Brandarama Legal Thread
fesicnet
30-03-2009 15:16:13
As I have stated before I am a law student not a lawyer and CANNOT offer legal advise, doing so is not only illicit but will result in inability for me to get a legal license.
What I can do is to share my PERSONAL information and resources that I will be using to pursue litigation against Brandarma/Mpell should the need arise. In this form I will try to help point people to resources I will use if I receive a letter or are in your salutation. Please feel free to post questions and I can try to help point to resources.
Anything I write is my personal opinion, protected by my 1st amendment rights, and is not legal advise. If you are considering legal actions you should seek the guidance of a qualified legal professional. If you think I am stupid law student that has no idea what I am talking about, then just ignore this thread. I am just trying to help people with the little knowledge that I have, thanks to privileged parents able to afford obscene tuition. Sorry if this is full of disclaimers but I have worked to hard to ruin my future career, for trying to help others. [/sizee690b0b635]
fesicnet
30-03-2009 15:17:20
If you are planning on falling a lawsuit or pursuing any litigation print these following links. You WILL need them, even Judge Judy requires documentation. Thanks, to freeipodplayer for sending them to me
Better save these pages before ARG gets wind and takes them down.
DMCN - http//web.archive.org/web/20071211030721/http//www.brandarama.com/lch.php?lk=1769&bid=1
Privacy - http//web.archive.org/web/20070812124955/http//www.brandarama.com/lch.php?lk=421
Terms - http//web.archive.org/web/20070807181143/http//www.brandarama.com/lch.php?lk=430&bid=1
Gift Rules - http//web.archive.org/web/20071020215753/brandarama.com/lch.php?lk=431&sesp=395_10200&pzid=&bid=1
(gift rules is missing the words for each gift... I assume they are inserted with each seperate gift landing page.)
I will post more information later on tonight.
Eeyore
30-03-2009 15:43:58
This should last about the half life of a mayfly.
An interesting paragraph is #13 under the T&C, referencing arbitration. That's gotta hurt...
fesicnet
30-03-2009 15:45:26
If you have completed any Brandarama sites since the 20th you may become bound to the new terms according to there successor agreement. (Don't get to worried if you have, because the terms, "prominently post material changes on the Home Page" are quite ambiguous. However, do not start or finish any Brandarama offers or you may be agreeing to there new terms.
14. Successor Agreements
The terms of this Agreement may change from time to time. You should check back at http//www.Brandarama.com (the "Home Page") regularly to determine if any material changes have been made. We will prominently post material changes on the Home Page. You agree that your continued use of the Service after the effective date of any change will constitute your affirmative consent to this revised Agreement. If you do not accept such revisions, do not access or use the Service.
(Source http//web.archive.org/web/20070807181143/http//www.brandarama.com/lch.php?lk=430&bid=1)
fesicnet
30-03-2009 16:15:48
First you need to understand that if you ever at any point intended to commit fraud or did commit fraud you will probably have no legal action against Brandarama or Mpell, as you violated the clean hands doctrine.
That being said having multiple accounts and completing the same offer multiple times, while may be considered fraud on this site, do not necessarily equal legal fraud or more importantly a violation of Brandarama’s Official Gift Rules or Standard Terms and Conditions. First of all there is nothing, that I have been able to find, in their documents that states or even indicated you can not use mutable e-mails.
However, completing the same offer more then once may be covered by provision 5 of the Official Gift Rules (See Below). It seems that the question of completing the same offer twice, comes down to each offers unique terms in conditions. If I was a lawyer I would argue that if the offer did not specifically state that it could only be completed once, then it crediting demonstrated that multiple completions were permitted. Completing something like Clever Clasp or Vista Print multiple times would most likely not equate a violation of the terms.
Brandarama might be able to argue industry standard, but that is not dispositive. More importantly the average user would have no idea of the industry standard and remember I-Deal only prohibits completing the same offer twice in a six month period.
5. Verification of Sponsor Offer Participation. Each Sponsor must provide written verification (written or electronic) to Brandarama that you have successfully qualified for and completed that Sponsor's offer. Following Brandarama's receipt of such verification from the last of the requisite number of Sponsors, Brandarama will send an email message to you with instructions on how to redeem your offer and ask you to confirm your delivery address where the will be shipped. The qualification time varies by Sponsor, but may be in excess of 30 days. In some cases an additional step by you is required to satisfy the Sponsor's qualifications. By way of example that is not intended to be exhaustive, all-inclusive, or otherwise limiting, a Sponsor offer for, for example, credit card or similar service may require you to use the credit card to make a purchase, take a cash advance, or transfer a balance, to satisfy the Sponsor's qualifications. The time it takes you to complete this step is in your control and not that of the Service or the Sponsor, and the qualification time for such Sponsor offers accordingly will vary based in part on the time you take to satisfy this requirement. Your gift qualification status may be viewed at any time at http//www.brandarama.com/status
fesicnet
30-03-2009 16:37:21
Plan 1
If you bought goods that you would not have otherwise purchased with the understanding that you would receive a reimbursement and now they are denying that reimbursement you have relied on their promise to your determent. This is called Detrimental Reliance. A court can force specific performance (i.e. payment) based on a negative change of condition relying on the promise has caused. When this happens it is called equitable estoppel, because it would be inequitable for the courts not to enforce the contract.
If they planned on disqualifying people they should have done so before conforming the gift to ship. Much more or less, one year later before they mail out an offer leading people to believe it was a done deal. You can sue Brandarama and Mpell in court asking that they be estopped from claiming any fraud or violations of the rules because you relied on there promise to your determent. You will need to do some legal research to make this argument but if you are owed enough money it will be worth it.
Plan 2
The second way is to sue Mpell based on breach of a contract, as the gift certificates say nothing about any the possibility of disqualification due to a violation of any other terms then the ones listed on the certificate.
fesicnet
30-03-2009 16:45:15
Remember all this may be for not if Brandarama and Mpell file bankruptcy you will have to stand in line as a creditor. Just because you sign a release to Mpell to get your gift does not mean it will hold up in court. Remember if you did not sign it you would get nothing, and the courts will not look fondly on that situation.
Also if you are going to sue go for it all. Look up your state’s (and New York’s) deceptive trade practices statute. Often it includes damages that can be included in your suit.
Finally do not be afraid to sue in small claims court. Contrary to what the uneducated say it is not difficult and the cost are minimal.
If you got questions feel free to ask and I will try to point you in the right direction but good luck.
doylnea
30-03-2009 16:49:32
This is not legal advice.
This is the most important and really, the only relevant thing posted.
[quote58d23bb8ea="fesicnet"]First you need to understand that if you ever at any point intended to commit fraud or did commit fraud you will probably have no legal action against Brandarama or Mpell, as you violated the clean hands doctrine. [/quote58d23bb8ea]
Fraud will almost certainly be[i58d23bb8ea] [b58d23bb8ea]very broadly[/b58d23bb8ea][/i58d23bb8ea] defined in any case brought against ARG or MPell.
jtackman
30-03-2009 17:00:35
"You agree that your continued use of the Service after the effective date of any change will constitute your affirmative consent to this revised Agreement. If you do not accept such revisions, do not access or use the Service."
Do not log in! Then you haven't accepted it.
fesicnet
30-03-2009 17:35:24
[quotec341edb202="doylnea"]This is not legal advice.
This is the most important and really, the only relevant thing posted.
[quotec341edb202="fesicnet"]First you need to understand that if you ever at any point intended to commit fraud or did commit fraud you will probably have no legal action against Brandarama or Mpell, as you violated the clean hands doctrine. [/quotec341edb202]
Fraud will almost certainly be[ic341edb202] [bc341edb202]very broadly[/bc341edb202][/ic341edb202] defined in any case brought against ARG or MPell.[/quotec341edb202]
My apologies for posting, just trying to help, did not mean to waste yours and my time.
bennyboy5768
30-03-2009 17:40:33
I have taken full page screenshots of the pages fesicnet has posted and put them on my website, a free service I am providing for you guys. These photos should last until next Febuary (thats when my domain expires and I don't intend on renewing it) and I wont be taking them down. Let me know if there is any issues viewing them. Here they are
www.funkytiger.com/brandarama/Brandarama%20Digital%20Millenium%20Copyright%20Notice.png
www.funkytiger.com/brandarama/Brandarama%20Gift%20Offer%20Rules%20for%20the.png
www.funkytiger.com/brandarama/Brandarama%20Privacy%20Policy.png
www.funkytiger.com/brandarama/Brandaramacom%20Terms%20%26%20Conditions.png
If there is any other pages you'd like me to capture and put up PM me and I'll do that as well.
doylnea
30-03-2009 17:55:28
a) I didn't lock the thread
b) I didn't say that what you wrote was untrue, but
b) I did say the most relevant thing was about Fraud, pointing that the amount of Fraud committed should preclude most people from filing suit, or expecting recourse in their favor.
