Consumer complaint received 2019-11-05
Company: Scott Fetzer Financial Group Inc.
State: CA
Product: Payday loan, title loan, or personal loan
Sub-product: Installment loan
Issue: Problem when making payments

Complaint:
On XX/XX/2019, I entered an agreement to participate in a case study with XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ), a company that makes machines that produce molecular-hydrogen-infused water. The agreement was as follows : in order to finance the machine I would agree to to take out a loan ( for {$12000.00} ) from United Consumer Financial Services ( UCFS ) ; and once I had the machine and was using it regularly, I would provide monthly testimonials, answer monthly questionnaires, and promote XXXX   on social media, etc. In return, I would be compensated $ XXXX   monthly. 

I received my monthly compensation check the first month. Since then I have not received any of the agreed upon monthly compensation, despite fulfilling my monthly requirements. I have contacted the company repeatedly about this issue. In response, they have decided to ignore my calls and emails. Eventually I was able to speak with one of the CEOs, XXXX XXXX. He reassured me that he would personally make sure that the checks should have sent to me, that they would be sent to me as soon as possible and that the reason I was not receiving the checks was because the company was having growth pains. It has now been several months, I have continued to try to resolve the issue fairly with them, but I have consistently been ignored -- and I have not received any checks. 

Moreover, since a few weeks ago, I no longer even have the molecular hydrogen machine! I returned it and expressly stated to XXXX that I will no longer participate in the case study, until a fair resolution can be agreed upon. I have not heard from XXXX. 

And it is very important to note that I am not the only one in the same situation. There are hundreds of others in the same situation, all of whom testify to the fact that trusii is failing to pay case study participants money it had promised. But please dont take my word for it : XXXX XXXX, a technology and health reporter of XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) has written an article for XXXX exposing XXXX wrongdoings, where she notes how wide-spread the issue is : XXXX XXXX   XXXX I have also tried reaching out to UCFS, and they have also chosen to offer no support to me nor all the other customers that are victims of trussis merchant fraud. This is in stark contrast to the reaction on the part of the lending companies XXXX XXXX and XXXX. XXXX has stopped doing business with XXXX many months ago. And XXXX is now suing XXXX in Florida. XXXX writes : XXXX claims that XXXX provided faulty systems to consumers and neglected to pay refunds and has ignored the lenders efforts to communicate with the company. XXXX XXXX, XXXX vice chairman, told XXXX that, under the XXXX XXXX, consumers are not economically responsible for merchant fraud and that the loan provider is doing what it can to protect and advocate for the consumer.

Why then is UCFS trying to evade the issue altogether? Why is their reaction the total opposite of XXXX XXXX and XXXX reactions? Do they not have a responsibility to their customers, and to choose carefully which companies they choose to work with? Were they really not aware that XXXX XXXX, the CEO of XXXX, faces criminal charges, and is currently free on bail? And that he was arrested in XXXX on five criminal charges ( one for second-degree organized fraud and four for third degree grand theft? XXXX mentions this, and it is attested to by court records : XXXX XXXX   XXXX? XXXX )

Company public response: Company believes complaint caused principally by actions of third party outside the control or direction of the company
Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief