Archive for the ‘FTC’ Category

FTC Alleges Amazon Unlawfully Billed Parents for Millions of Dollars in Children’s Unauthorized In-App Charges

No Password or Other Indication of Parental Consent Was Required for Charges in Kids’ Apps; Internal E-mail Referred to Situation as “House on Fire”

Date: July 10, 2014

Amazon.com, Inc. has billed parents and other account holders for millions of dollars in unauthorized in-app charges incurred by children, according to a Federal Trade Commission complaint filed today in federal court.

The FTC’s lawsuit seeks a court order requiring refunds to consumers for the unauthorized charges and permanently banning the company from billing parents and other account holders for in-app charges without their consent. According to the complaint, Amazon keeps 30 percent of all in-app charges.

Click image to link to Playing with Fire

According to the FTC, Amazon allowed kids to buy virtual goods — like coins, stars, and pet food — without getting parents’ permission.

Amazon offers many children’s apps in its appstore for download to mobile devices such as the Kindle Fire. In its complaint, the FTC alleges that Amazon violated the FTC Act by billing parents and other Amazon account holders for charges incurred by their children without the permission of the parent or other account holder. Amazon’s setup allowed children playing these kids’ games to spend unlimited amounts of money to pay for virtual items within the apps such as “coins,” “stars,” and “acorns” without parental involvement.

“Amazon’s in-app system allowed children to incur unlimited charges on their parents’ accounts without permission,” said FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez. “Even Amazon’s own employees recognized the serious problem its process created. We are seeking refunds for affected parents and a court order to ensure that Amazon gets parents’ consent for in-app purchases.”

The complaint alleges that when Amazon introduced in-app charges to the Amazon Appstore in November 2011, there were no password requirements of any kind on in-app charges, including in kids’ games and other apps that appeal to children. According to the complaint, this left parents to foot the bill for charges they didn’t authorize.

According to the complaint, kids’ games often encourage children to acquire virtual items in ways that blur the lines between what costs virtual currency and what costs real money. In the app “Ice Age Village,” for example, the complaint noted that children can use “coins” and “acorns” to buy items in the game without a real-money charge. However, they can also purchase additional “coins” and “acorns” using real money on a screen that is visually similar to the one that has no real-money charge. The largest quantity purchase available in the app would cost $99.99.

The complaint highlights internal communications among Amazon employees as early as December 2011 that said allowing unlimited in-app charges without any password was “…clearly causing problems for a large percentage of our customers,” adding that the situation was a “near house on fire.”

In March 2012, according to the complaint, Amazon updated its in-app charge system to require an account owner to enter a password only for individual in-app charges over $20. As the complaint notes, Amazon continued to allow children to make an unlimited number of individual purchases of less than $20 without a parent’s approval. An Amazon employee noted at the time of the change that “it’s much easier to get upset about Amazon letting your child purchase a $99 product without any password protection than a $20 product,” according to the complaint. In July 2012, as set forth in the complaint, internal emails again described consumer complaints about in-app charges as a “house on fire” situation.

The complaint alleges that in early 2013, Amazon updated its in-app charge process to require password entry for some charges in a way that functioned differently in different contexts. According to the complaint, even when a parent was prompted for a password to authorize a single in-app charge made by a child, that single authorization often opened an undisclosed window of 15 minutes to an hour during which the child could then make unlimited charges without further authorization. Not until June 2014, roughly two and a half years after the problem first surfaced and only shortly before the Commission voted to approve the lawsuit against Amazon, did Amazon change its in-app charge framework to obtain account holders’ informed consent for in-app charges on its newer mobile devices, as explained in the complaint.

According to the complaint, thousands of parents complained to Amazon about in-app charges their children incurred without their authorization, amounting to millions of dollars of charges. For example, one mother noted in the FTC complaint told Amazon that her daughter was able to rack up $358.42 in unauthorized charges, while others complained that even children who could not read were able to “click a lot of buttons at random” and incur several unauthorized charges.

The company’s stated policy is that all in-app charges are final and nonrefundable. According to the complaint, even parents who have sought an exception to that policy have faced a refund process that is unclear and confusing, involving statements that do not explain how to seek refunds for in-app charges or suggest consumers cannot get a refund for these charges.