Eeyore
30-03-2009 17:58:18
[quote44a09b3eee="fesicnet"]Finally do not be afraid to sue in small claims court. Contrary to what the uneducated say it is not difficult and the cost are minimal. [/quote44a09b3eee]One thing which should be added to this comment is that getting a judgment in court does not equal getting what you sued for. In fact, collecting the judgment can be much harder than winning it. They are two totally different things, with one being the prerequisite for the other. You aren't paid on the way out the door...
jtackman
30-03-2009 18:08:20
With the way doylnea is posting, one must assume that it or one of other mods here probably called arg and mpell and brought this whole thing on. If thats the case, you truly have no life and are pathetic individuals.
jtackman
30-03-2009 18:10:48
[quote7e17382680="Eeyore"][quote7e17382680="fesicnet"]Finally do not be afraid to sue in small claims court. Contrary to what the uneducated say it is not difficult and the cost are minimal. [/quote7e17382680]One thing which should be added to this comment is that getting a judgment in court does not equal getting what you sued for. In fact, collecting the judgment can be much harder than winning it. They are two totally different things, with one being the prerequisite for the other. You aren't paid on the way out the door...[/quote7e17382680]
That works the other way around too.
doylnea
30-03-2009 18:28:01
I have had no contact with ARG or Mpell, other than mailing in my cert.
dmorris68
30-03-2009 18:35:48
[quote5c35799464="jtackman"]With the way doylnea is posting, one must assume that it or one of other mods here probably called arg and mpell and brought this whole thing on. If thats the case, you truly have no life and are pathetic individuals.[/quote5c35799464]
WTH are you going on about?
ILoveToys
30-03-2009 19:10:18
[quoteeb184c4fa7="jtackman"]With the way doylnea is posting, one must assume that it or one of other mods here probably called arg and mpell and brought this whole thing on. If thats the case, you truly have no life and are pathetic individuals.[/quoteeb184c4fa7]
Do you really think that brandarama doesn't lurk the forums themselves????
LucaBella
30-03-2009 20:39:01
I like detrimental reliance... +Karma for taking the time to post all of this, OP. You may get criticized, but you're honestly trying to help and that's always appreciated!
zr2152
30-03-2009 21:07:32
people need to start thinking before they post...seriously.
fanofpurple
31-03-2009 04:36:42
I, for one, appreciate Fesicnet's advice on this mess. Even if we have some of the legal lingo to use in our reply to these morons, it may help. Some of us have been approved for a year or more, with our accounts being confirmed to ship, MPell certs telling us that we have successfully met all requirements, and then dealt this trash. I understand the need they have to enforce their rules, and going forward, if they choose to do that, they should. If anyone is committing fraud - it is THEM. They must have known prior to January 26th or whatever date our Mpell certs had on them, that they had no intention of paying us. To tell us to go out and buy our gift since we were approved and wait for reimbursement - they should not be able to get away with that. The letters are signed for by the gift site company - Trusted Rewards, Brandarama...
On a side note, I am almost wondering if skatingcrippled works for ARG. Regardless of what situation you are in - to think that what they are doing to all of us here on this board is good - seems odd to say the least.
mctrask
31-03-2009 07:21:57
Here's what stands out to me. The following was/is standard language on the Gift Rules page across Brandarama's sites
[quote762c7d1ec9]Summary of Frequently Asked Questions
Q How can you offer gifts?
A We rebate advertiser dollars to consumers in the form of gifts. Our advertising sponsors cover the cost of the along with the shipping and handling charges.[/quote762c7d1ec9]
As much as I think those who repeated offers across multiple email addresses ruined this company for the rest of us and it pains me to say it...if there was nothing in the rules prohibiting this practice then that is Brandarama's fault. It may have been ethically wrong but technically within the bounds that Brandarama set. If Brandarama was paid for the leads and profited from selling these email addresses, which I suspect they were or they would have changed the rules a long time ago, then they can't now claim fraud.
This "plan B" was only set in motion when Brandarama realized that plan A wasn't going to weed out many people, particularly the high rollers. As I said way back in early Feb. when I posted advising that people only buy gift cards to get their MPell receipts so they can recoup their money, Brandarama underestimates the freebie community.
So now they have decided to try and do things ass backwards by having people fund their own gifts and then trying to disqualify them after the fact. It's risky but they are counting on people not having the knowledge or means to pursue legal action. Those that threaten legal action or go further to hire an attorney will probably get a settlement offer along the same lines of the people who complained that they did not have the means to fulfill the MPell requirements, 10 or 20 cents on the dollar.
For those that received a letter and decide to take the legal route, the first thing you need to find out is if Brandarama got paid for the offers you did and profited from selling the information tied to each email address you used. They can't claim fraud while keeping the money made from those accounts without becoming a party to it.
And no, I am not expecting a letter.
dubbin87
31-03-2009 08:31:49
[quote6ca91c7942="mctrask"]Here's what stands out to me. The following was/is standard language on the Gift Rules page across Brandarama's sites
[quote6ca91c7942]Summary of Frequently Asked Questions
Q How can you offer gifts?
A We rebate advertiser dollars to consumers in the form of gifts. Our advertising sponsors cover the cost of the along with the shipping and handling charges.[/quote6ca91c7942]
As much as I think those who repeated offers across multiple email addresses ruined this company for the rest of us and it pains me to say it...if there was nothing in the rules prohibiting this practice then that is Brandarama's fault. It may have been ethically wrong but technically within the bounds that Brandarama set. If Brandarama was paid for the leads and profited from selling these email addresses, which I suspect they were or they would have changed the rules a long time ago, then they can't now claim fraud.
This "plan B" was only set in motion when Brandarama realized that plan A wasn't going to weed out many people, particularly the high rollers. As I said way back in early Feb. when I posted advising that people only buy gift cards to get their MPell receipts so they can recoup their money, Brandarama underestimates the freebie community.
So now they have decided to try and do things ass backwards by having people fund their own gifts and then trying to disqualify them after the fact. It's risky but they are counting on people not having the knowledge or means to pursue legal action. Those that threaten legal action or go further to hire an attorney will probably get a settlement offer along the same lines of the people who complained that they did not have the means to fulfill the MPell requirements, 10 or 20 cents on the dollar.
For those that received a letter and decide to take the legal route, the first thing you need to find out is if Brandarama got paid for the offers you did and profited from selling the information tied to each email address you used. They can't claim fraud while keeping the money made from those accounts without becoming a party to it.
And no, I am not expecting a letter.[/quote6ca91c7942]
A few thoughts come to my mind after reading this post.
How much is paid to BR when 1 person signs up for 1 offer and then cancels it soon after for whatever reason not entering into the longterm contact that the sponsors have?
What i said right there is completly within the rules and even the "FIPG rules"
Now lets take that and put the "scammer" twist on it.
1 guy signs up 5 times, cancels shortly after. They would still have to pay up front just like the legit guy. and BR is going to get something for each sale. So where is the difference now between guy A and B?
To me guy B might as well have been 5 seperate people all of which was perfectly legit.
I'm sure I've overlooked something and one of the goody goodys will rip this all apart but ehhhhh in the end BR pulled a shady ass move over the past 6 months.
zr2152
31-03-2009 08:47:01
roll
People, you got caught for offer fraud. Give it up.
freeipodplayer
31-03-2009 08:48:52
[quotebe39eb38ba="zr2152"]roll
People, you got caught for offer fraud. Give it up.[/quotebe39eb38ba]
roll
klangy
31-03-2009 09:01:13
[quote0db23e899c="zr2152"]roll
People, you got caught for offer fraud. Give it up.[/quote0db23e899c]
I did nothing wrong and got the letter too. Yours will be coming soon too.
newmomi0329
31-03-2009 09:30:00
[quotebff5a88e71="klangy"][quotebff5a88e71="zr2152"]roll
People, you got caught for offer fraud. Give it up.[/quotebff5a88e71]
I did nothing wrong and got the letter too. Yours will be coming soon too.[/quotebff5a88e71]
I am 100% appreciative of the information contained on this forum. I for one, did receive this letter and feel I have not done anything wrong either. I have been owed gifts now for over a year, have completed the MPELL "solution to the problem" and am now receiving this. I have read and re-read the terms and services that I SIGNED UP FOR back in 2007 and 2008 and no where does it state the items they tell me I'm disqualified for in the letter I rec'd. To be honest, as having this company be my first "free gift website" i DID NOT realize there was any such problem with doing an offer more than once...especially one that has been done more than once over the course of 3 years. It was not outlined in their gift rules.
newmomi0329
31-03-2009 09:35:37
[quotee71b88f84b="newmomi0329"][quotee71b88f84b="klangy"][quotee71b88f84b="zr2152"]roll
People, you got caught for offer fraud. Give it up.[/quotee71b88f84b]
I did nothing wrong and got the letter too. Yours will be coming soon too.[/quotee71b88f84b]
I am 100% appreciative of the information contained on this forum. I for one, did receive this letter and feel I have not done anything wrong either. I have been owed gifts now for over a year, have completed the MPELL "solution to the problem" and am now receiving this. I have read and re-read the terms and services that I SIGNED UP FOR back in 2007 and 2008 and no where does it state the items they tell me I'm disqualified for in the letter I rec'd. To be honest, as having this company be my first "free gift website" i DID NOT realize there was any such problem with doing an offer more than once...especially one that has been done more than once over the course of 3 years. It was not outlined in their gift rules.[/quotee71b88f84b]
I also wanted to state that their was a revision to the gift terms at some point in 2008, but again, it did not state anything about different email address's and signing up for offers more than once. DOES ANYONE HAVE THE REVISED TERMS AND CONDITIONS FROM 2008?
