Pop Quiz:
A company misrepresents what its service can do. An innocent consumer, having relied on their claims, signs up for their service but soon discovers that it cannot do what Sales had assured them it would.
Upon discovering the misrepresentation within days of subscribing to the service, the consumer immediately tries to cancel the monthly service and get a refund.
The company — after more than 11 days of ignoring the customer’s request — agrees to cancel the account at the end of the first month’s subscription, but refuses to refund the fee, citing its Terms of Service:
Charges and Cancellation: Article 8: “.. You agree that all payment obligations are non-cancelable and all amounts paid are non-refundable during the Initial Subscription Term or then current Renewal Term, as applicable.” Article 10 regarding Termination: “..Your Order Form may provide that a Renewal Term will begin automatically unless either party provides notice of termination at least thirty (30) days prior to the commencement of the next Renewal Term.”
The consumer signed up on April 4 and tried to cancel on April 7 immediately upon discovering that the service was unusable for the intended purpose. Instead of apologizing profusely and promptly canceling the account and refunding the money paid, the company refuses to refund the first month and will consider May 7 as the non-renewal date, which probably means they might try to bill her for the month beginning May 4.
Do you think the company’s conduct is legal or does it violate Section 5 of the FTC Act?
DataBreaches is not a lawyer but believes it violates Section 5, and has filed a formal request for investigation and complaint for injunctive relief.
Some might question why someone would file a complaint over $24.46. Sometimes, it really is the principle of the thing.
If you’d like to read more details about the situation and Zoom’s refusal to do the right thing, I’m embedding the entire complaint submission below. I have no idea if the FTC will take any action against Zoom in this matter. I hope they do. Consumers should not be held to TOS when the firm has made material misrepresentations.ZoomUS_DeceptionComplaint