ECA Boss Hal Halpin Addresses Accusations of Fraud

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
ECA Boss Hal Halpin Addresses Accusations of Fraud



In the wake of controversy surrounding accusations of wrongdoing levied at the Entertainment Consumers Association by a vocal minority, ECA CEO Hal Halpin has stepped in in an attempt to clear up muddied waters.

The situation in question is a bit too complex to be neatly summed up by even my mighty recap powers, but here goes: Last week, the Entertainment Consumers Association (ECA) - a consumer advocacy group - found itself at the center of a firestorm of controversy. The organization's accusers claimed that the ECA had offered discount codes on Amazon.com (and other retailers) as membership benefits, but had since removed said codes - and had also removed the option to turn off automatic renewal of one's membership in the association. The discount was used as a bait-and-switch tactic to get people to opt into a paid service which was then made irritatingly complex to opt out of, said critics.

The ECA quickly responded to these allegations [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/96504-ECA-Responds-to-Accusations-of-Wrongdoing], saying that the opt-out button had never actually worked and should never have been visible outside of internal testing, and that the only way to leave the organization had always been via snail mail since the very beginning. Furthermore, the removal of the discount coupons had been at the request of the partners like Amazon in response to a very small group of abusers exploiting a bug in the system that allowed them to stack codes by repeatedly joining the ECA's free trial. Still, many weren't convinced, and while the uproar seemed to die down, it was far from over.

In an attempt to address these concerns and set the record straight, ECA CEO Hal Halpin sat down with GameCulture [http://www.gameculture.com/2009/12/07/gameculture-exclusive-hal-halpin-eca-head-discusses-membership-complaints] to offer a comprehensive behind-the-scenes explanation of what had happened. When I say comprehensive, I do mean really, really comprehensive - it's very long, but sheds a lot of light on what was going on inside the ECA.

If I'm reading this correctly - and if Halpin is being entirely honest, which I have little reason to doubt - it seems like the controversy was a bit of a "Perfect Storm" scenario. As far as the partners were concerned, an influx of new users with a 10% discount was hardly a bad thing, since it was a largely untapped market - that 10% off the price was simply the cost of getting a new potential customer. For them, the problem was twofold: People joining and re-joining for new codes meant that the supply of available codes was depleted much more quickly than anticipated, meaning that it would take time to generate new ones - and when news of the stacking glitch spread, the acceptable discount quickly became unacceptable.

On the ECA's end, it was a combination of poor timing, lack of communication, and the fact that since all of the staffers were also members they wouldn't have ever seen the "opt out" button that seemed to have been only displaying for people on a free trial account (which wasn't supposed to be live in the first place). Denizens of the internet being denizens of the internet, a vocal minority quickly became inflamed and took to harassing ECA employees, the partners in question, and even the Better Business Bureau with some less-than-cordial language.

While the Halpin interview answered most of the issues I had with the situation, there's one question that still sticks out in my mind - I understand that the whole "you can only leave via snail mail" clause has been there from the beginning, but... why? It seems very inconvenient to me, especially given that the sort of people who would likely join the ECA aren't really the sort who use snail mail in their everyday lives. But then again, that's not necessarily relevant to these accusations of wrongdoing - it's just irritating.

If you've been following the situation from the beginning, the Halpin chat is worth a read - and while I have no doubt that it won't answer every question for everybody, it does shine quite the floodlight on the controversy.

Permalink
 

Jared

The British Paladin
Jul 14, 2009
5,630
0
0
And the plot thickens further.

Ive been following this for a while, and just watching and reading about it makes me wonder what more is actually been hidden behind the words spoken and 'offical' press releases.
 

Shamus Young

New member
Jul 7, 2008
3,247
0
0
I agree with what John mentions at the end - we can hand-wave a lot of this stuff, but there is no getting around the snail-mail thing and it smells rotten.

An automated system (or partly automated) is SO MUCH CHEAPER TO RUN. Someone can click through a list of opt-outs, or the system can run on its own.

But a snail mail system means having someone opening mail, matching paper records to electronic ones, and then filling in the electronic opt-out form themselves. Either way, YOU STILL NEED TO BUILD THE OPT-OUT SYSTEM. The only reason to take on this hassle is to make it difficult for people to leave so you can get that auto-renew money.

The best I can say is that this controversy made an unsavory business practice look like a fraudulent one.
 

Russ Pitts

The Boss of You
May 1, 2006
3,240
0
0
I agree the cancellation policy is completely backassward dumb. That said, I know plenty of industry types who I would consider genuinely slimy, and I have never felt that way about Hal Halpin. After speaking with him briefly about this situation the other day, and then reading the QA, I have to say I'm inclined to give ECA the benefit of the doubt on this one, at least so far as the controversy is concerned. If that ends up making me look dumb, then so be it. But sometimes you just have to take a friend's word.
 

Phokal

New member
Oct 12, 2009
60
0
0
I'm pretty sure (about 85%) that I had this auto-renew checkbox under my settings, and I had a paid for account. I was going to let it auto-renew until I started hearing about this controversy. Then I went to check and sure enough the interface looks different, and the buttons are missing.