SkatingCrippled.
31-03-2009 10:01:34
[quote5b0e7e9196="zr2152"]roll
People, you got caught for offer fraud. Give it up.[/quote5b0e7e9196]
I know, right. What losers. Stop with the bo-log-na you fraud people!!1!!
newmomi0329
31-03-2009 10:29:21
[quote54f55e9297="SkatingCrippled."][quote54f55e9297="zr2152"]roll
People, you got caught for offer fraud. Give it up.[/quote54f55e9297]
I know, right. What losers. Stop with the bo-log-na you fraud people!!1!![/quote54f55e9297]
How can it be fraud if you legitimately didn't know it was fraud and it wasn't in their gift terms?
SkatingCrippled.
31-03-2009 10:32:46
[quotef095569798="newmomi0329"][quotef095569798="SkatingCrippled."][quotef095569798="zr2152"]roll
People, you got caught for offer fraud. Give it up.[/quotef095569798]
I know, right. What losers. Stop with the bo-log-na you fraud people!!1!![/quotef095569798]
How can it be fraud if you legitimately didn't know it was fraud and it wasn't in their gift terms?[/quotef095569798]
Sure, "legitimately".
dubbin87
31-03-2009 10:33:47
[quotee01042ec20="newmomi0329"][quotee01042ec20="SkatingCrippled."][quotee01042ec20="zr2152"]roll
People, you got caught for offer fraud. Give it up.[/quotee01042ec20]
I know, right. What losers. Stop with the bo-log-na you fraud people!!1!![/quotee01042ec20]
How can it be fraud if you legitimately didn't know it was fraud and it wasn't in their gift terms?[/quotee01042ec20]
we all were suppose to hop in our time machines back in 2007 and jump ahead till today.
zr2152
31-03-2009 10:50:54
I'm just pissed at the people that frauded offers and bitch about getting DQ'ed. If you didn't fraud offers then I do pity you if you received a letter and didn't do anything wrong.
And please do not say that "oh it wasn't in their terms that you cannot do multiple offers" You're just the reason why ARG is in the situation they are in at the current moment.
And if you are "new" to the freebie scene then maybe I can feel a little sympathy for you not knowing that you couldn't do multiple offers but if brandarama was not your first site then you should have known better.
newmomi0329
31-03-2009 10:54:22
[quote297283b6d5="zr2152"]I'm just pissed at the people that frauded offers and bitch about getting DQ'ed. If you didn't fraud offers then I do pity you if you received a letter and didn't do anything wrong.
And please do not say that "oh it wasn't in their terms that you cannot do multiple offers" You're just the reason why ARG is in the situation they are in at the current moment.
And if you are "new" to the freebie scene then maybe I can feel a little sympathy for you not knowing that you couldn't do multiple offers but if brandarama was not your first site then you should have known better.[/quote297283b6d5]
I can't speak for anyone else, but in regards to my situation, yes, this was my first freebie site (again back in 2007) and was completly unaware of the situation. The first thing I do now a days when completing any sites is check the gift requirements and follow it to the tee.
RolltheStampede
31-03-2009 11:03:30
Thats fine an all but people are getting dqed for gift requirements that just appeared a week ago, when offers were completed almost 2 years ago.
jtackman
31-03-2009 11:09:38
roll, did you get a letter too>?
mctrask
31-03-2009 11:14:29
[quote6da9c04f8b="SkatingCrippled."][quote6da9c04f8b="newmomi0329"][quote6da9c04f8b="SkatingCrippled."][quote6da9c04f8b="zr2152"]roll
People, you got caught for offer fraud. Give it up.[/quote6da9c04f8b]
I know, right. What losers. Stop with the bo-log-na you fraud people!!1!![/quote6da9c04f8b]
How can it be fraud if y
ou legitimately didn't know it was fraud and it wasn't in their gift terms?[/quote6da9c04f8b]
Sure, "legitimately".[/quote6da9c04f8b]
Why are you impersonating another member and trying to get the Brandarama threads locked?
RolltheStampede
31-03-2009 11:29:16
[quote6ad6ffc133="jtackman"]roll, did you get a letter too>?[/quote6ad6ffc133]
i dont know i havent checked my mail in a week
zr2152
31-03-2009 13:50:20
[quote611a0fdde1="RolltheStampede"][quote611a0fdde1="jtackman"]roll, did you get a letter too>?[/quote611a0fdde1]
i dont know i havent checked my mail in a week[/quote611a0fdde1]
haha.
But yes you're right RTS, that does suck for people getting DQ'ed for the whole email thing.
fesicnet
31-03-2009 13:51:30
First of all everyone needs to stop making accusations towards the mods. I may not agree with everything thing they do, but they spend there free time on here making all this possible. Unless you have information that they are in anyway connected to you receiving the letter, then you should not make that statement. It is slanderous and you could be held liable for deformation of character. More importantly it kills your own personal credibility.
On the flip side receiving a letter from a company that has a monetary incentive not to issue you a check does not make you a fraudster. And people need to stop assuming such. I have not received a letter and do not expect to. However, I am trying to help make since of this complex situation.
On a final note, repeating offers like magazine burst, vista print, cleaver clasp, or other of that nature multiple times, in my view would not constitute fraud. Actually, I fail to even see how it would be unethical assuming you do not return the items. However, completing an offer like Netflix, which states it is only for new customers, more then once could be considered fraud even under the old contract.
zr2152
31-03-2009 13:56:23
[quotef0d5d517ae="fesicnet"]First of all everyone needs to stop making accusations towards the mods. I may not agree with everything thing they do, but they spend there free time on here making all this possible. Unless you have information that they are in anyway connected to you receiving the letter, then you should not make that statement. It is slanderous and you could be held liable for deformation of character. More importantly it kills your own personal credibility.
On the flip side receiving a letter from a company that has a monetary incentive not to issue you a check does not make you a fraudster. And people need to stop assuming such. I have not received a letter and do not expect to. However, I am trying to help make since of this complex situation.
On a final note, repeating offers like magazine burst, vista print, cleaver clasp, or other of that nature multiple times, in my view would not constitute fraud. Actually, I fail to even see how it would be unethical assuming you do not return the items. However, completing an offer like Netflix, which states it is only for new customers, more then once could be considered fraud even under the old contract.[/quotef0d5d517ae]
It is fraud because those companies pay a good chunk of money for new leads. When those leads do not become profitable it hurts them. SO if you do it 5 times, they are screwed 5 times.
I think we should get off the topic of the definition of offer fraud and focus ore on the legal ramifications of what should happen to those really being DQed illegitimately.
jtackman
31-03-2009 13:57:16
ARG is being sued next week. I encourage everyone else here that received a letter to blast the NY attorney general, consumer frauds bureau, with complaints. Legitimate complaints. Make sure you include copies of the paper and any correspondence. I guarantee you once a few people start serving papers things will be different over there. I for one am not letting $18,000 slide.
fesicnet
31-03-2009 14:03:57
[quote13c0bfffc8="zr2152"][quote13c0bfffc8="fesicnet"]First of all everyone needs to stop making accusations towards the mods. I may not agree with everything thing they do, but they spend there free time on here making all this possible. Unless you have information that they are in anyway connected to you receiving the letter, then you should not make that statement. It is slanderous and you could be held liable for deformation of character. More importantly it kills your own personal credibility.
On the flip side receiving a letter from a company that has a monetary incentive not to issue you a check does not make you a fraudster. And people need to stop assuming such. I have not received a letter and do not expect to. However, I am trying to help make since of this complex situation.
On a final note, repeating offers like magazine burst, vista print, cleaver clasp, or other of that nature multiple times, in my view would not constitute fraud. Actually, I fail to even see how it would be unethical assuming you do not return the items. However, completing an offer like Netflix, which states it is only for new customers, more then once could be considered fraud even under the old contract.[/quote13c0bfffc8]
It is fraud because those companies pay a good chunk of money for new leads. When those leads do not become profitable it hurts them. SO if you do it 5 times, they are screwed 5 times.
I think we should get off the topic of the definition of offer fraud and focus ore on the legal ramifications of what should happen to those really being DQed illegitimately.[/quote13c0bfffc8]
You are half right about how the companies pay for new leads. Companies such as clear clasp and entertainment book, were paying for all leads and did not care as long as they made a sell and the person did not return the product.
On a side note if you did commit fraud, I would chalk this up to one big loss. Because there is nothing keeping Brandarama from suing you for breach of contract and various torts, including fraud.
