Business ProfileforLucienne Skin Cream

BBB files indicate that the products listed in this BBB Business Profile have a pattern of complaints concerning unauthorized and/or unexpected charges and unresolved refund disputes. Complaints filed by consumers state that they signed up for what they thought was a free trial and later discovered additional unauthorized and/or unexpected charges to their credit cards for additional amounts. BBB contacted the business in February 2017 about the pattern of complaints.

In Febuary 2017 BBB received a response from the business.
Business believes that before Customers commit to their 14 day free trial, Customers are given the terms and conditions explaining that if they don't cancel their trial within 14 days of the order, they will be charged for the full amount of the product and also will be put on a monthly subscription to receive product every month until they cancel.

Business believes their website contains fully compliant and explicit terms and conditions within all pages of website. The reference within the complaint filed, mentioning lack of clear terms, must be related to affiliate's (3rd party) web pages, which our company's outsources.

According to information in BBB files, the business is using fake celebrity endorsements in its advertising, specifically Angelina Jolie, Christie Brinkley, Kelly Ripa, and Shark Tank. BBB's Code of Advertising indicates that advertising which uses testimonials or endorsements is misleading if they are not genuine and do not represent the current opinion of the endorser (Section 30, Testimonials and Endorsements).

In February 2017, BBB contacted the business regarding its advertising of free trial periods of its products. Consumers that sign up for the free trial period are enrolled in a monthly subscription for additional products. BBB requested the business substantiate that the claims meet the standards outlined in BBB's Code of Advertising (Section 18, Negative Option Plans, Continuity Plans and Automatic Shipments). The Code maintains that "Any advertisement for a product or service that includes an offer to sell or provide consumers with additional goods or services under a negative option feature must include a clear and conspicuous disclosure of all material terms of the negative option feature." Material terms that should be clear and conspicuous include the existence of the negative option feature, the cost of the additional goods or services, how consumers can cancel and avoid future shipments and charges, and how consumers can return items that they do not want. The Code continues that "advertisers must avoid making disclosures that are vague, unnecessarily long or which contain contradictory language."

Additionally, BBB asked the company to substantiate claims made on its website about the efficacy or results of using the company's products. BBB requested the business substantiate the claims per standards outlined in BBB's Code of Advertising (Section 34, Claimed Results). Claims as to efficacy or results which will be obtained by or realized from a particular product should be based on recent and competent scientific or other objective data. Advertisers should be prepared to substantiate such claims.

In February 2017, the business responded to BBB's request for substantiation about its advertising.
Business believes the reference within the complaint filed, mentioning lack of clear terms, must be related to affiliate's (3rd party) web pages, which our company's outsources.