WARNING - Premium White / Dazzle Toothpaste

[Repsports]

I want to warn others not to go after the "Free" Premium White / Dazzle toothpaste trial. So far I been billed $250 and never received anything. The details are in the agreement you sign (but never read). The postage on the "free" sample is robbery $11.90 US then within 14 days (if not returned)they charge you $87.62 US for the cost of the "free" sample then 7 days later another $87.62 US for the next months supply. The only way to get a refund is to return the goods - which is very hard if you have never received anything, as in my case. They will continue to bill you if you dont cancel and get a cancellation number. Be warned!
They have a distribution center in Pickering apparently - if they even exist.

PremiumWhite CANADA
1725 McPherson Court
Pickering, Ontario Canada L1W3H9

[45ED]

I want to warn others not to go after the "Free" Premium White / Dazzle toothpaste trial. So far I been billed $250 and never received anything. The details are in the agreement you sign (but never read). The postage on the "free" sample is robbery $11.90 US then within 14 days (if not returned)they charge you $87.62 US for the cost of the "free" sample then 7 days later another $87.62 US for the next months supply. The only way to get a refund is to return the goods - which is very hard if you have never received anything, as in my case. They will continue to bill you if you dont cancel and get a cancellation number. Be warned!
They have a distribution center in Pickering apparently - if they even exist.

PremiumWhite CANADA
1725 McPherson Court
Pickering, Ontario Canada L1W3H9

If it's there and you don't read it, I'd be more likely to blame you rather than the company. It's like all those infomercials that give you "free" stuff, provided that you pay for S&H. It's not free if you have to pay to get there.

It was there in writing. You didn't read it. This isn't like the often-convoluted credit card fine print practice. Should've done your homework, I say.

[Sauerkraut]

If it's there and you don't read it, I'd be more likely to blame you rather than the company. It's like all those infomercials that give you "free" stuff, provided that you pay for S&H. It's not free if you have to pay to get there.

It was there in writing. You didn't read it. This isn't like the often-convoluted credit card fine print practice. Should've done your homework, I say.

The OP didn't ask for sympathy or assign blame to a specific party. He/She is simply warning others.

[hightech]

So the message here is " READ a contract before signing or accepting it"

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Akraz]

So the message here is " READ a contract before signing or accepting it"

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Nice post count :twisted:

[45ED]

Wouldn't it strike someone as "odd" if, for a free product, they ask for a credit card number?

[najibs]

At this point, it would have been cheaper to just go to the dentist and get your teeth whitened professionally.

[annebos35]

Informercials we buy your gold and we don't pay ten per cent of the value.
I read ALL online reviews before purchasing anything off the t.v!
As in your case, I would have written cancel on the invoice and sent it back.

[jp06]

can't the OP take legal action? He's being d/cked around here with some bogus "refund" option. The refund only works if he returns the stuff (which aren't being sent). I wonder if this company even have any toothpaste to begin with.

[spm24]

I actually was going to make a post about this. but with the product ACaiberry .

it does the exact same thing. right now im with calls back and forth with my CC and them saying there is nothing they can do but the "company" is well known by them , i asked if its well known by them and there is a actual person who deals with all the cases why isnt the company blacklisted from doing business with Mastercard since its basically fraud how you get charged 2x before the item arrives.


if anyone has any suggestions it would be helpful .

and to the OP you might be lucky and be able to do the 30 day guarantee thing and get some of the money back.

[Becks]

Contact the Better Business Bureau to lodge a complaint. Also, call the local tv station or call the CBC to see if a reporter wants to do a story on this.

[lip]

If it's there and you don't read it, I'd be more likely to blame you rather than the company. It's like all those infomercials that give you "free" stuff, provided that you pay for S&H. It's not free if you have to pay to get there.

It was there in writing. You didn't read it. This isn't like the often-convoluted credit card fine print practice. Should've done your homework, I say.

:mad:
Why be an a** to the OP...obviously the company is out to trick people. Lots of people cannot even read the fine print(age, eyesight, reading level, etc...) and they are hoping to rip these people off...the OP was just warning people...

LIP

[45ED]

:mad:
Why be an a** to the OP...obviously the company is out to trick people. Lots of people cannot even read the fine print(age, eyesight, reading level, etc...) and they are hoping to rip these people off...the OP was just warning people...

LIP


'Cept I wasn't talking about other people. I was referring to the OP who knew the fine print was there, who was likely able to read the fine print, and who decided to not read it for whatever reason.

Rarely will you find someone posting/warning about something and not having been affected by it first. I would not have "been an a**" to the OP if he was warning about a scam that he came across or something similar. But clearly, it isn't like that. The likely reason why the OP was posting/warning was because he was personally ripped off and was/is using the warning to also express his anger/frustration at being ripped off - a bit of warning, a lot of frustration, and sprinkle of rant.

In OP's situation, it takes two to tango: the company may have been deceitful, but they laid out the details up front that the OP chose to not read. He could have but didn't.

[jp06]

'Cept I wasn't talking about other people. I was referring to the OP who knew the fine print was there, who was likely able to read the fine print, and who decided to not read it for whatever reason.

Rarely will you find someone posting/warning about something and not having been affected by it first. I would not have "been an a**" to the OP if he was warning about a scam that he came across or something similar. But clearly, it isn't like that. The likely reason why the OP was posting/warning was because he was personally ripped off and was/is using the warning to also express his anger/frustration at being ripped off - a bit of warning, a lot of frustration, and sprinkle of rant.

In OP's situation, it takes two to tango: the company may have been deceitful, but they laid out the details up front that the OP chose to not read. He could have but didn't.

You sound like you can smell a SCAM anytime. Regardless if the OP read the fine print or not, the company is tricking the people who signed up. By trapping them and not sending them any product, they can't take advantage of the "return for refund" option. And this scammer company can come up with a BS excuse that "oh it's in the fine print, and we offer a full refund if they return the product". Yes, that's nice of them to offer a refund option that is beyond reach and that is deceiving!

[sixer]

Wow!!!

I bet this will make people think twice about all the freebies they go for again!

[Teraric]

I read up on this company awhile ago when I saw the ads. It's really just as simple as typing "Dazzle Toothpaste" in google. Before you buy any "free trial" or signup for anything for that matter, just google it.