Also, before you sue you need to find out if you agreed to a Mandatory Arbitration Agreement and what your states laws are pertaining to the agreement.
Eeyore
31-03-2009 14:05:19
[quote5912143f48="jtackman"]ARG is being sued next week.[/quote5912143f48]
Why not invite everyone to file as a class since you've appear to already have started the ball rolling? Your attorney would run down elderly cripples to get the chance for a class action settlement, no?
You might want to go re-read the T&C before you start that though. There is that word "arbitration" in there, plus a few others which should make it fairly easy for ARG to defend. Especially since you have no actual proof of damages yet.
RolltheStampede
31-03-2009 14:07:47
how can you break a rule if it isnt there?
They broke the agreement first by not shipping out gifts in 6-8 weeks in the first place.
jtackman
31-03-2009 14:10:15
i'm sure if we got the right judge and the judge saw how we were led through this whole mpell mess, im sure the ruling would be in our favor. if not, i guess we are out the money we owed plus attorney fees. but in my opinion its worth a shot. If for no more than to waste the CEO's time.
Captain All That
31-03-2009 14:11:21
[quote5df18ca3af="jtackman"]With the way doylnea is posting, one must assume that it or one of other mods here probably called arg and mpell and brought this whole thing on. If thats the case, you truly have no life and are pathetic individuals.[/quote5df18ca3af]
I'm not going to get banned for calling you retard or any other name that would allude to what I think of your intelligence.... but if you are psychic or had any type of common sense... you'd already know what I really think of you.
Please don't post anymore.
Eeyore
31-03-2009 14:20:47
[quoteaf162f2b3e="jtackman"]i'm sure if we got the right judge and the judge saw how we were led through this whole mpell mess, im sure the ruling would be in our favor. if not, i guess we are out the money we owed plus attorney fees. but in my opinion its worth a shot. If for no more than to waste the CEO's time.[/quoteaf162f2b3e]The CEO won't even have to miss lunch. You lose on summary judgment if you even make it that far.
How about that class action? If you really filed suit then you should post the case number here as well as your attorney's contact info. Maybe you'll even earn a client referral or three.
newmomi0329
31-03-2009 14:45:17
[quote66b3d2451d="Eeyore"][quote66b3d2451d="jtackman"]i'm sure if we got the right judge and the judge saw how we were led through this whole mpell mess, im sure the ruling would be in our favor. if not, i guess we are out the money we owed plus attorney fees. but in my opinion its worth a shot. If for no more than to waste the CEO's time.[/quote66b3d2451d]The CEO won't even have to miss lunch. You lose on summary judgment if you even make it that far.
How about that class action? If you really filed suit then you should post the case number here as well as your attorney's contact info. Maybe you'll even earn a client referral or three.[/quote66b3d2451d]
I have no understanding of the law and how to pursue legal action for something like this, but when i am threatened legal action against me for violating some terms and conditions that did not exist at the time i completed my gifts, how can this be upheld in any court of law? Regardless of any thing else, whether there is an un-written rule or not about signing up for offers more than once, or not being able to use additional email addresses, if it wasn't stated in their terms and conditions, how can they accuse me of fraud?
RolltheStampede
31-03-2009 14:51:25
[quote27dc2efe10="newmomi0329"][quote27dc2efe10="Eeyore"][quote27dc2efe10="jtackman"]i'm sure if we got the right judge and the judge saw how we were led through this whole mpell mess, im sure the ruling would be in our favor. if not, i guess we are out the money we owed plus attorney fees. but in my opinion its worth a shot. If for no more than to waste the CEO's time.[/quote27dc2efe10]The CEO won't even have to miss lunch. You lose on summary judgment if you even make it that far.
How about that class action? If you really filed suit then you should post the case number here as well as your attorney's contact info. Maybe you'll even earn a client referral or three.[/quote27dc2efe10]
I have no understanding of the law and how to pursue legal action for something like this, but when i am threatened legal action against me for violating some terms and conditions that did not exist at the time i completed my gifts, how can this be upheld in any court of law? Regardless of any thing else, whether there is an un-written rule or not about signing up for offers more than once, or not being able to use additional email addresses, if it wasn't stated in their terms and conditions, how can they accuse me of fraud?[/quote27dc2efe10]
don't act like you couldn't have just used your time machine and go back in time and tell yourself not to do it.
roll
Eeyore
31-03-2009 14:53:43
You are certainly entitled to defend yourself of false accusations, but the legal premise used above to sue is flawed from the start. If you did not do anything wrong I would suggest that those who got one reply to the audit letter as specified and see what their response is before talking lawsuits. This cart is so far ahead of the horse now that it's turned comical.
mookieb2
31-03-2009 14:55:35
[quote133afca289="jtackman"] I for one am not letting $18,000 slide.[/quote133afca289]
Wow thats alot of gifts.
ILoveToys
31-03-2009 15:06:44
[quoteddbe30e438="mookieb2"][quoteddbe30e438="jtackman"] I for one am not letting $18,000 slide.[/quoteddbe30e438]
Wow thats alot of gifts.[/quoteddbe30e438]
Especially w/out repeating offers or completing the same site (4 offer $1000 Visa) more than once.
newmomi0329
31-03-2009 15:11:22
[quote1d1782b0cf="Eeyore"]You are certainly entitled to defend yourself of false accusations, but the legal premise used above to sue is flawed from the start. If you did not do anything wrong I would suggest that those who got one reply to the audit letter as specified and see what their response is before talking lawsuits. This cart is so far ahead of the horse now that it's turned comical.[/quote1d1782b0cf]
You know,...to me it's not even about the lawsuit and I'd really rather not be involved in that mess, but it's hard not to be on the defense when I get a letter that states " our investigation has revealed that the terms of the program have been violated"....."your violation may result in the forfeiture of any monetary compensation or gifts you may have already received. In such event, we reserve the right to take such necessary legal action against you in order to reclaim any compensation and/or gifts you obtained in violation of the programs." MIND YOU...the gifts that I actually did receive(when they were sending them out) was back in the months of 2007!
SkatingCrippled
31-03-2009 15:17:40
[quote2248e203d7="ILoveToys"][quote2248e203d7="mookieb2"][quote2248e203d7="jtackman"] I for one am not letting $18,000 slide.[/quote2248e203d7]
Wow thats alot of gifts.[/quote2248e203d7]
Especially w/out repeating offers or completing the same site (4 offer $1000 Visa) more than once.[/quote2248e203d7]
You best be careful; freeipodplayer might make another account and make you look like a douche bag.
wiebelhaus03
31-03-2009 15:32:29
the funny thing is, everyone believed it.......shouldn't that tell you something?
fesicnet
31-03-2009 15:38:00
[quotea03e8e43c7="Eeyore"]You are certainly entitled to defend yourself of false accusations, but the legal premise used above to sue is flawed from the start. If you did not do anything wrong I would suggest that those who got one reply to the audit letter as specified and see what their response is before talking lawsuits. This cart is so far ahead of the horse now that it's turned comical.[/quotea03e8e43c7]
I think it would be wise to to talk to Brandarama in good faith and attempt to explain the situation before suing. The information I have posted comes from my education, and I am quite sure detrimental reliance is fundamental to contract law. I am also quite sure that you can not violate a prevision of a contract, if it is not included in the contract. But what do I know?
Remember I am NOT a lawyer, and before acting on any legal advise or concepts you should consult a licensed legal professional.
bruman
31-03-2009 21:46:32
[quote464d6c81dc="jtackman"]ARG is being sued next week. I encourage everyone else here that received a letter to blast the NY attorney general, consumer frauds bureau, with complaints. Legitimate complaints. Make sure you include copies of the paper and any correspondence. I guarantee you once a few people start serving papers things will be different over there. I for one am not letting $18,000 slide.[/quote464d6c81dc]
Have you tried e-mailing your rebuttal to ARG? If you argue the case well enough they might take you off hold. Or at least wait until April 17th when mpell says the checks are going out so you don't sue them to death before everyone else who didn't receive a letter gets paid.
Eeyore
31-03-2009 22:03:41
He hasn't done anything. If he had his lawyer would be here soliciting members for a class action. Bet on it.
hiddenbelow
01-04-2009 02:06:44
Doesn't the original contract have a statute of limitations?? I'm just free balling here.... Or is it spitballing (
marbs4life
01-04-2009 06:53:16
[quoted3a40ce269="Eeyore"]He hasn't done anything. If he had his lawyer would be here soliciting members for a class action. Bet on it.[/quoted3a40ce269]
He may have not done so but others HAVE.
and I don't think many lawyers would UNLESS all have the same exact reasons for DQ. (which there are at least 2 versions of said letter I have seen so far. and no, this isn't in he said, she said internet fairy land... this is hard copy in my face, 2 separate letters)
marbs4life
01-04-2009 06:57:36
[quotea680b27082="bruman"]
Have you tried e-mailing your rebuttal to ARG? If you argue the case well enough they might take you off hold. Or at least wait until April 17th when mpell says the checks are going out so you don't sue them to death before everyone else who didn't receive a letter gets paid.[/quotea680b27082]
I personally do not believe Mpell checks are coming any time soon. Actually, who the hell even knows who is sending them... Mpell has no idea of this situation.
neverendingmoolah
01-04-2009 08:50:01
[quote71c7e99767="newmomi0329"][quote71c7e99767="Eeyore"][quote71c7e99767="jtackman"]i'm sure if we got the right judge and the judge saw how we were led through this whole mpell mess, im sure the ruling would be in our favor. if not, i guess we are out the money we owed plus attorney fees. but in my opinion its worth a shot. If for no more than to waste the CEO's time.[/quote71c7e99767]The CEO won't even have to miss lunch. You lose on summary judgment if you even make it that far.