This is the Commission’s second case relating to children’s in-app purchases; Apple, Inc. settled an FTC complaint concerning the issue earlier this year. The Commission is seeking full refunds for all affected consumers, disgorgement of Amazon’s ill-gotten gains, and a court order ensuring that in the future Amazon obtains permission before imposing charges for in-app purchases.

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the complaint was 4-1, with Commissioner Joshua D. Wright voting no. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The case will be decided by the court.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

Hiding in plain sight? — Federal Trade Commission

Could your mobile carrier be hiding third-party charges on your phone bill that you never authorized? The FTC has alleged that T-Mobile has done just that.

The agency says that T-Mobile charged consumers not only for regular phone services, but also for third party content – including monthly subscriptions for ringtones, wallpaper, horoscope texts, flirting tips, and celebrity gossip – that consumers neither knew about nor agreed to.

According to the FTC, here’s how it happened: On the first page of the bill, T-Mobile deceptively lumped third-party charges under a general line item that also included charges for their services like texting. The obscure breakouts of each charge were on the pages toward the end of the bill.

More surprising? The company continued to charge consumers, pocketing up to 40 percent of those third-party charges, even after some consumers caught on, complaints piled up, and industry auditors put T-Mobile on notice that the charges were unauthorized.

Here’s how to reduce the chances of paying charges crammed onto your bill without your knowledge or permission:

  • Read your mobile phone bill each month – line by line, and page by page. Don’t ignore the billing statement you get in the mail or through an automated online payment system. You should know your baseline monthly bill. Taking time to read every page of your statements can help you detect potentially fraudulent charges, keep surprise charges to a minimum, and save you money.
  • Consider a block on third-party charges. Many phone carriers already offer third-party blocking service for free. You just have to ask.
  • Ask your mobile phone carrier for its policy on refunds for fraudulent charges. Some carriers have a 60-day period for refund requests, and many have a policy of partial refunds for fraudulent charges you detect – no matter how long the cramming charges have occurred.
  • If you have a prepaid phone plan, check that you’re not losing pre-paid minutes to pay for unauthorized third-party charges. Stay on top of how many calling minutes you have, and make sure that minutes don’t go missing due to deductions unrelated to your regular phone calls. Check your accounts online or call the number your carrier gives you for account access.

If you suspect you’ve been a victim of cramming, contact your phone carrier first about the charges, then file a complaint with the FTC.

Home Improvement Scams – WABI-TV

Russ spoke with Joy about keeping an eye out for scammers when looking to find some home improvement workers.

There are three Maine laws that deal with transient sales and home repairs. They are explained in detail in the Consumer Law Guide published by the Attorney General’s office (visit www.maine.gov/ag. See chapter 17 of the Guide for laws relating to construction. Chapter 13 deals with transient sales).

Among the key pieces of advice are these.

Always have a written contract for any job costing more than $3,000. There’s a three-day cooling off period before work starts; if you decide you don’t want the job done within those three days, you can cancel the deal. You and the contractor may–but you don’t have to–agree to settle any disputes that might arise through mediation or arbitration.

Don’t sign a contract that includes any blank spaces (to be filled in later). And Maine law says the contractor cannot ask for more than one-third of the total contract amount as a down payment. The Attorney General has a model contract for home construction (see chapter 18 of the Guide).

You’ll likely want to check out a number of contractors before hiring one. Ask each of them how many jobs like yours they’ve done in the past year, and ask for references. Find out what kinds of insurance they carry. Beware of those who demand more than the one-third up-front payment or insist on cash. Also, be wary if the contractor asks you to get the building permit.Transient sellers must be licensed by the state, and an unlicensed contractor may not want to show up at your town hall.

For information on professions requiring a state license, visit www.maine.gov/pfr.

Be extra wary of transient repair “pros” who “spot a problem” you had not noticed. Once inside your home, they may break something and then point out that it “needs fixing.” The shady contractor may insist you come with him to inspect something, while one of his associates steals your valuables.

Those last few points are among the National Consumers League’s top 10 red flags of home repair scams. Read more at www.nclnet.org.

See the Federal Trade Commission’s reminder at www.ftc.gov/scam-alerts

Be on the lookout for timeshare resale phonies – Federal Trade Commission

The FTC and state consumer protection agencies have shut down dishonest timeshare resellers for bilking timeshare owners out of millions of dollars. If you’re selling a timeshare, listen carefully for the promise of lots of money quickly and a request for an upfront fee. Those are two key signs of timeshare resale scam — and someone you don’t want to do business with.

In one recent case, Vacation Property Services claimed to represent big-name companies eager to buy timeshares for business travel and events. The company guaranteed timeshare owners hefty returns if they moved quickly on the offer. But first, the company said the owner had to pay from $500 to $2,000, via credit card, in “registration” and other fees to seal the deal.

Timeshare Resale Scams Infographic

Timeshare Resale Scams
Infographic

The company’s promises of ready buyers, fast sales, big profits and money-back guarantees turned out to be lies. What’s more, the timeshare owners were stuck with debt on their credit cards from paying the “fee” after the company told them that the sale would be complete — and that they’d have their money — by the time the credit card bill came.

If you own a timeshare, question any offers to help you resell it. Be skeptical of companies that:

  • claim the market in your area is “hot” and that they’re “overwhelmed” with buyer requests
  • say they have buyers ready to purchase your timeshare — or promise to sell your timeshare within a specific time
  • guarantee you’ll get big returns on your resale
  • require you to pay fees upfront — even if there’s the promise of a “money-back guarantee”
  • don’t provide a contract — or provide a contract that doesn’t accurately reflect conversations you had

Read about buying and selling a timeshare, or check out our infographic to see how timeshare resale scams typically work.

Lights out for fake utility bill collectors – Federal Trace Commission

The caller sounds convincing: If you don’t pay your utility bills immediately, your gas, electricity or water will be shut off. They ask you to pay using a specific — and unusual — method.

Be warned: The call probably is a trick to steal your money.

The Federal Trade Commission, state and local consumer protection agencies, and utility companies have gotten a slew of complaints from consumers about utility bill scams. Here are a few signs you may be dealing with a scammer:

  • You get a call or an email claiming your services will be cut off unless you call a number or click on a link and give your account information. Most utility companies don’t ask you to send your account information by email.
  • Someone calls demanding you wire the money or use a prepaid or reloadable debit or gift card to pay your bill. Legitimate companies don’t demand you use those methods to pay.
  • The caller tells you to call a phone number and give your credit, debit or prepaid card number. But if you do that, the scammer can access the money from your credit, debit or prepaid card, and you can’t trace where your money went. Once it’s gone, it’s gone.

So if you get a call from someone threatening to shut off your utility service:

  • Make sure you’re dealing with your utility company before you pay any amount. Call the company using a number you’ve looked up. Or go to their website to determine the status of your account. Confirm where and how to pay your bill. Don’t give out your account information on the phone unless you place or expect the call.
  • Never wire money to someone you don’t know — regardless of the situation. Once you wire money, you cannot get it back.
  • Do not click links or call numbers that appear in unexpected emails or texts — especially those asking for your account information. If you click on a link, your computer could become infected with malware, including viruses that can steal your information and ruin your computer.
  • If you are falling behind on your utility bill, contact the utility company and see if they can work with you to come up with a payment plan and a way to keep your service on.
  • If you think a fake utility bill collector or any other scammer has contacted youfile a complaint with the FTC and your state consumer protection agency.

Income Tax Scams – WABI-TV

Russ and Joy talk about scammers that take advantage of the income tax season to gain personal information from you.

Tuesday’s deadline for filing income taxes has the scam artists in high gear. They’ll email, and sometimes call, saying they are Internal Revenue Service officials and that you owe taxes. They will demand payment, often by wire transfer, prepaid debit card, or by giving your credit card number, threatening jail-time, revoking your driver’s license and more if you don’t pay up.

Russ says not to fall for any of these ploys. The IRS will not email or call you, they will use regular mail as a primary means of communication. Russ also warns you to be wary of any phone calls, as these scammers may know such information as the last four numbers of your social security number, they may use fake phone numbers and badge numbers to appear more legitimate, and the may even go as far as calling back with threats posing as the police or the department of motor vehicles.

