo and fumes. No more crouching painfully on my knees to scour away the greasy grime. Or so I thought. Then I discovered “Aqua-Lift”, the most useless piece of technology ever conceived of, except for perhaps the Rotato. No. I take that back. The Rotato does what it says it will. I will not even pursue the fact that the Kitchen-Aid broiler sets fire to everything I put in there before it has a chance to actually broil properly, or that the stovetop elements are so hot on the lowest setting that I can’t properly simmer most dishes. Whirlpool’s Aqua-Lift “self-cleaning” feature alone is enough to convince me to never again buy Kitchen-Aid or any other Whirlpool brand. Aqua-Lift, for the uninitiated, is a Whirlpool brainfart that depends on steam to break down the baked-on grease that accumulates inside your oven. If you’ve ever tried the youtube hack where you put a bowl of water in your oven and heat it up so that the steam makes it possible to just wipe it sparkling clean “with NO scrubbing!”, you will know that this method is about as effective as waving a magic wand over the mess. The instructions that come with the stove warn most emphatically that you should not use any kind of cleaning spray or foam to clean the stove or door glass as this can impair the cleaning process and/or damage the surface, and nullify the warranty. And there it is, your Catch-22 – because no amount of steam can reverse the chemical change that occurs when grease gets baked on to the sides of your oven. So, after several earnest tries and and equal number of abysmal failures, I got the big chemical guns out again. I’m back on my hands and knees with my head inside the oven, scrubbing and cursing, and hoping that the cleaner will eat through the grease before it eats through my gloves. I fervently pray that this piece of junk stove breaks down soon so that I can pitch it onto the street for delivery to its most appropriate destination – the dump!!!

I don't imagine you could take that measurement without breaking the seal. The inadequate seals are the bigger concern, though since they mean air leakage from outdoors is possible. In talking with a local window and door distributor who reps. a number of lines, including Andersen and Marvin, he said that Marvin windows are far superior. I've gotten that from lots of experienced builders as well. But he said he found Andersen doors to be superior to Marvin's. So much for one stop shopping! Windows are more important, though.

Did i-Cool for Menopause not work for you? Did it fail to relieve you of your hot flashes and night sweats? If so, you might be entitled to a refund. As part of a class action settlement, you can submit a claim for your refund here: http://i-coolclassaction.com/claim-verification/ It only takes a minute. If i-Cool for Menopause did not work for you, make sure you get your portion of the settlement funds before April 4th or it will be too late! Here is the notice: NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT Doe v. DSM Nutritional Products, LLC et al. Case No. 30-2011-00510631-CU-MT-CXC (Orange County Superior Court) If you bought DSM Nutritional Products, LLC’s “i-Cool for Menopause” product you could be entitled to money from a legal settlement. A Settlement has been proposed in a class action lawsuit with DSM Nutritional Products, LLC (“DSM” or “Defendant”) involving DSM’s product, i-Cool for Menopause. A class action lawsuit pending in the Superior Court of California for the County of Orange entitled Doe v. DSM Nutritional Products, LLC et al. (Case No. 30-2011-00510631-CU-MT-CXC) may affect your rights. Plaintiff Jane Doe claims that Defendant misrepresented i-Cool for Menopause’s efficacy for the reduction of menopausal symptoms, specifically hot flashes. DSM vigorously denies these allegations and the Court has not decided who is right. A class action lawsuit was filed against DSM Nutritional Products, LLC (“DSM” or “Defendant”). In this lawsuit, Plaintiff claims, among other things, that the phrase “clinically proven to safely reduce hot flashes by up to 85%” on Defendants package was false or misleading in violation of California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act (Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1750, et seq.) and California Unfair Competition Law (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17500, et seq.) The Action further alleges that Defendant’s alleged misrepresentations were designed to, and did, lead Plaintiff and others similarly situated (collectively the “Class”) to believe that the Product could cause an 85% reduction in hot flashes when it could not. DSM Nutritional Products, LLC denies that the phrase or any other representations are false, misleading or otherwise unlawful and the Court has not decided who is right. Your Options In This Settlement File a Claim. You must file a claim to remain in the Class. You will be bound by the Court’s rulings, but you can object to the Settlement. Claim Forms must be signed and postmarked (or submitted online) by April 4, 2016. By remaining in the Class, you will release claims against Defendant as outlined in the detailed Notice, which is available here. Exclude yourself and keep your right to sue the Defendant. Your written request for exclusion must be postmarked by April 4, 2016. Object to the Settlement and/or appear in Court, only if you remain in the Class. You may hire your own attorney for these purposes, but do not have to. Your written request to object or appear must be postmarked by April 29, 2016. The Court will hold a hearing (the “Fairness Hearing”) on May 20, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. (PST) in Department CX-102 at the courthouse located at 751 W Santa Ana Blvd, Santa Ana, CA 92701 to decide whether to approve the Settlement and determine the amount of attorneys’ fees and Plaintiff’s incentive awards. These options are explained in the Notice of Class Action Settlement Important Dates: Deadline to file and postmark objections (including any requests to appear before the Court): April 29, 2016 Deadline to submit a claim: April 4, 2016 Deadline to postmark requests for exclusion: April 4, 2016 Final Approval Hearing: May 20, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. (PST) For full information about the settlement, visit: http://i-coolclassaction.com/