How about that class action? If you really filed suit then you should post the case number here as well as your attorney's contact info. Maybe you'll even earn a client referral or three.[/quote71c7e99767]
I have no understanding of the law and how to pursue legal action for something like this, but when i am threatened legal action against me for violating some terms and conditions that did not exist at the time i completed my gifts, how can this be upheld in any court of law? Regardless of any thing else, whether there is an un-written rule or not about signing up for offers more than once, or not being able to use additional email addresses, if it wasn't stated in their terms and conditions, how can they accuse me of fraud?[/quote71c7e99767]
You have to understand that completing the offer involves more than one contract. You contract with the publisher (ARG) but you also contract with the advertiser (Netflix, Blockbuster, etc.). The advertiser dictates the terms and concitions to the publisher on what constitutes a valid sale, in which they will pay your business. Those terms and conditions should be expressly stated by the publisher, but not necessarily so. If you are over the age of minority (18) and you agree to the TOS on the advertiser's website (stating that you will pay $4.95 for s&h to review the product and if you dont like it return with 30 days and will not be charged, you agreed to their TOS. However, if somewhere in the mix they have stated only one offer per household, or something to that affect, and you more than one offer, than you did violate their TOS, and cannot hold them liable. Even if they (netflix) did pay ARG for your sale, ARG does not have to pay you for completing the requirements.
AdrienD1892
06-04-2009 20:01:56
[quote28b3c9f6d3="dubbin87"]
A few thoughts come to my mind after reading this post.
How much is paid to BR when 1 person signs up for 1 offer and then cancels it soon after for whatever reason not entering into the longterm contact that the sponsors have?.[/quote28b3c9f6d3]
Depending on the company, just for having an ad on a website can cost the company posting the ad 1000-10,000. Or more. There are a LOT of free websites out there that make their profit completely off having advertisers or sponsors.
Ever hear of that 17 year old girl who got rich off making myspace layouts? She got 10 grand for putting up one little ad on her page. Now she's a multimillionaire and her website is completely free to users.
Brandarama I'm sure gets paid off click, plus having an ad on their sites. that's not even taking into account the money given if someone actually signs up for the trial. That's just the money for having a photo on their domain. And since they have a TON of domains, they're making a profit from that alone.
kinneylamb
06-04-2009 20:52:10
ok for people looking for a way out of being dq'd for terms and conditions that did not exist at the time they completed the site, and for only those people that did not repeat offers and/or repeat gifts with multiple e-mails..
it's a very simple term called statute of limitations. this is a mainstream well known term because its been violated so many times in the past. it basically means that a company can't hold you accountable over and over again with new terms. thats why terms are terms. they are allowed to be updated but you are to be dealt with according to the terms and conditions you agreed to when you clicked the check box and signed up for the website. you are not to be retroactively held accountable for things that are newly written, a year or two after the fact and even after you've been CTS and "approved" by mpell. brandarama may try to skate this, but in my eyes this is a pretty black and white, clear and simple, and you're on the right side of things.
i hate saying this because i'm / we're basically right, but this is not legal advice.
AdrienD1892
06-04-2009 21:01:20
[quote0c69e35366="kinneylamb"]ok for people looking for a way out of being dq'd for terms and conditions that did not exist at the time they completed the site, and for only those people that did not repeat offers and/or repeat gifts with multiple e-mails..
it's a very simple term called statute of limitations. this is a mainstream well known term because its been violated so many times in the past. it basically means that a company can't hold you accountable over and over again with new terms. thats why terms are terms. they are allowed to be updated but you are to be dealt with according to the terms and conditions you agreed to when you clicked the check box and signed up for the website. you are not to be retroactively held accountable for things that are newly written, a year or two after the fact and even after you've been CTS and "approved" by mpell. brandarama may try to skate this, but in my eyes this is a pretty black and white, clear and simple, and you're on the right side of things.
i hate saying this because i'm / we're basically right, but this is not legal advice.[/quote0c69e35366]
normally that would be true but there's a clause in their TOS that states they can change the TOS at will and you'll be held to the new TOS. But I believe that's while you're completeing the site not after you've been approved. But they might come back using that clause as a loophole. Just thought people should be aware of that too...
Plus, MPell apparently has no knowledge of these letters, which means, they're going to send you your check anyway lishrugli
the whole thing is very dodgy
Why's everyone adding a disclaimer about legal advice?
Eeyore
06-04-2009 21:18:31
[quote7ee3f4530a="kinneylamb"]it's a very simple term called statute of limitations. this is a mainstream well known term because its been violated so many times in the past. it basically means that a company can't hold you accountable over and over again with new terms.[/quote7ee3f4530a]
The legal term you are searching for is "ex post facto", not statute of limitations. The concept is that a new law cannot be applied retroactively to charge someone with a crime which was not a crime when the act was committed. The statute of limitations applies against infractions which were against the law at the time of committal but were not prosecuted.
Most fraud statutes have no limitation on when charges can be filed.
Neither of these apply to contracts.
jtackman
06-04-2009 21:57:23
well technically we arent in a contract when we are doing brandarama sites are we --
kinneylamb
06-04-2009 22:54:08
well the general meanings of the terms statute of limitations and ex post facto apply here, and i encourage anyone who thinks its unfair (who completed the sites honestly) to persue their accounts/gifts. the idea that you've been audited and dq'd for something that wasn't a problem according to the terms and conditions when you completed the site, and agreed to when you signed up. over 1-2 years ago. they may as well abuse this rule and make up a requirement that you needed to be 24 or older. i mean please. at the time it wasn't an issue, at the time is when you completed your gift. their shipping delay caused this mess and now they decide to dq you just because your account is active, youre still owed gifts and so its convenient. for the people who did not fraud gifts or offers multiple times, i seriously dont think so. stand up, be agressive and persue your gift. its a gift for pete's sake. make them prove this isn't a scam.
Eeyore
06-04-2009 23:24:32
[quoteaecf7b9862="jtackman"]well technically we arent in a contract when we are doing brandarama sites are we --[/quoteaecf7b9862]The T&C is a contract in the legal sense. All three required parts are present Mutual Consent, Offer and Acceptance, and Mutual Consideration. In order for it to be enforceable from our end we have to satisfy our burden of performance, which if we have completed the sponsor offers and all other terms in effect at the time of completion we have done. This is where ARG is trying to wiggle out...by coming up with "proof" that we did not meet our burden. Of course it's BS for most folks but that is not stopping them from trying to muddy those waters.
A larger problem for those contemplating legal action is the arbitration clause we agree to by doing the site in the first place. This has been in there for years.
Unfortunately, righteous indignation may make you feel better but it won't get anywhere in court.
There is no application of the statute of limitations here. ARG is accusing those being audited of fraud, and in New York state the clock on that runs for six years. Unless you are being denied for a site you did in 2003 or earlier you cannot invoke laches as a defense.
kinneylamb
07-04-2009 00:38:33
i wasn't suggesting persuing limitations in a legal sense. just the fact that you've been fucked in several ways.
in fact you dont have to persue legal action, period. dont even bother with it, except jack b/c he's hell bent on doing it after april 17 and good for him.
just go after the BBB, the AG of NY, ruin their reputation as many ways as possible on the internet, and have patience with the claims you've filed. call your local news scam-alert assistance while you're at it.
as for the courts, we dont need righteous indignation to win because we have real reasons to win that make us feel righteous in the first place. you said it yourself, they're trying to wiggle out of that clause. they are persuing not giving us our gifts as much as we are persuing getting our gifts. so 1-2 years into this storyline, there's still activity going on over the same damn gifts. i'm sure a court would love to step in and impose something official to happen. it's a circus.
edit speaking of patience tho, for those who have submitted a rubut to the audit letter, i'd give it a reasonable amount of time and keep on them about a response before you go ahead further (assuming they continue to cite ridiculous things to dq you such as proof of offers kept for 30+ days - haha - this literally makes me laugh)
nickmode
07-04-2009 00:59:42
Hey all. The only bradarama site i have done was the YTB 4 offers for the $1000 visa. I never repeated any offers either.
Then i got this email..
""
Thank you for contacting us.
You were mailed a Cash Back Certificate from Mpell Solutions. This was mailed Jan 21/09 and the offer expired Feb 26/09. The Cash Back Certificate replaced all the outstanding gifts. You had to have participated in the offer to receive your cash back for your outstanding gift. This is no longer available and you will not be receiving your outstanding gift. I'm sorry.
