Consumer pulls hair out over lack of a refund

Another tricky commercial promising a too-good-to-pass-up offer recently caught a local shopper unaware. Television ads can be pretty enticing with images of gorgeous models, handy kitchen tools, and money-back guarantees.

Some ads make outrageous claims (“marked down from $400 to $9.95 for this TV offer, quantities limited, not available in stores, act now and get five bonus gifts that will do your taxes, wash your windows, and feed the cat”).

Some offers are more believable, but even so, it’s never easy to obtain a refund from these out-of-state companies with no mailing address and an 800-number with an automated menu that keeps you hanging “on hold” in the land of perpetual elevator music.

Marion Sullivan of Corinth found this out after treading water with the Aussie Nads company for three months before she finally contacted Consumer Forum. Her situation was familiar. She had responded to a TV ad for the Aussie Nads Hair Removal System, ordered her product by credit card, and sat back anticipating the hair-free days to come. When her product arrived she gave it a good yank (ouch!), wasn’t satisfied, and returned it for a full refund as promised by Aussie Nads’ “satisfaction-guaranteed, money-back warranty.”

While awaiting her refund, she received a surprise in her credit card statement. The $24.95 charge she expected had grown to $42.85! With no response from the company after returning her product and receiving what she considered an overcharge, Sullivan called Nads customer service.

Our Corinth consumer was not a happy camper when Nads customer service said she would not receive a refund because the product was not returned within 30 days. Thirty days from what? Marion had a postal receipt proving she returned the product within 30 days of receiving the product. Nads replied that more than thirty days had passed from the date the order was placed.

Fed up, Sullivan wrote Forum, handing over the reins to Northeast COMBAT. Our volunteer caseworker collected the details and wrote the president of Aussie Nads. We enclosed documentation of Marion’s attempts to get her money back and notified the business they were in violation of mail order laws that state if a time limit is put on a warranty, it begins when a customer receives the product, not when the order is submitted. We asked Aussie Nads to issue Sullivan a refund.

Out-of-state companies often ignore consumer complaints, hoping they will just go away (and consumers often give up too easily). But when a company is sluggish, COMBAT happily demonstrates its relationship with agencies across the nation willing to back up our efforts to protect Maine consumers.

When the company failed to respond to COMBAT’s first letter, we mailed an ultimatum promising that unless they issued Marion a $42.85 refund, we would be forced to contact the California Attorney General, Los Angeles Office of the District Attorney, Postal Inspector, director of California Consumer Affairs, the Federal Trade Commission, LA’s Better Business Bureau, and the Beverly Hills Chamber of Commerce. We further indicated our intention to ask those agencies to examine Aussie Nads’ business practices and consider the possibility of consumer fraud.

Apparently Aussie Nads got the message that we take protecting Maine people seriously. They promised Sullivan a full refund, rather lamely explaining that her earlier requests had slipped through the cracks when the company switched to another “fulfillment center.” Marion’s refund soon arrived, and another case was successfully closed for a happy COMBAT member.

For help and information write: Consumer Forum, Bangor Daily News, PO Box 1329, Bangor 04402-1329.