Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Justin Asking on May 22, 2011 at 5:15am

Hi Amanda, This was a great read for me as I have been following this saga of Jesse Willms alleged conspiracy to defraud the many internet users worldwide out of their hard earned money. I for one have my own opinion of his guilt in these matters but will await the outcome of this action taken by the FTC before commenting further.

I first read of this action by accident while reading the updated review of one of Jesse Willms earlier ventures at the Better Business Bureau, the review of :

 

http://www.bbb.org/edmonton/business-reviews/health-and-medical-pro...

 

1021018 Alberta Ltd

Alternate Business Names

1016363 Alberta Ltd, Acai Force Max, Acai Slim, AcaiBurn, Alpine White, Brighter Teeth Whitening System, Celebrity White Teeth, Clean White, Clear Lift Ultra, CoastWest Holdings Ltd, Credit Report America, Dazzle Pro, Dazzle Smile, Dazzle Smile Pro, Dazzle White, Dental White, DownloadMusicInc.com, E-Z Kit, Earn Cash Fast with Google, Earn Google Cash, Earncashfromgrants.com, Easy Weight Loss Tea Inc, eDirect Software, eDirectSoftware, Farend Services Limited, Farend Services Ltd, Government Funded Grants, Guide to Success Online, Idol White, JDW Media LLC, Just Think Media, Muscle Force Max, Premium White, Premium White USA, Pure Cleanse Pro, Pure Lift Cream, Pure Rezver, Quick Profit Kit, Secure Information Resource, Security Help Kits, Success Grants, Ultifreshwell, Ultra Cleanse Plus, VibrantSmile, White Smile, Wu Yi Tea Source, Wu-Long Source, Wu-Yi Source, Wu-Yi Tea

 

I found a great deal of information under the heading “Government Actions” including the information of the FTC lawsuit.

"Government Actions

The following describes a government action that has been resolved by either a settlement or a decision by a court or administrative agency. If the matter is being appealed, it will be noted below.

On December 17, 2010 Service Alberta Issued a Directors Order against 1021018 Alberta Ltd. O/A Just Think Media and Jesse Willms.

ISSUE

1021018 Alberta Ltd., ola Just Think Media, is an Alberta company based in Sherwood Park. In 2009 and 2010, the supplier advertised offers on the Internet to sell various products, including teeth whitening pens. These were sold under names including "Dazzle White Pro", "Dazzle Smile Pro", and "Premium White". Their websites offered trials wherein the consumer could receive the product by paying only the shipping cost. The shipping costs varied from about US$1 to $5 based on the product and the day. Consumers would be directed to these pages through e-mail solicitation and advertising links on popular websites.

Consumers who signed up for the trial were automatically enrolled for ongoing shipments and billings unless they contacted the company to cancel. In addition, if they did not cancel their order within fourteen days and return the trial product, the consumer would be charged full price for the trial.
Service Alberta received numerous complaints from consumers who attempted to cancel the charges and were refused by the supplier. Several of these consumers provided documents showing they did not receive a proper copy of the Internet sales contract. as required by the Internet Sales Contract Regulation ("Regulation"). Those consumers attempted to cancel within the 30 day period allowed when a proper copy of the contract is not sent to the consumer. Even where these rights were exercised properly, the consumers did not receive a refund within 15 days of cancellation, as required. In at least one reported case, the company continued to charge a consumer for a mouth tray that was an "up sell" to the original contract even after the original contract was cancelled and refunded.

Upon being contacted by Service Alberta, legal counsel for 1021018 Alberta Ltd. responded by stating terms and conditions were clearly listed on the websites, but issued refunds to specific complainants at that point, stating in at least one case this was made "in good faith". When expressly questioned about what the company will do to comply with the Regulation, the legal counsel did not directly respond to the issue, and instead indicated their client will no longer be offering teeth whitening offers online.
The Director is aware the specific products involved in these complaints are no longer sold by 1021018 Alberta Ltd. and each of the consumers involved in the specific complaints leading to this order have received their money back. Nevertheless, it is believed there is a significant likelihood this company and its director continue to be involved in Internet commerce and are therefore responsible to comply with the Regulation on an ongoing basis. In addition, several consumers were only refunded after Service Alberta contacted the company's legal counsel about their complaint. As such, the Director believes these consumers were only refunded because a government body was getting involved, and not out of an intent to comply with the Regulation.