Please feel free to contact us if you have any additional questions.
Sincerely,
Morgan
YourTopBrands Member Support ""
I never knew they were sending out new forms that i needed to sign. they never sent me an email or notified me what had to be done. And im extremely pissed because i was CTS Nov. 7, 2008.
Am i in the same boat as everyone else? What should i do about this?
kinneylamb
07-04-2009 01:41:33
it helps to check your mail, unless you moved and you never got it.
at this point, complain to customer service and dont take their bs for an answer because they hired all new people who are acting like brandarama robots. then file a complaint with the BBB of NY and the AG of NY and see if you can get that money tree to start shakin'.
-kinneylamb
manOFice
07-04-2009 07:07:56
[quote32264cc632="nickmode"]Hey all. The only bradarama site i have done was the YTB 4 offers for the $1000 visa. I never repeated any offers either.
Then i got this email..
""
Thank you for contacting us.
You were mailed a Cash Back Certificate from Mpell Solutions. This was mailed Jan 21/09 and the offer expired Feb 26/09. The Cash Back Certificate replaced all the outstanding gifts. You had to have participated in the offer to receive your cash back for your outstanding gift. This is no longer available and you will not be receiving your outstanding gift. I'm sorry.
Please feel free to contact us if you have any additional questions.
Sincerely,
Morgan
YourTopBrands Member Support ""
I never knew they were sending out new forms that i needed to sign. they never sent me an email or notified me what had to be done. And im extremely pissed because i was CTS Nov. 7, 2008.
Am i in the same boat as everyone else? What should i do about
this?[/quote32264cc632]
When I couldn't login, that's the exact same email they sent me, then I replied back and I was able to login and everything was fine. Just contact them saying you never got your mpell papers
AdrienD1892
07-04-2009 07:14:47
[quote8f7b77e4ee="Eeyore"][quote8f7b77e4ee="jtackman"]ARG is being sued next week.[/quote8f7b77e4ee]
Why not invite everyone to file as a class since you've appear to already have started the ball rolling? Your attorney would run down elderly cripples to get the chance for a class action settlement, no?
You might want to go re-read the T&C before you start that though. There is that word "arbitration" in there, plus a few others which should make it fairly easy for ARG to defend. Especially since you have no actual proof of damages yet.[/quote8f7b77e4ee]
The only people that get anything in class actions are the first person that starts it and the lawyers. Plus, the more people who join the less everyone gets.
neverendingmoolah
07-04-2009 07:58:51
[quote4ab8925391="kinneylamb"]i wasn't suggesting persuing limitations in a legal sense. just the fact that you've been fucked in several ways.
in fact you dont have to persue legal action, period. dont even bother with it, except jack b/c he's hell bent on doing it after april 17 and good for him.
just go after the BBB, the AG of NY, ruin their reputation as many ways as possible on the internet, and have patience with the claims you've filed. call your local news scam-alert assistance while you're at it.
as for the courts, we dont need righteous indignation to win because we have real reasons to win that make us feel righteous in the first place. you said it yourself, they're trying to wiggle out of that clause. they are persuing not giving us our gifts as much as we are persuing getting our gifts. so 1-2 years into this storyline, there's still activity going on over the same damn gifts. i'm sure a court would love to step in and impose something official to happen. it's a circus.
edit speaking of patience tho, for those who have submitted a rubut to the audit letter, i'd give it a reasonable amount of time and keep on them about a response before you go ahead further (assuming they continue to cite ridiculous things to dq you such as proof of offers kept for 30+ days - haha - this literally makes me laugh)[/quote4ab8925391]
I think if if were to pursue legal action it might pay to explore the Parole Evidence Rule doctrine. In this it is stated that a contract cannot be changed after the parties have met their obligations (or considerations have been met). We as the user has met our obligations, and are still waiting almost 2 years for ARG to meet their obligaitons. This is a very good doctrine to apply to this case, because in contracts law, there are several things to consider in order for the contract to be valid. 1) Meeting of the minds, between 2 or more parties. 2) payment/consideration. 3) performance. Thus, there was a meeting of the minds when we agreed to the original TOS. We agreed to do the offers and be compensated $1,000 visa gc and have performed our obligations, but no consideration has been made by ARG. The Parole Evidence Rule says that in order for any party to change the original contract, that it must be mutually agreed upon between the parties, and in this case it was NOT!!
Eeyore
07-04-2009 08:07:51
[quotede090e9ba1="kinneylamb"]just go after the BBB, the AG of NY, ruin their reputation as many ways as possible on the internet, and have patience with the claims you've filed. call your local news scam-alert assistance while you're at it. [/quotede090e9ba1]ARG has no reputation to ruin. This is a large part of the problem. It is also a good idea to remember that libel laws apply to the Internet. So far nobody here has proof of damages as the process has not run to completion.
kinneylamb
07-04-2009 15:24:14
yea true they dont care. as far as libel, there's no libel in explaining what happened LOL! 6-8 weeks!!?
kinneylamb
07-04-2009 15:28:53
[quote1cd1b53c10="neverendingmoolah"][quote1cd1b53c10="kinneylamb"]i wasn't suggesting persuing limitations in a legal sense. just the fact that you've been fucked in several ways.
in fact you dont have to persue legal action, period. dont even bother with it, except jack b/c he's hell bent on doing it after april 17 and good for him.
just go after the BBB, the AG of NY, ruin their reputation as many ways as possible on the internet, and have patience with the claims you've filed. call your local news scam-alert assistance while you're at it.
as for the courts, we dont need righteous indignation to win because we have real reasons to win that make us feel righteous in the first place. you said it yourself, they're trying to wiggle out of that clause. they are persuing not giving us our gifts as much as we are persuing getting our gifts. so 1-2 years into this storyline, there's still activity going on over the same damn gifts. i'm sure a court would love to step in and impose something official to happen. it's a circus.
edit speaking of patience tho, for those who have submitted a rubut to the audit letter, i'd give it a reasonable amount of time and keep on them about a response before you go ahead further (assuming they continue to cite ridiculous things to dq you such as proof of offers kept for 30+ days - haha - this literally makes me laugh)[/quote1cd1b53c10]
I think if if were to pursue legal action it might pay to explore the Parole Evidence Rule doctrine. In this it is stated that a contract cannot be changed after the parties have met their obligations (or considerations have been met). We as the user has met our obligations, and are still waiting almost 2 years for ARG to meet their obligaitons. This is a very good doctrine to apply to this case, because in contracts law, there are several things to consider in order for the contract to be valid. 1) Meeting of the minds, between 2 or more parties. 2) payment/consideration. 3) performance. Thus, there was a meeting of the minds when we agreed to the original TOS. We agreed to do the offers and be compensated $1,000 visa gc and have performed our obligations, but no consideration has been made by ARG. The Parole Evidence Rule says that in order for any party to change the original contract, that it must be mutually agreed upon between the parties, and in this case it was NOT!![/quote1cd1b53c10]
perfect.
neverendingmoolah
07-04-2009 15:45:15
I think I might prevail with a lawsuit for violation of the parole evidence rule or statute of frauds. Both doctrines apply to contracts law and can be effective in bringing claims against ARG!!
The statute of frauds make it very clear that all contracts for $500 or more must be in writing, and cannot be changed unless in agreement by both parties in writing. The parole evidence rule states that terms cannot be changed as well. ARG needs to step their game up!!
kwoodyk34k
07-04-2009 21:07:28
[quotea85454fb11="neverendingmoolah"][quotea85454fb11="newmomi0329"][quotea85454fb11="Eeyore"][quotea85454fb11="jtackman"]i'm sure if we got the right judge and the judge saw how we were led through this whole mpell mess, im sure the ruling would be in our favor. if not, i guess we are out the money we owed plus attorney fees. but in my opinion its worth a shot. If for no more than to waste the CEO's time.[/quotea85454fb11]The CEO won't even have to miss lunch. You lose on summary judgment if you even make it that far.
How about that class action? If you really filed suit then you should post the case number here as well as your attorney's contact info. Maybe you'll even earn a client referral or three.[/quotea85454fb11]
I have no understanding of the law and how to pursue legal action for something like this, but when i am threatened legal action against me for violating some terms and conditions that did not exist at the time i completed my gifts, how can this be upheld in any court of law? Regardless of any thing else, whether there is an un-written rule or not about signing up for offers more than once, or not being able to use additional email addresses, if it wasn't stated in their terms and conditions, how can they accuse me of fraud?[/quotea85454fb11]
You have to understand that completing the offer involves more than one contract. You contract with the publisher (ARG) but you also contract with the advertiser (Netflix, Blockbuster, etc.). The advertiser dictates the terms and concitions to the publisher on what constitutes a valid sale, in which they will pay your business. Those terms and conditions should be expressly stated by the publisher, but not necessarily so. If you are over the age of minority (18) and you agree to the TOS on the advertiser's website (stating that you will pay $4.95 for s&h to review the product and if you dont like it return with 30 days and will not be charged, you agreed to their TOS. However, if somewhere in the mix they have stated only one offer per household, or something to that affect, and you more than one offer, than you did violate their TOS, and cannot hold them liable. Even if they (netflix) did pay ARG for your sale, ARG does not have to pay you for completing the requirements.[/quotea85454fb11]
Question.
