Real Player review: UNABLE TO CANCEL ORDER 1

Hi all, I have recently sent an email to Real for a FULL REFUND of $103 (8 MONTHS of BILLING Without MY APPROVAL!).
Please see copy of email below which includes some of the CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT which Real has clearly NEGLECTLY thus they're FRAUDULENT AND MUST BE STOPPED so PLEASE read my proposition (about compiling a dossier of ALL of our complaints) at the bottom of this letter. Feedback much welcomed!
Thanks in advance.

Email written and sent on 24th October 2008:
Hi,
I'm very sorry to say this matter is not 'SOLVED' until you justifiably refund the payments that came out of my partner's Credit card account WITHOUT PERMISSION. Since you have access to our account and previous records you may well note that we have not used any Realplayer software and that our account has been 100% INACTIVE throughout the 8 month period in which we were falsely charged! We are absolutely embarrassed by your response and so-called 'customer service skills' - you can see that these charges have been incorrectly made and that a very unfortunate mistake has occurred as a result. Yet, you continue to shy away from rectifying the situation and, moreover, NEGLECT the justifiable wishes of your 'customer's'! Disgraceful behaviour I'm afraid; shame on you and shame on your company for failing to carry out your job in a proper, just and moral manner!
Once again, we are requesting A FULL REFUND OF INCORRECT CHARGES incurred over the 8-month period, 03/10/2008 - 10/11/2008.
Please allow me to remind you and your company about THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 2003 FOR INTERNET SALES CONTRACT REGULATIONS (You can look this up yourself here: (http://www.gov.ns.ca/JUST/REGULATIONS/regs/cpintrnt.htm) which STATES the following (I'm SURE you and YOUR COMPANY already know this extremely well but PLEASE bare with me for a MINUTE):

INTERNET SALES CONTRACT REGULATIONS:
made under Section 34 of the
Consumer Protection Act
R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 92
O.I.C. 2002-327 (June 28, 2002, effective December 19, 2003), N.S. Reg. 91/2002Information considered disclosed

DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION:
3 For the purposes of Section 21X of the Act, a supplier shall disclose the following information to a consumer before entering into an internet sales contract with the consumer:

(e) AN ITEMIZED LIST of the price of the goods or services being SOLD TO THE CUSTOMER and ANY ASSOCIATED COSTS payable by the consumer, including taxes and shipping charges;

(f) A DESCRIPTION OF ANY ADDITIONAL CHARGE that may apply to the contract, such as customs duties and brokerage fees, the amount of which cannot reasonably be determined by the supplier;

(g) the total amount of the contract, or, where the goods or services are being purchased over an indefinite period, the amount of the periodic payments under the contract;

(l) the supplier’s cancellation, return, exchange and refund policies, if any; and

(m) any other restrictions, limitations or conditions of purchase that may apply.

INFORMATION CONSIDERED DISCLOSED:
4 A supplier is considered to have disclosed to a consumer the information required to be disclosed in Section 3 if

(a) the information is prominently displayed in a CLEAR AND COMPREHENSIBLE manner; and

(b) the consumer is able to RETAIN or PRINT the information.

Oh and this REGULATION is a BIG ONE - CLOSELY RELATED TO YOUR COMPANY SO PLEASE PAY ATTENTION:

CONTENT AND DELIVERY OF INTERNET SALES CONTRACT:
5 (2) A copy of an internet sales contract provided by a supplier pursuant to Section 21Z of the Act shall be:

(a) SENT BY E-MAIL to the E-MAIL ADDRESS provided by the CONSUMER (That's me & my partner in this case - though we didn't know anything about it?!) to the SUPPLIER (That's YOUR COMPANY) for the provision of INFORMATION related to the CONTRACT;

(b) sent by facsimile to the facsimile number provided by the consumer to the supplier for the provision of information related to the contract;

(c) mailed or delivered to an address provided by the consumer to the supplier for the provision of information related to the contract

Unfortunately, RealPlayer (SuperPass) have OVERLOOKED ALL OF THESE CRUCIAL CUSTOMER PROTECTION REGULATIONS and thus it's no big surprise when I tell you that I am currently one 'customer' (?) out of several THOUSAND/hundred thousands that are experiencing SIMILAR ISSUES with your services on the internet! The biggest issue I and, as stated, lots and lots and lots of other internet browsers are having is YOUR CLEAR LACK OF PROVIDED INFORMATION ABOUT FUTURE SUBSCRIPTION PAYMENTS (Regulations 4(a and b)) and YOUR LACK OF E-MAILS TO CONFIRM THE SUBSCRIPTION PAYMENTS (Regulations 5(a, b and even c))!
Once again, we are requesting A FULL REFUND OF INCORRECT AND CHARGES incurred over the 8-month period, 03/10/2008 - 10/11/2008.
I have now spent well OVER 2 HOURS of my precious time dealing with a situation that should NEVER have materialised in the first place; needless to say I am losing the last little ounce of patience that I may or may not now possess. I am a very ethical person and believe in what's just, fair, right - (call it what you please) thus I am requesting that your company now follows suit by returning the unethical 'mistaken' charges, taken from our credit card, IMMEDIATELY IN FULL ($103.92USD). In my last email, the word 'fraudulent' was not directed at a third party credit card scam, no Veeresh, it was directed towards your company and its clear neglect of The Consumers Protection Act!
Should you choose to REFUSE the rightful REFUND or even DELAY this matter further by choosing NOT TO REPLY (I'm sure your company is BIG & EXPERIENCED enough to avoid the latter) I will proceed in the following way:

FIRSTLY, my partner and I will compile a dossier of our (and several thousands of other violated consumers) more-than-justified allegations. SECONDLY, we will put these in an affidavit format complete with the specific statutory violations your company has made and then THIRDLY, hand your government this entire case on a (big dinner) plate in order for them to deal with this gross misconduct of a well established company.
We may also decide to chuck in desert, which would be inevitably be detrimental to your company (again), by putting the allegations together as a Case Prosecution Summary (the way agents present cases to the US Attorney's Office) and publish it on the Net for all to see EXACTLY how your company operates. Don't worry about the lack of exposure this will receive as I'm VERY experienced with Google's PPC Adwords!
Last note, I fully advocate the Law of reciprocity which suggests the universe gives back what you give out so in our case we're asking that you rightfully give return (GIVE BACK) our 'subscription payments' that we're wrongfully taken from our credit card (GIVEN OUT).

Thanks,
JCallinan

PS: Please accept my invitation for you and your company to do the RIGHT thing here or I will make an example of this wrong doing so that others need not go through this disgraceful ordeal!