The Federal Trade Commission is warning businesses that emails with the subject line “Pending consumer complaint” are NOT from the FTC. They are from scammers claiming that someone has filed a complaint with the FTC about their company. Clicking on attachments could download a virus or other malware onto your computer, just delete them.

For more on malicious emails, visit http://www.onguardonline.gov/malware.

“Pending FTC complaint” emails are fakes – FTC

FTC Warns Small Businesses: Don’t Open Email Falsely Claiming to be From FTC‏

“Pending FTC complaint” emails are fakes | Consumer Information.

Have you gotten an email with the subject line “Pending consumer complaint” that looks like it came from the FTC? The email warns that a complaint against you has been filed with the FTC. It asks you to click on a link or attachment for more information or to contact the FTC.

These emails pull out all the stops to look official: They have an FTC seal, references to the “Consumer Credit Protection Act (CCPA)” and a “formal investigation,” and what look like real FTC links. The truth is that they’re fakes.

We’ve heard from many people that emails like this are making the rounds. If you get one, don’t open it. Don’t click on the links. If you click on the link, it may install malware on your computer. Malware can cause your device to crash and can be used to monitor and control your online activity, steal your personal information, send spam, and commit fraud. You can forward the email to spam@uce.gov, but then delete as soon as you do.

Fraudulent huckster’s reward: 10 easy payments of one year each

 

CONSUMER FORUM

 

By Russ Van Arsdale, executive director Northeast CONTACT

 

Posted March 23, 2014, at 12:24 p.m.

 

One of the most familiar faces on American infomercials was recently sentenced to 10 years in prison. Following prior dealings with the legal system, Kevin Trudeau continued to lash out at corporate and government figures he accused of being corrupt.

That changed at last Monday’s sentencing for contempt. According to the Chicago Tribune, Trudeau’s defiant attitude gave way to a more contrite demeanor, a change the convicted fraudster attributed to his first night behind bars.

Kevin Trudeau first came to Northeast CONTACT’s attention through a product called Coral Calcium Supreme. In some of his infomercials Trudeau claimed taking it would cure cancer. Those claims violated an earlier court order banning false health claims by Trudeau, and he was hit with more sanctions as a result.

Trudeau made his name in a series of late-night TV ads, touting sure-fire diets and products that supposedly delivered a number of health benefits. The ads were long on promises and, according to most consumers, short on delivery.

Investigators say Trudeau amassed a fortune through sales of his products and books. His undoing revolved mostly around claims he made in his infomercials about his book, “The Weight Loss Cure ‘They’ Don’t Want You to Know About.”

The best-selling author had boasted that his diet plan was easy. But people who suffered through the 500-calorie-a-day regimen said it was anything but easy. Investigators with the Federal Trade Commission agreed and told Trudeau to stop making those claims. He refused, saying he was the target of zealous regulators and prosecutors.

Last August, the FTC hit Trudeau with a $37.6 million fine; the money was supposed to go to the hundreds of thousands of people who had bought his book based on his inflated infomercial claims.

Trudeau dug in, refusing to pay a nickel. His continued refusals resulted in a contempt case, which Trudeau lost.

At his sentencing last week, Judge Ronald Guzman pointed to a career built on fraud and called Trudeau “deceitful to the core.”

Trudeau had served nearly two years in federal prison in the 1990s after being convicted on two fraud charges. Last Monday, prosecutors said his record of fraud goes back to the mid-1980s.

Throughout his career, Kevin Trudeau struck a chord, both with conspiracy theorists and with searchers for miracle cures and other easy answers to life’s complex problems. If 10 years seems like too much for Trudeau to deal with, we offer him a suggestion.

Think of it as 10 easy payments of one year each.

************************************************************

ALSO IN THE NEWS: Scammers are making hay out of the mysterious disappearance of Malaysian Airlines flight MH370. Phony stories are appearing on Facebook, Twitter and other sites, mostly claiming the plane has turned up, survivors found and so on.

Instructions to “click here” should be ignored; the insensitive crooks are just trying to get you to answer questions that will get your money to them, or to infect your computer with malware.

