From TFA:

  > Rule from Mamdani administration ... targets ‘junk fees’
  > The city is also targeting so-called “junk fees” that raise the final price of everything from apartments to sporting events, with a proposed rule that requires sellers to “advertise the total price for any good or service, including all mandatory additional charges and fees, up front”, according to a release shared with the Guardian.

▲ ryandrake 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> proposed rule that requires sellers to “advertise the total price for any good or service, including all mandatory additional charges and fees, up front”

This is going to be tough to enact, anywhere in the USA, even New York. There is nothing quite as American as "not knowing what you're going to pay for something until you have to pay." Whether it's your doctor bill, restaurant bill with tips and service fees, your hotel stay with a hidden resort fee, or just general purchases where tax is computed at the very end right before you pay... We are culturally so used to this abuse.

▲

baq 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You may find some bits of culture are easier to change than others and I wager this one falls squarely in the ‘surprisingly easy’ category.

▲

kevin_thibedeau 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

FTC has mandated all-in pricing for hotels since last year.

▲

nemomarx 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I mean culturally we're used to it, but it seems really easy to test for and therefore fine businesses doing it in NYC? Just go ring up some purchase and see if they add a tax onto the listed price, and if they do report it.

	▲	saghm an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Agreed, this is totally solvable. You could even set up an email address for people to send pictures of their receipts to so they know who to investigate. Imagine if you could just screenshot a bill and send it to "junkfees@nyc.gov" and then they'd assign someone to look into it!

▲ socalgal2 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The latest one for me is renting a new apartment, getting told it cost $XXXX a month, then being told I'm required to have $XXXXXX amount of renter's insurance at $XXX a month and oh, by the way, click here to use ours.

▲

dml2135 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

A requirement to obtain renter’s insurance is not an example of the type of fees this legislation is targeting.

▲

SoftTalker an hour ago | parent [-]

It should also be illegal. If I want to risk loss of my personal property that should be my decision to make.

▲

erentz 42 minutes ago | parent [-]

It’s not your property they care about. They usually want this because it includes liability insurance if you damage their property or someone else’s, or your negligence causes harm to someone.

▲

evolve2k 21 minutes ago | parent [-]

In Australia we have very strong consumer protection law, here it’s expected (by the bank usually) the landlord has at least a minimum “landlord insurance” that covers all that stuff.

For anything not covered, where a tenant does damage thats what the bond is for.

Renter insurance should be optional.

Actually I’m surprised that landlord insurance is not already occurring, imagine a building with 100 apartments, I’m sure the bank would ask the landlord to have a single cover over 100’s of little crappy policies.

If renter insurance is required by regulations, this is likley another good target for policy change.

Americans really do get screwed in so many ways.

	▲	SoftTalker 16 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Same here. This has only been a thing recently when landlords figured out they could make money selling the insurance. When I was a renter, insurance was never required from me.

▲

fibonachos 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The insurance requirement isn’t uncommon where I am (California). Though I would avoid whatever plan they are pushing. I got mine through my existing insurance provider and it worked out to ~$15 per month IIRC.

▲

nxm 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Renter’s insurance is not a fee.