So even if they do find a way to say "you broke 1 of the rules for 2 offers because it says 1 per household," does this allow them to nullify every single offer you've done for every single gift for every single one of their sites?
For example, if blockbuster says 1 trial per household. (I'm not sure if it even does.. I only know I got penalized for doing it twice) And I signed up twice over the years, they can void 60+ other offers for unrelated gifts based on that???
doylnea
07-04-2009 22:10:16
yes, that is evidence of willful intent to commit fraud.
mctrask
08-04-2009 10:00:20
[quote34ffc46a37="kwoodyk34k"]
Question.
So even if they do find a way to say "you broke 1 of the rules for 2 offers because it says 1 per household," does this allow them to nullify every single offer you've done for every single gift for every single one of their sites?
For example, if blockbuster says 1 trial per household. (I'm not sure if it even does.. I only know I got penalized for doing it twice) And I signed up twice over the years, they can void 60+ other offers for unrelated gifts based on that???[/quote34ffc46a37]
This is the first line of the Blockbuster T&C for the free trial offer
[quote34ffc46a37]Offer valid for new customers only; cannot be combined with any other offer. For those getting a free or discounted trial, limit one per household. [/quote34ffc46a37]
Brandarama's Gift Rules state that you must fulfill the requirements of the sponsor offers. While you did break Blockbuster's free trial rule, if that is the only offer repeat you did and it was several months apart, I don't see how that proves willful intent to defraud. Especially if you have done 60+ offers with no other repeats.
I don't think the old Gift Rules or EULA say anything about disqualifying you for all gifts if you break one sponsor's rule. You should only be disqualified for the one gift where you repeated the Blockbuster offer and only if that brought you under the number of required offers to qualify for the gift.
neverendingmoolah
08-04-2009 11:57:09
[quote="kwoodyk34k
Question.
So even if they do find a way to say "you broke 1 of the rules for 2 offers because it says 1 per household," does this allow them to nullify every single offer you've done for every single gift for every single one of their sites?
For example, if blockbuster says 1 trial per household. (I'm not sure if it even does.. I only know I got penalized for doing it twice) And I signed up twice over the years, they can void 60+ other offers for unrelated gifts based on that???
When you complete a ref site, if they suspect you of committing offer fraud they will suspend your account, and the person who you have completed the offers for until they can investigate further. If they find you guilty of offer fraud they lock your account, and ban you from the site and/or network. Correct?? This is because once you have been labeled a "fraudster" it can be hard to redeem yourself and prove that you did not commit fraud during any of the other transactions you conducted with them. I think rather than go through a long process of redmeption they would rather just ban the user because it is just easier, less painful and less embarrassing.
ikeepsecrets
08-04-2009 15:53:15
You sign up for a gift, you sign up for some offers. You sign up for another gift, your mother signs up for the same offers under your account, you get the credit. That was not against the terms and conditions. Now it is, but then it wasn't.
so fuck you pay me bitches
zr2152
08-04-2009 16:57:15
[quote150ebeabbb="ikeepsecrets"]You sign up for a gift, you sign up for some offers. You sign up for another gift, your mother signs up for the same offers under your account, you get the credit. That was not against the terms and conditions. Now it is, but then it wasn't.
so fuck you pay me bitches[/quote150ebeabbb]
Just to play devils advocate here... How do they know that it was your mom that signed up? For all they know it could have been you again.
marbs4life
08-04-2009 20:03:07
[quoteef074f3684="zr2152"][quoteef074f3684="ikeepsecrets"]You sign up for a gift, you sign up for some offers. You sign up for another gift, your mother signs up for the same offers under your account, you get the credit. That was not against the terms and conditions. Now it is, but then it wasn't.
so fuck you pay me bitches[/quoteef074f3684]
Just to play devils advocate here... How do they know that it was your mom that signed up? For all they know it could have been you again.[/quoteef074f3684]
Exactly.
They fucked up (ARG). Not against the rules.
zr2152
08-04-2009 20:23:44
[quote67d9a45709="marbs4life"][quote67d9a45709="zr2152"][quote67d9a45709="ikeepsecrets"]You sign up for a gift, you sign up for some offers. You sign up for another gift, your mother signs up for the same offers under your account, you get the credit. That was not against the terms and conditions. Now it is, but then it wasn't.
so fuck you pay me bitches[/quote67d9a45709]
Just to play devils advocate here... How do they know that it was your mom that signed up? For all they know it could have been you again.[/quote67d9a45709]
Exactly.
They fucked up (ARG). Not against the rules.[/quote67d9a45709]
wow. roll
I hope you guys know that you are not their customer but their customers are rather their advertisers. Honestly, they probably don't give a damn about everybody whining about the rules.
marbs4life
08-04-2009 21:17:50
[quotee8e9ca4ffd="zr2152"][quotee8e9ca4ffd="marbs4life"][quotee8e9ca4ffd="zr2152"][quotee8e9ca4ffd="ikeepsecrets"]You sign up for a gift, you sign up for some offers. You sign up for another gift, your mother signs up for the same offers under your account, you get the credit. That was not against the terms and conditions. Now it is, but then it wasn't.
so fuck you pay me bitches[/quotee8e9ca4ffd]
Just to play devils advocate here... How do they know that it was your mom that signed up? For all they know it could have been you again.[/quotee8e9ca4ffd]
Exactly.
They fucked up (ARG). Not against the rules.[/quotee8e9ca4ffd]
wow. roll
I hope you guys know that you are not their customer but their customers are rather their advertisers. Honestly, they probably don't give a damn about everybody whining about the rules.[/quotee8e9ca4ffd]
blah blah blah, how about you whine to someone who actually gives 2 shits?
gabriel
11-04-2009 08:11:05
I never got the letters. and im waiting from 3 ARG site for 2,100.
mistertomlinson
11-04-2009 18:43:07
Saturday night bump.
EDIT Oops, I'm in the wrong thread. oops
kwoodyk34k
16-04-2009 13:50:38
Has the EULA changed at all or is it the same that it has always been?
neverendingmoolah
16-04-2009 14:43:59
[quote0f95e1549d="kwoodyk34k"]Has the EULA changed at all or is it the same that it has always been?[/quote0f95e1549d]
ARG have changed the status page of their offers. It now reads that upon completion of their sponsor offers you will receive a "cash back certificate" instead of gift cards. I believe they have made system wide changes to reflect their new policies.
ILoveToys
16-04-2009 14:49:32
[quotef29d53875b="neverendingmoolah"][quotef29d53875b="kwoodyk34k"]Has the EULA changed at all or is it the same that it has always been?[/quotef29d53875b]
ARG have changed the status page of their offers. It now reads that upon completion of their sponsor offers you will receive a "cash back certificate" instead of gift cards. I believe they have made system wide changes to reflect their new policies.[/quotef29d53875b]
Thanks for the new information!
kinneylamb
16-04-2009 14:54:43
the EULA is updated but i think the only change is the link that redirects to the new gift rules
neverendingmoolah
16-04-2009 14:56:46
[quote642976d9e5="ILoveToys"][quote642976d9e5="neverendingmoolah"][quote642976d9e5="kwoodyk34k"]Has the EULA changed at all or is it the same that it has always been?[/quote642976d9e5]
ARG have changed the status page of their offers. It now reads that upon completion of their sponsor offers you will receive a "cash back certificate" instead of gift cards. I believe they have made system wide changes to reflect their new policies.[/quote642976d9e5]
Thanks for the new information![/quote642976d9e5]
I was actually surprised to see these changes on the status page for gifts they should have shipped out almost 2 years ago. I pulled off some more info on the most recent changes on the status page
You must remain an active member of the required Sponsor Offers for at least 30 consecutive days from the date you sign up for the specific Sponsor Offer and you are only allowed to cancel the number of Sponsor offers set forth in the chart below.
Total Sponsor Offers Required
for Cash Back Gift Certificate Number of Canceled Sponsor
Offers Permitted
0-3 0
4-5 1
6-8 2
9-15 3
16-19 4
20-27 5
28-30 6
31-37 7
38 and over 8
Once you have satisfied all Sponsor requirements you will receive an email confirmation from rewardsparade.com with redemption instructions, and you will see a confirm button appear in the Gift Status section above. You will have 90 days from the date of the email confirmation to complete the redemption requirements, that include confirming your shipping address, mailing in your claim form and completing and mailing a W-9 form for gifts over $600 in value. You may be required to submit copies of proof of membership for the required Sponsor offers for 30 consecutive days from the date you signed up for the specific Sponsor offer, along with the claim form. Submission after this time has elapsed does not meet the conditions for eligibility, and in that case, rewardsparade.com will not be obligated to award you the Cash Back Gift Certificate. Fulfillment based on a completion of redemption instructions after 90 days is at the sole discretion of rewardsparade.com.
