Complaint Review: Lot 18 - Internet

Verbatim from our BBB complaint:

It has always been my belief that a business whose goals are to satisfy their customer’s needs, to serve their customer’s best interests, and to operate their business in an honest, ethical, and open manner were certain to be more successful than those which do not. Indeed, there is much research, not to mention real-world examples of this being the case.

In the instant case, we have a business, which does not aspire to these goals. In fact, every communication to us coming from Lot18/TastingRoom to date clearly indicates that their business model is completely dedicated to garnering the most profits possible, without any regard to customer needs, interests, and without much thought given to ethical concerns, openness or honesty.

First, let me begin by stating factually that I have made several attempts, by various means, to cancel my Lot18/TastingRoom membership. That this has been admitted to by the organization should be proof enough that something in their business operation is amiss. But that is not all that is wrong.

The very day I received the notice via email from Lot18 indicating that my ‘shipment was ready’ was the very same day I sent another email requesting cancellation of my membership. I had previously sent an email request, as acknowledged by their staff: (email image attached)

So, as early as 2/16/2015 Lot18/TastingRoom was at the very least aware of my desire to cancel my membership, yet not only did they ignore this request, which is unethical, dishonest, and does not serve my needs, but they went further, and shipped their product to me anyway, despite their previous knowledge of my desire to cancel.

Adding further insult to injury, Lot18/TastingRoom advised me to produce “documentation of a phone cancellation or online cancellation,” which is patently ridiculous. I would have to get them to agree to be recorded in a phone conversation, which is highly unlikely to occur, and worse, their website does not provide a confirmation page when cancellation is made there, or I would have said requested ‘evidence’ to offer. Either way, Lot18/TastingRoom clearly did not act ethically, honestly, or in a manner which considered the customer’s needs and interests.

What makes this especially egregious is the fact that they have violated their own TOS several times, and therefore are in breach of those terms, as stated clearly in their own TOS:

“6.3 As part of this continuing innovation, you acknowledge and agree that Tasting Room by Lot18 may stop (permanently or temporarily) providing the Services (or any features within the Services) to you or to users generally at Tasting Room by Lot18’s sole discretion, without prior notice to you. You may stop using the Services at any time. You do not need to specifically inform Tasting Room by Lot18 when you stop using the Services (emphasis supplied).”

It is obvious that they use the enforcement of their TOS in an arbitrary way, and therefore their firm’s honor as regards the TOS cannot be relied upon. Should an arbitrator take a neutral point of view of these facts, they would most certainly have some hard questions for their firm. I suspect their answers would be, unsatisfactory.

Furthermore, their firm’s TOS specifically states, in pertinent part:

"5.2 Tasting Room by Lot18 will attempt to send two courtesy reminder emails – one 14 days and one 7 days prior to your next club shipment – to the email address we have on file."

This was not done. Therefore, the firm once again violated their own TOS. For that reason alone, they are in breach of contract since they failed to provide me ample notice of intent to ship, denying me opportunity to cancel my membership in a timely manner. Further evidence of the firm's failure to honor their own firm's TOS appears here:

"14.2 If you want to terminate your legal agreement with Tasting Room by Lot18, you may do so by (a) notifying Tasting Room by Lot18 at any time and (b) closing your account for all of the Services, where Tasting Room by Lot18 has made this option available to you. Please contact Tasting Room by Lot18’s member services department to terminate your legal agreement with Tasting Room by Lot18."

By their own admission this requirement of the TOS was met, as the firm was notified by me, in writing, on 2/16/2015, that my cancellation request was received in writing (via email). Subsequent emails proved the firm’s wanton disregard for legal adherence to contractual provisions, when they informed me that their firm does not accept cancellations via email, which is a requirement to be found nowhere in the TOS. This also represents not only a second violation of the firm's own TOS, but exhibits a reckless disregard for one of the bedrock principles in law known as equity.

I realize that the vast majority of their customers are not trained in the law, which while convenient for their interests, is very inconvenient for those of the customers who are ensnared by their web of lies, deceit, reckless disregard for the truth and basic dishonesty.

This contention is borne out by the plethora of negative reviews upon any (unpaid review) site which one might choose to research the customer experiences relating to the business practices of Lot18/TastingRoom. The fact that the very same story is related over, and over, and over, again and again, is proof that the business practices of Lot18/TastingRoom are unethical, amoral, and solely profit-driven, managed to the exclusion of the customer’s stated requests for cancellation. (As an example, see http://www.resellerratings.com/store/Lot18.)

As I am only one of several dozen customers – across several consumer review sites – whose experiences with Lot18/TastingRoom have been recorded as negative on their customer service, delivery methods, business practices and poor quality of product, there is still another issue pending: unjust enrichment. In the law, unjust enrichment is defined by the Legal Information Institute of the Cornell University School of Law, as follows:

“The retention of a benefit conferred by another, that is not intended as a gift and is not legally justifiable, without offering compensation, in circumstances where compensation is reasonably expected. The elements of a cause of action for unjust enrichment are:  the enrichment of the party accused of unjust enrichment; that such enrichment was at the expense of the party seeking restitution; and the circumstances were such that in equity and good conscience restitution should be made.  An additional requirement is that the party accused of unjust enrichment must know of the benefit conferred; to ensure that the benefit was not foisted on the recipient and is something for which compensation is reasonably expected. Recovery on a theory of unjust enrichment typically occurs where there was no contract between the parties, or a contract turns out to be invalid.”

