Anti-aging cream adds weeks of stress
Woman learns it’s buyer beware when it comes to online pitches
This click bait bit back. While reading the news on Facebook, Nat Hendren was noticed an ad for an anti-aging cream and its offer of a free trial. But it cost her almost $150 and she wants to warn others not to make the same mistake.
Hendren clicked on the pop-up ad that featured before-and-after photos of a middle-aged woman and thought the $4.95 shipping and handling charges for a 30-day trial sounded reasonable. She entered her credit card details.
She also said she clicked “no” on the box that asked if she was interested in signing up for a monthly delivery of the cream called Abella Mayfair.
Two days later, two charges — for $5 and $6 — showed up on her MasterCard under Pearl Skin Daily, which had a similar sales pitch. She waited but the cream never arrived in the mail.
On Dec. 17, 14 days after she placed the order and still with no delivery, MasterCard alerted her and her husband, Mark, that an international charge was being made on the card.
“That’s the first we heard of the charge,” said Hendren’s husband.
Hendren said she never agreed to a delivery and they checked the Internet. They realized they had fallen for what they say is a dishonest or misleading pitch.
“I didn’t submit an order. I just wanted to try the sample size,” said Hendren, who is a supervisor at Urban Fare.
They sent strongly worded emails to Abella Mayfair and Pearl Skin Daily, demanding a refund but received only an offer of $50.
MasterCard informed the couple nothing could be done about the Dec. 17 charge because it was “pending.”
Once it was completed in a few days and the couple still hadn’t received delivery of the cream, they could dispute it.
Mark Hendren said part of the blame for these kinds of companies lay with the credit card companies, without which they couldn’t operate.
He said MasterCard’s name on a company’s website lends it legitimacy and they should protect their brand by not allowing companies with dubious business models to use it.
“They’re enabling those companies,” he said.
A spokeswoman for MasterCard Canada said in an email any transaction must meet “defined rules of authenticity” or it’s declined. If a cardholder notices a fraudulent transaction, they can start a fraud claim with the issuing bank, she said.
“With a MasterCard they (cardholders) are not responsible for purchases made by a fraudster with their credit card under zero liability rules,” she said.
“MasterCard is responsible for the security of the rails along which the transaction runs.”
But some online complaints about similar anti-aging cream websites say credit card companies suggest the customer was responsible because of the fine print on the website.
The company that charged Hendren has a website that lists conditions for accepting a trial offer that included agreeing to payment of monthly deliveries of the cream
I didn’t submit an order. I just wanted to try the sample size.
and giving the customer 14 days to cancel.
But as Hendren discovered, the 14 days were up before she even received the cream, and she was confused by the promise of a “30day” trial.
And, she said, the fine print was on the website, but not on the original pop-up ad.
As womensblogtalk.com pointed out on its site, 14 days isn’t enough time to receive or sample the product, most of the companies are impossible to reach by phone, and the companies often change names or use multiple brands.
(Phone numbers Postmedia tried calling were out of service and an emailed request for comment was returned as a form letter asking for the date the order was placed and the problem with it.)
The federal Competition Bureau suggests not clicking on free offers on pop-up ads and be discerning about where you send any personal data.
The bureau said to take a day or two to search the web for any complaints against the company and read all the small print before agreeing to anything “free.”
If there’s a time limit for the trial, mark it on a calendar and call before time expires.
Nat said she learned the hard way and warns others to not get the sample.
“It’s not worth it.”