LEGISLATION

The following sections are excerpts from the Internet Sales Contract Regulation:
Cancellation of Internet sales contract
6(1) A consumer may cancel an Internet sales contract in the following circumstances:
(a) at any time from the date the contract is entered into until 7 days after the consumer receives a copy of the contract if
(i) the supplier does not disclose to the consumer the information described in section
4(1)(a), or
(ii) the supplier does not provide to the consumer an express opportunity to accept or decline the contract or to correct errors immediately before entering into it:
(b) within 30 days from the date the contract is entered into if the supplier does not provide the consumer with a copy of the contract pursuant to section 5.

Notice of cancellation
8(1) An Internet sales contract is cancelled under section 6 on the giving of a notice of cancellation in accordance with this section.
(2) A notice of cancellation may be expressed in any way as long as it indicates the intention of the consumer to cancel the Internet sales contract.
(3) The notice of cancellation may be given to the supplier by any means, including, but not limited to, personal service, registered mail, telephone, courier, facsimile and e-mail.

Effect of cancellation
9(1) A cancellation of an Internet sales contract under section 6 operates to cancel the contract as if the contract had never existed.
(2) A cancellation of an Internet sales contract under section 6 also operates to cancel
(a) any related consumer transaction,
(b) any guarantee given in respect of consideration payable under the contract, and
(c) any security given by the consumer or a guarantor in respect of consideration payable under the contract, as if the contract had never existed.

Responsibilities on cancellation
10(1) If an Internet sales contract is cancelled under section 6, the supplier must, within 15 days from the date of cancellation, refund to the consumer all consideration paid by the consumer under the contract and any related consumer transaction, whether paid to the supplier or another person.

ORDER

* 1021018 Alberta Ltd. o/a Just Think Media must comply with the Internet Sales Contract Regulation by ensuring all consumers who cancel contracts where cancellation rights exist under the Regulation are refunded in full within 15 days of cancellation.
* Jesse Willms, either in his own capacity or when acting on behalf of a corporation in which he has an interest or by which he is employed, must comply with the Internet Sales Contract Regulation by ensuring all consumers cancelling contracts where cancellation rights exist under the Regulation are refunded in full within 15 days of cancellation.
* Any employee, representative, agent or associate of Jesse Willms and/or 1021018 Alberta Ltd. o/a Just Think Media must comply with the Internet Sales Contract Regulation by ensuring all consumers cancelling contracts where cancellation rights exist under the Regulation are refunded in full within 15 days of cancellation.

The following describes a pending government action that has been formally brought by a government agency but has not yet been resolved. We are providing a summary of the government's allegations, which have not yet been proven.

"The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has brought a law enforcement action against the above company alleging the company received more than $450 million from consumers by luring them into "free" or "risk-free" offers. Consumers were then charged for products or services they did not want or agree to purchase. As part of its ongoing efforts to stamp out online fraud, FTC seeks to stop the operation's illegal practices and make the defendants repay affected consumers."
"According to FTC's complaint, the companies used deceptive tactics in offering "free trials" for various online products, including acai berry weight loss pills, teeth whiteners, health supplements, work at home schemes, free credit reports and penny auctions."
"According to FTC, the companies obtained consumers' credit or debit card account numbers by promising they would only pay small shipping and handling fees and also promised phony "bonus" offers for signing up. Consumers had no reason to believe they would be charged for the trial product or extra bonus products, but they were often charged for the "free" trial and monthly recurring fees. Although the defendants offered a money-back guarantee, consumers were often unsuccessful in canceling the charges or obtaining refunds and the process involved time-consuming phone calls and other steps that made the deals far from risk free."
"The FTC further alleged that the defendants provided merchant banks with false or misleading information, in order to acquire and maintain credit and debit card processing services from the banks in the face of mounting chargeback rates and consumer complaints. The companies also allegedly violated the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E (issued by the Federal Reserve System's Board of Governors) by debiting consumers' bank accounts without their signed written consent and without providing consumers with a copy of the written authorization."
The Commission files a complaint when it has "reason to believe" that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendant has actually violated the law. The case will be decided by the court.
The entire FTC complaint can be found at the link below."

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2011/05/jessewillms.shtm

 

I sincerely hope that justice will prevail in these actions and any and all persons found guily in this conspiracy are required to make restitutions to their victims. Are forced to pay punitive damages, and made to serve lengthy jail terms.

 

Justin

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Justin Asking on August 26, 2011 at 7:23am

Hi Amanda, I was just wondering if there are any further updates to this report of FTC actions proposed long ago. I see that the complaint and law enforcement action against an online operation that allegedly raked in more than $450 million from consumers has been very quiet at the FTC site after the original news release of May 17th, 2011.

 

Justin

• ▶ Reply