Fair-Trading.com.au REPORT REGARDING
THE TrueLocal.com.au INTERNET DIRECTORY - TrueLocal.com.au
THE TrueLocal.com.au INTERNET DIRECTORY - TrueLocal.com.au
The complainant, contracted as a website administrator for an internet florist, received an unsolicited telephone call from TrueLocal.com.au (TL) which is operated by an internet directory company by the name of Australian Local Search Pty Ltd which is owned by News Limited. TL represented to the complainant that his customers’s florist Sunshine Coast website would receive substantial click throughs from TL’s directory in the region of 50 per month if the complainant entered a 12 month contract for a Priority Listing.
In September 2007 and in reliance of TL representations, the complainant entered a contract for a Priority Listing with TL and provided authority for TL to perform monthly charges to his customer’s credit card for this service (as authorised by the customer). The TL account number for the service was 328041.
On 24 October 2007 the contract was terminated by the complainant for the following reasons provided to TL by email :
| Since the start of the True Local Priority Listing in September,
the website log has recorded a total of 4 click throughs from True
Local. One of those click throughs was my own test, leaving a total
of 3 click throughs in approximately a 6 week period, for which $62-50
per month is being paid which works out at around $30-00 per click
through. This is far below expectations and unacceptable. Please confirm your receipt and acceptance of this termination. |
No acceptance or acknowledgment was received from TL, and on 1 November 2007 the termination notice was re-sent by fax to TL which also confirmed that the complainant had revoked the authority to perform monthly charges to the credit card.
On approximately 15 November 2007, TL made several telephone calls to the complainant and confirmed a termination of the contract. TL subsequently persuaded the complainant to commence a new contract for reasons that included :
|
•
|
that there must have been a technical problem for the previous poor result; |
|
•
|
the poor result was not in accordance with TL’s own data regarding inquiries to TL for florist websites in Australia and in particular the Sunshine Coast; |
|
•
|
that TL would amend and rectify the listing to achieve a reasonable return on investment; |
|
•
|
the listing would have the added facility of what the complainant understood to be a customer control panel for the Priority Listing; |
|
•
|
a $10-00 reduction of TL’s monthly fee to $52-50. |
As a result of the above, a new trial contract (the 2nd contract), was commenced with TL, however, NO authority was provided to TL to perform monthly charges of a credit card.
The complainant was never provided with the said control panel facility.
The complainant did not receive any invoices from TL until February 2008 when a payments overdue letter was received by the complainant. On 19 February 2008 the amounts overdue were paid by bank transfer. The complainant continued to not receive invoices from TL but subsequently noticed that TL had made unauthorised credit card debits to the complainant’s customer on 12 and 19 March 2008 totaling $157-50.
The complainant then made immediate telephone calls to TL, all of which were not returned and as such the complainant faxed the manager of TL’s customer services with complaints regarding TL’s :
|
•
|
unauthorised credit card transactions; |
|
•
|
continued appalling click throughs from TL and that the TL click throughs were equivalent to 1% of click throughs received from Google, which was a free service; |
|
•
|
the TL service was of little value and was money wasted. |
Despite the complainant’s request in the fax for TL to make telephone contact, TL made no contact or any response to the fax whatsoever, which provided the complainant with considerable frustration.
Despite the previous notice given to TL, on 19 April 2008 TL made yet another unauthorised credit card transaction. Discovering this on 21 April 2008, the complainant telephoned TL in Liverpool Street Sydney to inquire the address of its company registered office. A TL representative named Ben, did not know what this address was and clearly did not understand that an Australian company is required to have a registered office.
As such the complainant conducted an ASIC search to discover the address at a cost of $17-60, and by fax and letter dated 23 April 2008 the complainant corresponded to TL at its registered office at News Limited, 2 Holt Street, Surry Hills NSW.
That correspondence titled LEGAL NOTICE gave TL notice of the following :
|
•
|
the said 2 unauthorised credit card transactions; |
|
•
|
the further unauthorised credit card transaction dated 19 April 2008; |
|
•
|
no receipt of TL invoices; |
|
•
|
no notification from TL of the said unauthorised credit card transactions; |
|
•
|
telephone calls being not returned; |
|
•
|
faxed correspondence being ignored; |
|
•
|
a requirement for refund for the unauthorised transactions; |
|
•
|
if no refund was provided by TL a Visa chargeback would be initiated; |
|
•
|
a requirement for a $17-60 ASIC search reimbursement; |
|
•
|
that the TL service has zero worth; |
|
•
|
that TL failed to live up to representations inducing contracts with the complainant; |
|
•
|
to the extent that the 2nd contract was not terminated, it was thereby terminated. |
On 28 April 2008, Ben for TL telephoned the complainant and stated that there would be no refund, the money was owed and that the credit card transactions had been authorised.
The complainant subsequently initiated a Visa chargeback for the 3 unauthorised transactions which was successful, and the 3 amounts totaling $210-00 have been refunded by Visa to the complainant’s customer.
On 3 July 2008 a person believed to be named Geoff Sing from TL telephoned the complainant demanding a re-payment of the chargebacks. Mr. Sing also accused the complainant of being in the wrong and threatened that the complainant risked ramifications as to the complainant’s credibility, if payment was not made.
In consideration of TL’s appalling conduct and the resultant severe frustration, the complainant told Mr. Sing to f*** off.
The complainant has subsequently received an Overdue Notice dated 16 July 2008 from TL for $210-00, and the complainant now seeks a written response from TL, via Fair-Trading.com.au, as to why this amount should be paid, considering TL’s :
|
•
|
conduct as set out above; |
|
•
|
misleading or deceptive representations inducing the 2nd contract; and |
|
•
|
if the $210-00 is paid, it would further contribute to the existing negative return on investment (i.e. loss) already suffered by the complainant’s customer which is contracted to be reimbursed by the complainant. |
Fair-Trading.com.au has forwarded this report to TL via the following methods :
TL’s Credit Department by email; TLaccounts@newsdigitalmedia.com.au
The TL company registered office at Surry Hills by fax; 02 9288 2480
| NAME OF COMPLAINANT |
:
|
Gordon Craven |
| NAME OF RESPONDENT |
:
|
Australian Local Search Pty Ltd T/A TrueLocal.com.au |
| DATE OF REPORT |
:
|
4 August 2008 |
| ADDRESS FOR RESPONSE |
:
|
response@fair-trading.com.au PO Box 125, TEWANTIN QLD 4563, Australia |
| PUBLISHED AT |
:
|
www.Fair-Trading.com.au/reports/true-local.html |