The part that upsets me the most: they haven't sent out an email to all their members about it. I'm sure some of the other members have seen this button, perhaps USED this button, but aren't following this story on the internet.

I'd expect this level of screw up ("I used the button to discontinue my auto-renew, but apparently it doesn't function, I haven't checked back at the site, and I was charged anyway and you guys don't give refunds.") to have some organization wide email letting us users know what went wrong.
 

Nesrie

New member
Dec 7, 2009
41
0
0
The lack of communication hasn't changed. There has still been no messages sent to the membership base. The TOS was changed again removing No. 5, the credit card expiration date issue, again with no notification. The forums were disabled and form feedbacks are not being answered. Hal's last response was just a PR piece done from the safety of his own site and hardly gets to the bottom of the issue so much as explain their, the ECA's, limited perspective.
 

tcool93

New member
Apr 7, 2008
2
0
0
He is obviously not telling the whole truth. Because there definitely was other options of cancelling besides snail mail. In their TOS, there was also the option to call in to cancel. Their forums are down again (I wonder why), but here is a cached link of it:

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:FJcIFrG3PTEJ:forums.theeca.com/showpost.php%3Fp%3D113158%26postcount%3D54+%22A+Member+may+cancel+this+Agreement+and+membership+in+the+ECA+Service+by+calling+1-203-761-6180%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Even one of their forums moderators said they did it on purpose to curb the cancellations.

Funny, even Hal's original excuse was that people were joining, cancelling and rejoining. I'd like to know how they pulled that off if the only option to cancel was snail mail, certified.

Personally I am offended by the comments stating it was harrassing employees and the BBB. What do you expect to happen when someone scams you? Their "employees" were perma banning anyone and everyone who posted anything negative about them in their forums (yes even the forum for posting gripes).

I can't believe anyone can defend him and his company in any way whatsoever. Anyone with any common sense and morals knows what he has done is wrong in every way.
 

tcool93

New member
Apr 7, 2008
2
0
0
I also want to add, the fact that there WAS an online option to cancel your account, is legally binding. It doesn't matter whether they intended it or not.

I know for a fact I never ever sign up for any service or contract, or subscription unless there is an way to cancel easily online. I checked before signed up, and never would have signed up otherwise.

Now I end up losing money on this whole scam because I have to mail in a certified letter, and I got nothing out of their "service".

If they still don't remove me from their list... I have all the evidence, and will then be contacting the BBB along with my credit card company. Any charges to my card will be fraud on their part.
 

arcane93

New member
Dec 10, 2009
1
0
0
You do know, right, that GameCulture is a publication of the ECA? Hal Halpin "interviewed" himself. The most pressing questions were not asked.

Secondly, this whole "joining, canceling, and rejoining" story never has been adequately explained. Why on earth would anyone do that, when the codes were unlimited in the first place? Even when they limited the system to only give out one code per day, how many orders to most people place to Amazon within a single day (especially given that the discount was on the entire order, not a single item, so there would be no reason to parcel the order out)? Also, the stacking glitch required having codes from older batches -- new batches were only put up after the old ones were depleted, so the only way to have those codes would have been to have saved them up from earlier. No amount of canceling and rejoining would have yielded codes that would stack. It almost seems like Mr. Halpin does not even understand the issues that he's talking about (or, perhaps, is hoping that we don't understand them).

Finally, the "opt out" button did *not* only appear for people on the "free trial" accounts. I was a fully paid member, and it appeared on my profile. I personally used it not because I was looking to leave the organization, but rather because I didn't want them to *auto*-renew my membership -- I don't like anything auto-renewing, and frankly, after several months as a member of the ECA, I was not entirely convinced that they were actually doing anything. My intent in using it was to turn off auto-renewal and wait out the rest of my current membership. If they convinced me within that time to continue as a member, I would renew by *my* choice, not by some automated function. As far as I could tell when I used it, it had worked -- I received a message from the system telling me that my account would not be renewed.

When the news came out that the button to cancel auto-renewal was not supposed to be on the site and it had been removed, that was all we were told. No further information was given. Several members asked repeatedly whether the ECA intended to honor it for those members who had already used it, but they were met with complete silence. When further word finally came weeks later, it was only stated that the button had never worked -- an indirect answer at best, but if they had even shared that information earlier it might have helped to defuse the situation.

And that, right there, has really been the biggest problem throughout this whole issue -- the complete lack of communication. When questions were asked on the ECA forums, they were deleted or locked, and the posters often banned (even when the questions were entirely reasonable). No representative from the ECA was ever there to answer them anyway, leaving the task to forum moderators who knew little more than anyone else did. The forums have since been shut down entirely. The only answers that have been given are the two statements from Hal Halpin linked in this article, which give excuses which don't make sense and skirt around the issues.

I don't think that the term "fraud" as you use in your article title is accurate, but this definitely has not been handled well at all, and the whole situation speaks poorly to the ECA as an advocate of consumer rights.