Consumer Forum is a collaboration of the Bangor Daily News and Northeast CONTACT, Maine’s all-volunteer, nonprofit consumer organization. For assistance with consumer-related issues, including consumer fraud and identity theft, or for information, write Consumer Forum, P.O. Box 486, Brewer 04412, visit http://necontact.wordpress.com or email contacexdir@live.com.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

15 minutes of game: Getting to the core of the FTC’s $32.5 million settlement with Apple | BCP Business Center

By Lesley Fair
January 15, 2014 – 12:30pm

It’s a simple concept really:  Companies shouldn’t charge people for stuff without their express consent.  That’s the law – and it’s always been the law.  So when a company chooses to implement a billing process that, in effect, opens a tab for kids and lets them place “all sales final” charges on their parents’ credit cards with the click of a button – and without Mom or Dad’s express consent – it shouldn’t come as a surprise when law enforcement follows.  That’s the story behind the FTC’s proposed settlement with Apple, which will return at least $32.5 million to consumers.

To paraphrase Andy Warhol’s quote about 15 minutes of fame, the FTC’s complaint focuses on 15 minutes of game – a built-in default period when those unauthorized charges could be racked up.  But first, a bit of background on how Apple’s billing process works.  Before consumers can download anything from the iTunes Store, they have to link their account to a credit or debit card.  When people download an app or buy something within an app, Apple bills their iTunes account and pockets 30% of the revenue.  From start to finish, the billing process is Apple’s baby.  The company controls exactly how it’s done.

Apple offers thousands of apps – including many games featured in the Kids or Family section of the iTunes Store – that let users buy things within the app.  Maybe it’s “food” for an imaginary pet or “gold” that can rev up the gaming experience.  The Magical Pixie Dust may be virtual, but it costs cold, hard cash in the form of charges to the device owner’s iTunes account.  And Pixie Dust doesn’t come cheap these days;  in-app charges can range from 99 cents up to almost $100 per click.

Here’s where that 15-minute window becomes critical.  If a child is playing a game and wants to make an in-app charge, Mom or Dad typically has to key in their password and then hand the device back to the kid to continue playing.  But according to the FTC’s complaint, what Apple didn’t explain is that it stores the password for 15 minutes.  That means all in-app charges made during that 15-minute window are incurred without the account holder having to re-enter the password.  In effect, without telling parents, Apple set up a 15-minute “Put it on my tab” period where Moms and Dads were responsible for charges they didn’t expressly authorize.  That happened even in apps rated for, say, four-year-olds – not a group likely to grasp the concept that pressing a button or two can run up a bill rivaling what a family spends in a week on groceries.  For example, the “Tiny Zoo Friends” app, which Apple has rated for kids 4 and up, lets players buy a quantity of “Zoo Bucks” at a cost of $99.  And remember:  Apple has an “all sales final” policy.

Furthermore, up until the release of Apple’s latest operating system in September 2013, when a child playing a game tried to make the first in-app charge, a BUY button appeared that the kid could click.  What showed up next was a pop-up identical to the password prompt that appears before the installation of an app.  The trouble is nowhere did that password prompt explain it was for a purchase.  So if a kid clicked BUY and then passed the device to Mom or Dad for their password, the parent had no way of knowing that the routine act of entering their password resulted in a charge – much less that it opened that 15-minute window when unauthorized charges could be added.  (Click on the picture to see how that worked.)  That payment process isn’t entirely a thing of the past.  For people who haven’t upgraded their operating system, that’s still what happens.

The financial injury in this case isn’t speculative.  Apple received tens of thousands of complaints from consumers about unauthorized in-app charges by kids.  For example, one Mom reported that her daughter’s clicks resulted in $2600 in unauthorized purchases in the “Tap Pet Hotel” app.  Others reported $500 in surprise in-app charges when kids played “Dragon Story” and “Tiny Zoo Friends.”