I would submit that it is reasonable to expect restitution for the expense ($168.99 charged to our card on 2/27/2015, with no delivery as of 3/15/2015) as well as the shipping and ‘restocking fee,’ as equity and good conscience demand. Further, because the ‘benefits’ of Lot18/TastingRoom’s poor product quality, execrable customer service, dysfunctional website and moribund ethical practices resulted in their product being foisted upon my person, unjust enrichment in any amount is not to be reasonably expected by Lot18/TastingRoom. Holding our funds for over two weeks while failing to ship product is just one more piece of evidence that Lot18/TastingRoom is a poorly-managed business. This is in addition to the callous disregard for the feelings of other people, the reckless disregard for the concerns and interests of others, the deceitfulness (continual lying to deceive for profit), the incapacity to experience guilt, and the failure to conform to social norms and respect the law.

Additionally, the is ample evidence of contractual disputes being a disproportionate part of Lot18/TastingRoom’s regular business practices, such that a cause of action for unjust enrichment, based in part upon a multiplicity of customer complaints about the same issue, where such enrichment was at the expense of the party seeking restitution, and circumstances were such that in equity and good conscience restitution could be made, make my next point crystal clear. Evidence sufficient to support and argument for a petition for class action status is apparent, and this is but one option to be considered should our request for restitution go unanswered.

Finally, on a phone call to the company made 2/29/2015, John in Customer Service stated that “your order has already been processed for shipment, and is on a pallet, ready to be picked up by UPS right now.” Delivery, according to emails received, was to be made by 3/9/2015. In fact, if this was true because the following email arrived on 3/11/15: (email image attached)

The only excuse for Lot18/TastingRoom failing to deliver said product by the date of this letter, 3/16/2015, a full week delay is inexplicable. A total twelve-day delay in shipment cannot possibly be explained in any logical manner. The question remains: Is Lot28/TastingRoom sincerely interested in operating their business in an honest, ethical manner, one which serves the needs of their customers?

Lastly, does Lot18/TastingRoom truly desire that a judge and jury decide the outcome of a $19.99 shipping cost and a $15.00 restocking fee? (the shipment will be refused - and as an adult signature is required for delivery, it will be returned to Lot18/TastingRoom by the shipping agent - if indeed it ever arrives).

IN CLOSING,

We humbly submit that our cause is just, and that appropriate action to secure restitution of the entire amount charged to our Visa Back Card in the amount of $168.99, should be taken immediately, once all the facts have been substantially verified. Failing that, please make it clear to Lot18/TastingRoom that, notwithstanding their arbitration provision, we are at liberty to bring a cause of action in a court of competent jurisdiction, and we shall engage counsel to this end.

For now, we leave the matter to your capable hands, trusting in the Better Business Bureau to put matters right so the costs (not to mention the social media backlash from widespread public reports – amply distributed across all major social media channels) of litigation in this matter, might be avoided. The court of public opinion can be quite a powerful deterrent to those who refuse to own their mistakes.

----

Response to Lot 18

We have reviewed Lot 18’s response and find the following:

1)    They failed to respond to the gaps in their TOS.

2)    They failed to address the delay in canceling our membership.

3)    They failed to address the lack of product receipt.

First, the TOS provided by Lot18 does not state with specificity that email notification—which in common-law practice and as stated by all the nation's courts is a legally acceptable form of written communication—is insufficient notice of intent to cancel. Indeed, their TOS states, in pertinent part,

“6.3 As part of this continuing innovation, you acknowledge and agree that Tasting Room by Lot18 may stop (permanently or temporarily) providing the Services (or any features within the Services) to you or to users generally at Tasting Room by Lot18’s sole discretion, without prior notice to you. You may stop using the Services at any time. You do not need to specifically inform Tasting Room by Lot18 when you stop using the Services (emphasis supplied).”

Further,

"14.2 If you want to terminate your legal agreement with Tasting Room by Lot18, you may do so by (a) notifying Tasting Room by Lot18 at any time and (b) closing your account for all of the Services, where Tasting Room by Lot18 has made this option available to you. Please contact Tasting Room by Lot18’s member services department to terminate your legal agreement with Tasting Room by Lot18."

By their own admission, our letter of intent to cancel was received by Lot 18 on 2/17/15. If changes to their TOS were made to include a provision stating that “only phone or website cancellations are accepted,” they did not post the provision to their TOS.

Aside from their obvious lack of justification for ignoring our email request, upon receiving the response from customer service, we did, in fact, log into the online system and cancel the account. They conveniently failed to provide that information in their response, as well.

Second, Lot 18 failed to address the enormous gap between the time we canceled (2/17/15), the lag time in acknowledging said cancellation (2/27/15), and the alleged shipping date of their product (3/11/15 per their email).

Last, to date we have not received the shipment Lot 18 alleges to have sent. In fact, we specifically asked for the tracking number in a communique date 3/4/15, and our request was ignored. (Unjust enrichment)

At this point, the cardholder has taken steps with their respective bank to pursue this matter as a fraudulent charge. We have provided plenty of information regarding our intent to cancel, and Lot 18 has provided a timeline further supporting our assertion that we did in fact cancel on 2/17/15. Lot 18 has consistently maneuvered around their TOS, failed to produce a tracking number for the alleged shipment and acted in overall bad faith.