ILoveToys
16-04-2009 15:25:46
You apparently didn't catch my sarcasm.
kinneylamb
16-04-2009 15:31:19
ok but all that info is the status page and also mentioned in the gift rules. he was asking about the EULA, which i dont know why, but they are two separate things. just sayin.
kinneylamb
16-04-2009 15:38:15
[quote3e112d7537="ILoveToys"]You apparently didn't catch my sarcasm.[/quote3e112d7537]
apparently not everybody knows you're an older member who knows that already.
Eeyore
16-04-2009 15:54:31
Reading is fundamental.
RolltheStampede
16-04-2009 16:23:03
[quote0a01688215="kinneylamb"][quote0a01688215="ILoveToys"]You apparently didn't catch my sarcasm.[/quote0a01688215]
apparently not everybody knows you're an older member who knows that already.[/quote0a01688215]
how about " And now you know, and knowing is half the battle"
kinneylamb
16-04-2009 17:32:55
not really it should have ended there
kwoodyk34k
16-04-2009 17:43:40
I was asking about the EULA because the audit response e-mail says I broke section 5 of the EULA and I was just wondering if section 5 of the current EULA is the same exact thing as the old one because I didn't see an archived EULA link on the first page.
Not a big deal really..
bruman
16-04-2009 19:37:18
kinneylamb
16-04-2009 20:01:02
section 5?? you have to register and confirm your info in order to mail a claim form for the gift, so that should be an easy win.. no?
kwoodyk34k
16-04-2009 23:27:10
[quotee96e06232d="kinneylamb"]section 5?? you have to register and confirm your info in order to mail a claim form for the gift, so that should be an easy win.. no?[/quotee96e06232d]
Which is why I asked about if it was the same one. I don't understand how I could have violated that, lol.
abigoria
08-05-2009 12:39:33
$500 Visa Gift Card
Confirmed; to be shipped
[Oct-9-07 1035 AM]
and
$1000 Visa Gift Card
Confirmed; to be shipped
[Nov-7-07 336 PM]
Hi everyone. Above is the 2 visa gifts I am supposed to be receiving from Brandarama... I am being told I will not be receiving them now? They have said they mailed me 2 rebates in January 2009. I have no idea what these rebates are about? No one at Brandarama never told me about these rebates, and I have never received them! Now they claim I cannot get my gift now... I emailed them and told them I never received these rebates they are speaking of, and all they just said that it would be expired now and I could not claim them... But I never had a chance in the first place, because I never received them by mail..
Anyone else getting this sort of problem??
I would appreciate some help with this.
Thanks,
-Eric
ohboyitsryan
08-05-2009 12:55:27
go to the Brandarama thread and read back like 50 pages. but basically, you're screwed...
RolltheStampede
08-05-2009 13:06:54
I wonder how this owuld turn out if you pressed the issue sinc empell is no longer part of the equation. You never agreed to mpell so you should still be under args terms, since they are back to fulfilling and you are confrimed to shipped they shouldnt be able to just yank it from you.
but i realize this is all moot since noone is getting paid anyway.
ghounds07
08-05-2009 14:31:33
Yeah basically summarizing what RTS said, but those rebates were part of a cash back program ran by Mpell Solutions. Most people on here went through that process, but right after that ARG/Brandarama quit that program with Mpell, so I can't see how they could require you to have fulfilled something that they aren't even using anymore...
Good luck though
manOFice
08-05-2009 14:35:21
[quote876e3fe093="ghounds07"]Yeah basically summarizing what RTS said, but those rebates were part of a cash back program ran by Mpell Solutions. Most people on here went through that process, but right after that ARG/Brandarama quit that program with Mpell, so I can't see how they could require you to have fulfilled something that they aren't even using anymore...
Good luck though[/quote876e3fe093]
They will be paying you on what you sent to mpell, If you didn't do the mpell process I doubt you'll get paid
kinneylamb
12-07-2009 21:31:04
bump for relevence, hopefully people will post more in here about this stuff instead of the main thread
bryanvanalmkerk
22-07-2009 08:55:55
Hey Guys.
I talked to arg, they are not paying anyone.
The issue has been pushed to a bankruptcy lawyer/asset buyer/seller or whatever you call it.
So what that means is, the bank gets paid before anyone else. They owe the bank 10 million. The auction takes place this month I believe and I know they will not get anywhere near 10 million. So until they get what their owed, no one will get anything.
potsey2007
22-07-2009 09:35:37
thanks Captain Obvious
Eeyore
22-07-2009 13:02:39
More like Captain Oblivious...
bryanvanalmkerk
22-07-2009 19:44:45
Eh, some people dont know what the deal is still and still have hope.
Take what i say how you will.
Zags1199
22-07-2009 20:12:05
Everyone has basically known about the sale for a while now. People know they aren't going to be paid. We all know it's game over.
Eeyore
22-07-2009 23:03:25
[quote0e3c786adb="bryanvanalmkerk"]Eh, some people dont know what the deal is still and still have hope.
Take what i say how you will.[/quote0e3c786adb]
Wellllll.....considering that there is a 170 page thread, most of which documents how ARG set us up and then sold us down the river, coming in at this late date to inform us how it will all go down is both arrogant and stupid. Your information was in the email they sent out on the 13th and is now plastered across all of their sites.
Anyone with an active brain cell knows the game is over.
kinneylamb
07-08-2009 08:46:37
sometime in march/april this year
Me,
We have been informed by Active Response Group they will be transfering funds within the next two weeks.
Sincerely,
Mpell Solutions
-----
statute of limitations cannot help brandarama, when there is proof they knew they had no funds to give out at the time they wrote their customers they would receive checks, as well as the time they told mpell they would receive funds. the balance sheet said otherwise. people out millions of dollars in purchases. that would never be reimbursed. convincing them otherwise and lying about it, causing harm and monetary damages, credit card bill interests, and so on.
Eeyore
07-08-2009 14:29:49
Are you a lawyer? If so, go back to law school.
There is no Brandarama. It's gone. li poof li. How do you intend to collect your alleged damages? Besides your unsupported allegations of "proof they knew they had no funds to give out at the time they wrote their customers" the "damages" were entirely optional.
Fraud is a tough nut to prove. You'll need much better ammo than that as well as a target to shoot at. Right now you've got neither.
kinneylamb
07-08-2009 19:44:48
it's gone, i will never get my money, but its not over with. they are going to pay. i'll make them answer to everybody under the sun, march through manhattan and talk to everybody in the press. they. are. going. to. pay. where did that money go.
Eeyore
07-08-2009 21:52:55
You talk a big game but have yet to give any specifics about your grand plan. In reality you'll continue to shoot your eMouth off and do nothing.
kinneylamb
08-08-2009 15:31:49
psh, like i'd share any specifics on this forum anyway
Eeyore
08-08-2009 17:40:49
You have nothing but a loud mouth and no information or plan.
gabriel
12-08-2009 11:05:27
Fuck you Eeyore!
all you are is an ARG rat!
gabriel
12-08-2009 11:09:55
Everyone look at his 342 post ..they all have to do with sticking up for this company in some way!! please ban this D-bag!
ghounds07
12-08-2009 13:16:16
[quoteef6a715acb="gabriel"]Everyone look at his 342 post ..they all have to do with sticking up for this company in some way!! please ban this D-bag![/quoteef6a715acb]
?
maybe he actually has a valid point and others refuse to back up theirs?
Eeyore
12-08-2009 15:12:32
[quotefd98be097a="gabriel"]Fuck you Eeyore!
all you are is an ARG rat![/quotefd98be097a]
Feel free to stick your head up your ass. Oh, wait. Sorry. It's already there. roll
Ol' Brad pimped me for $2,100. All I hear from some (including you, now) is a bunch of juvenile rants and legal bravado with zero to back it up. I've filed with the NY AG but expect nothing to come of it since there is no company to recover from. However, these complaints may make it harder for Brad to start up another one of these scams since he is named in them personally.
I also filed with the state of Colorado since ARG had offices there too.
What have you done, big boy?
gabriel
12-08-2009 20:58:35
Really huh?
can you please explain to us how you filed with these two state that are 2000 miles apart?
did you do it online or what?
zr2152
13-08-2009 16:52:54
[quotecfe7c08032="gabriel"]Really huh?
can you please explain to us how you filed with these two state that are 2000 miles apart?
did you do it online or what?[/quotecfe7c08032]
you're the big shot talking shit behind your keyboard and computer screen. I doubt he is goona help you. Figure it out yourself.
dmorris68
14-08-2009 16:29:39
Stop the juvenile antics or I'll be giving out free, no-expenses-paid vacations from the forum.
Zags1199
14-08-2009 18:06:03
Will that be given as a cashback certificate as well?
wiebelhaus03
14-08-2009 19:07:44
[quote9b569bf543="Zags1199"]Will that be given as a cashback certificate as well?[/quote9b569bf543]
hahaha