The FTC’s proposed order requires Apple to change its practices to make sure it has account holders’ express, informed consent before billing them for in-app charges.  If people give their OK to be billed for future charges but then change their mind, the order gives them the right to withdraw their consent at any time.  You’ll want to check the order’s definition of “express, informed consent” in this context, but here are some salient features:  It requires an affirmative act communicating authorization for the in-app charge – like entering a password  – that has to be close to both the in-app activity Apple is billing the user for and to a clear and conspicuous disclosure of material information about the charge.  Apple must have those billing changes up and running by March 31, 2014.

As part of the proposed settlement, Apple will provide at least $32.5 million in refunds to people who were billed for accidental or unauthorized in-app charges incurred by kids.  How will the refund program operate?  Apple has to send an electronic notice to customers with directions on how to get their money back.  And it’s not just a “take Apple’s word for it” provision.  The order requires the company to hand over to the FTC records of refund requests, refunds paid, and any refunds denied.

What messages can other companies can take from the FTC’s proposed settlement?

First, get people’s express consent before billing them.  That’s Consumer Protection 101 for app developers, app sellers, advertisers, payment processors, and anyone else in the marketing ecosystem who wants to avoid the scrutiny of law enforcers and the ire of outraged consumers.

Second, especially when it comes to merchandise geared toward kids, think through your processes in advance to minimize the risk that a child’s quick click could result in hefty unauthorized charges unknown to the parent until they get the bill.

Weight-loss scams prey on the unsuspecting

CONSUMER FORUM

By Russ Van Arsdale, Executive Director Northeast CONTACT
Posted Jan. 12, 2014, at 12:46 p.m.
If your New Year’s resolution to lose weight hasn’t gained traction, check out this website. I know, you’ve heard that pitch before, but this one is different … really.

The website (wemarket4u.net/fatfoe/) touts the wonders of FatFoe, an eggplant extract in capsule form that “binds with food to block the absorption of fat, carbs AND calories. Lose up to 10 pounds per week,” the ad continues, and it’s “GUARANTEED to work for everyone.”

In the too-good-to-be-true department, this one tops the list. However, when you try to click and buy FatFoe, you’re redirected to another website that admits FatFoe isn’t real. The fake site was put together by the Federal Trade Commission and Competition Bureau of Canada to educate consumers about weight-loss hoaxes.

Among the red-flag claims in hoax ads:

— You can lose weight without diet or exercise.

— You can eat all the high-calorie foods you like and still lose weight.

— A product can make you lose three pounds a week for more than four weeks.

— A product will make you lose weight permanently, and it works for everyone.

The educational website concludes that the only thing you’re guaranteed to lose is your money.

That website was launched in 2004 as part of “Operation Big Fat Lie,” a multi-pronged effort by the FTC to crack down on losses to consumers that likely run into the billions of dollars. At that time, Maine joined the FTC in suing a firm based in Scarborough for making false claims about a topical gel and dietary supplement. The company agreed to pay $100,000 to consumers to settle the charges.

Just last week, the FTC settled with marketers of Sensa and three other fad products. Ads for Sensa said, “sprinkle, eat and lose weight.” Under the settlement, sellers of Sensa agreed to pay $26.5 million to consumers who bought it and to stop making unfounded claims.

The latest crackdown is termed “Operation Failed Resolution.” The FTC also announced it’s charging L’Occitane, which claimed a skin cream could somehow cause users to lose weight. The agency also is charging HCG Diet Direct for marketing an unproven human hormone for weight loss. The FTC also announced a partial settlement of a case against LeanSpa, LLC, which allegedly set up fake news websites to promote acai berry and “colon-cleanse” supplements as weight-loss aids.

If you think you may be entitled to some compensation, check this FTC-run website: http://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/refunds. It lists a number of companies the FTC has pursued with contact information. The FTC is still working out the ways consumers might be compensated, so you may not get an answer right away.

To see the FatFoe website and similar sites warning of phony health claims, work-at-home schemes and more, visit wemarket4u.net.

Consumer Forum is a collaboration of the Bangor Daily News and Northeast CONTACT, Maine’s all-volunteer, nonprofit consumer organization. For assistance with consumer-related issues, including consumer fraud and identity theft, or for information, write Consumer Forum, P.O. Box 486, Brewer 04412, visit http://necontact.wordpress.com or email contacexdir@live.com.

 

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 72 other followers

%d bloggers like this: