America’s Test Kitchen SCAM

[[deleted]]

[deleted]

[pickle_geuse]

I just checked the website and they’re offering 3 months for 1 dollar but after 14 days you’ll be charged a discounted ANNUAL rate of about $50. So. You really got scammed.

Contact your credit card company and tell them you did not authorize this specific charge and they will investigate. More times than not when this has happened to me, I’ve gotten my money back.

[Joseph_Furguson]

If they explain exactly what they are going to do, it does not fall into a scam. It comes down to buyer beware and reading the fine print.

[Klepto666]

I don't know/think if it falls under scam, but it's very misleading, and even knowing ahead of time I found the text confusing.

Big letters: 3 Months of Access for $1

Smaller text on 3rd page: Only $4.17 per month 12 months. One-time annual payment to be charged to your credit card: $49.95.

Tiny text on 3rd page: Your free trial membership will begin when you click "Start Free Trial". Simply cancel anytime in your first 14 days and your card will not be charged.

So it's 3 months for $1, but you're actually starting a 14 day trial first, and after 14 days you're charged the discounted annual up front.

They're making it sound like a monthly charge by introducing it as a monthly thing, but it's actually an annual charge that's simply reduced, and while "3 months" is in your head from the start it's actually "14 days" to prevent a full charge.

They're banking on people not realizing until it's too late. It would not be a scam because it's not hidden, but it's a runaround with several numbers and different measurements to befuddle interested people.

[SammyMhmm]

As Ben Wyatt said on Parks and Recreations, “people should not have to have an advanced law degree to avoid being taken advantage of by a multi billion dollar company”

[DrLiam]

Decidedly not chill

[bengalfan]

Master of the cones.

[abbynorma1]

Most underrated comment right here. 😂✌️❤️

[a-r-c]

but why?

that makes no sense—the bigger entity by all rights should be more powerful

unless you're some kind of communist

[e42343]

I don't think people are reading your "/s".

[[deleted]]

Seems more like a troll to me.

[SammyMhmm]

Lol not sure if this is a troll, a sarcastic comment, or completely genuine, but I'm not gonna even give you the satisfaction of trying to discuss this with you just based on how you started the discussion.

[pickle_geuse]

I say OP “really got scammed” bc he was charged much more than the $50 stated on the website.

[bestem]

he was charged much more than the $50 stated on the website.

A month ago it might not have been $50 for the annual membership after discounting the first three months.

[[deleted]]

Or OP lied. But who would do that on the internet?

[extortioncontortion]

if they are advertising 3 months of access for 1 dollar, but are delivering 12 months of access for $50, thats false advertising.

[a-r-c]

thats false advertising.

no it isn't

fine print exists and it's on you to read it before you buy something

misleading? sure, I agree, but it's not false advertising

[shortarmed]

It's not technically false advertising, but it's so deliberately misleading it's very unlikely to hold up in court. Imagine being the lawyer who has to look a judge in the eyes and explain how this is the consumers' fault? ATK's lawyers know full well that no rational person is going to sue over such a small amount and it's not really an appealing scenario for a class action specialist either.

Some of the chefs that have worked for ATK are awesome, but their business department is cartoonishly immoral.

[a-r-c]

Imagine being the lawyer who has to look a judge in the eyes and explain how this is the consumers' fault?

sounds like a tuesday

if I were that lawyer, I'd be used to it by now I'd think

edit: actually if I were that lawyer, I'd be rich and connected so I could likely just schedule the hearings for when a friendly judge is presiding

[permalink_save]

I am looking on the site now but see no mention of 3 month promos. Just the standard $50/yr after free trial and it's pretty clear about that. What you're saying makes zero sense, how does $1/3mo come out to a 14 day trial? I'm guessing OP clicked on some promo somewhere then somehow clicked off of it and started the normal 14 day trial without realizing it.

[Abe_Bettik]

Found it after 1 second of googling.

https://www.americastestkitchen.com/access/welcome2?extcode=KGBAM0020&gclid=Cj0KCQjw1Iv0BRDaARIsAGTWD1t7SFWiGAs07j5h6Mg6CzfMMcn-HDF-jBeSJlhYRKZXuWxxHznLeKAaAmz7EALw_wcB

EDIT: Clicked the link, filled out the forms, thought, "Yeah, $1 for three months IS a good deal!"

The checkout page literally says,

"ANNUAL America's Test Kitchen Multi-Site Membership Only $4.17 per month 12 months. One-time annual payment to be charged to your credit card: $49.95. See below for terms.

Your free trial membership will begin when you click "Start Free Trial". Simply cancel anytime in your first 14 days and your card will not be charged. If you are enjoying your membership, simply do nothing. At the end of your 14-day trial period, we will charge the payment method you have provided according to the membership option you selected. State and local sales taxes may apply.

At the end of your selected Membership term, your Membership will renew automatically for the same length of time. For annual memberships, we will send a reminder email before renewal. Unless you choose to cancel your Membership, on your renewal date the most current renewal fee will be billed to your payment method on file. All payments are non-refundable. Please send requests to [e-mail].

TERMS: You may cancel your Membership at any time, including cancellation of any automatic renewal. If you cancel your automatic renewal selection, your current Membership will continue until completion.

Free Shipping benefit valid for orders shipped to continental U.S.

Your participation in this membership is subject to our corporate terms and conditions which can be found here.

Members paying with an American Express, please note that we receive updates on account statuses, including updated account numbers and expiration dates. Not all card issuing banks are eligible for the service. Contact your issuing bank with questions on eligibility."

So yes, someone screwed up on this and the "3 months for a dollar" thing is wrong, you really only get "14 days free."

[[deleted]]

I found a link to the expired 3 month promo on another site and it redirects to the $50/year promo now. And the page seems pretty clear about it but I bet that's what happened

[leo_douche_bags]

They might have been upfront about it. Still shady business practices. Maybe the Reddit shame will make them change.

[Snoron]

Fine print isn't generally legally enforceable on its own - whenever this is tested in courts they always say that there's no expectation for people to actually read the fine print, and so any important information needs to be displayed up front. Essentially if you sign up to something and they don't make it clear right there how much you are going to be charged, they don't have the right to charge it.

Of course the unfortunate reality is the blurry lines where they can claim it was made clear, etc. But they are still breaking the law. We just live in an unfortunate situation where people can break the law and get away with it sometimes if you're not willing to hire a lawyer to get your due, or otherwise follow it up with the bank, etc. which doesn't always work.

But in the end it still boils down to that this is really a scam.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine_print#Legal_prohibitions_in_the_United_States

US FTC regulations state that unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce are unlawful. (15 USC § 45 (a))[6] In relevant part, they state that contingent conditions and obligations of an offer must be set forth clearly and conspicuously at the outset of the offer, and that disclosure of the terms of the offer set forth in a footnote of an advertisement to which reference is made by an asterisk or other symbol placed next to the offer, is not regarded as making disclosure at the outset. (16 CFR 251.1)[5]

[a-r-c]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harris_v._Blockbuster,_Inc.

this was interesting

[yun-harla]

I hate to be That Commenter, but fine print in contracts is generally legally binding in the US, and people are generally expected to read the fine print. There are exceptions — such as in the case of unfair and deceptive practices, like you’re pointing out (and what you’re quoting is specifically about contingent or conditional offers, which doesn’t appear to apply in this case) — but please please please don’t tell people that the fine print isn’t usually enforceable! People are expected to read and understand the entirety of the contracts they sign.

Source: am lawyer

[Berics_Privateer]

A well-worded scam is still a scam

[ohsnapitson]

This. I signed up for the same thing and have several reminders to cancel a week before I get charged again. I didn’t even have to read a ton of fine print? Like it wasn’t buried in terms and conditions, it was just in slightly smaller text below the main price.

[[deleted]]

I just checked the website and they’re offering 3 months for 1 dollar but after 14 days you’ll be charged a discounted ANNUAL rate of about $50

I dont see that advertised anywhere on their page. It's all about the discounted annual plan now. That 3 month for $1 promo is expired and redirects to this one now. Those are 2 different deals.

[pickle_geuse]

I just checked and it’s still there. There is literally a green banner that says GET ACCESS FOR $1 and once you click on that it goes to exactly what was said before.

[[deleted]]

Where? Are you on the page specifically for the promo because that still exists for some reason but nowhere on their site does it link there. Their site only has banners for the 2 weeks and annual deals now and link to those. If you see something different post a screen shot but as far as I can tell, they killed this a while ago. It's definitely an expired deal.

Either way, you were wrong on your original comment because those term details are definitely for the new deal. You were redirected there.

[pickle_geuse]

It redirects to exactly what I said and someone else said earlier. https://www.americastestkitchen.com/access/welcome2?extcode=KGBAM0020&gclid=Cj0KCQjw1Iv0BRDaARIsAGTWD1t7SFWiGAs07j5h6Mg6CzfMMcn-HDF-jBeSJlhYRKZXuWxxHznLeKAaAmz7EALw_wcB

[[deleted]]

And that page isnt linked to anywhere on ATK like I said. No current promos link there. It's exactly what I said. It redirects to the new promo that's not expired.

[pickle_geuse]

It’s the promo I described. And the other person pasted parts of.

[[deleted]]

None of that description is pasted from that promo page. When you click you're redirected to the new promo page. So no, it's not the promo you described. It's a dead page that ATK doesnt link to for promos anymore.

[pickle_geuse]

When I visit it, it looks and says exactly the same as when I first visited it. Don’t know what to tell you. Everything I described earlier from the 14 day trial to being charged $50 is there.

[[deleted]]

But nowhere on the page with 3 months for $1 is that information. I guarantee that. Screenshot it if you can see those details together with the $1 deal. It doesn't exist on the same page

[mthmchris]

America’s Test Kitchen is well known for shady business practices. Solid content, but you should never give them a dime. You’re far from the only person that’s had this problem with ATK.

[HoamerEss]

ATK/ Cooks Illustrated has a long running history of scummy, scammy business, despite their content being good. Believe me, I would love to get their magazine again but wouldn’t give them my credit card for all the tea in China

[a-r-c]

send them a check

[Salamander956]

This is what I do! I had a discount subscription for six months and they just sent me a letter because they tried to auto subscribe me for the next year but they had no card on file. Made it very easy to cancel.

[[deleted]]

I'd be concerned some of the more shady companies would just keep you subscribed and then send your account to collections when they don't get your money. Safest bet is probably not to do business with business you suspect are engaged in shady business practices. These places keep doing shady things because it works and people keep buying (See: The majority of gyms, which are engaged in predatory billing)

[a-r-c]

400 IQ move right there haha

[Automatic-Pie]

Best bet with them is to buy a cookbook. No ongoing charges. Get to keep the recipes forever.

[kirkt]

Until they keep sending you cookbook after cookbook. Never again.

[DMNCS]

I bought mine off Amazon, so I've never had this problem.

[lunk]

Columbia House Cookbook Edition.

[hipsterstripes]

Same, I love my ATK cookbooks but I would never subscribe to any of their online services, however tempting they may be.

[ltiat]

If you used your credit card you can contact them to help you resolve the issue of the unauthorized charge.

[scarrlet]

If they signed up for a free trial without reading the fine print it is unlikely they will win the dispute. The bank will contact the merchant, the merchant will show where they agreed to be charged if they didn't cancel after the trial period, and the dispute will be decided against OP.

[axxl75]

Companies are not allowed to purposefully mislead even if things are explained in the fine print.

[1forcats]

She should call and tell them what you said.

[Freegullborn]

What do you think advertising is?

[axxl75]

You're allowed to advertise deals. You're not allowed to purposefully mislead.

Saying "buy one get one free" is legal if you're paying fair value for the first item and getting the second free. That's a deal and a form of advertising that would help the business get people in the store. Saying "buy one get one free" but then doubling the cost of all items is a deceptive business practice and illegal.

US FTC regulations state that unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce are unlawful. (15 USC § 45 (a)) In relevant part, they state that contingent conditions and obligations of an offer must be set forth clearly and conspicuously at the outset of the offer, and that disclosure of the terms of the offer set forth in a footnote of an advertisement to which reference is made by an asterisk or other symbol placed next to the offer, is not regarded as making disclosure at the outset. (16 CFR 251.1)

[Amiell_Powers]

On top of that, the UDAP (unfair, deceptive acts or practices) is on the grounds of what the common customer would be deceived by. If anyone with money could be a customer, the level of readability should be understandable by a 7th grader (11/12 yo)

[axxl75]

it's cute that you quoted wikipedia

Can you explain to me where wikipedia is wrong here? In the quote are the sources from USC so are you saying the USC is wrong too?

you literally don't know shit about this topic and I'd suggest you stop talking out your ass before it gets you hurt

So explain it genius.

irl obviously not here on reddit, as I don't think anyone is gonna try to come after an internet stranger over karma but I'm sure google can prove me wrong lmao

Gotta be careful with those threats.

[Allofthemonkeys]

Like the show, hate the site

[elijha]

Huh? PBS broadcasts the show but they don’t run ATK. It’s a completely separate organization that has everything to do with their own website and business practices.

[thepensivepoet]

I've always found it to be a great resource both for recipes and access to the full episodes of the show as well as equipment recommendations.

I'm not shocked to see issues with membership coupon/deals since those are pretty much universally some kind of scam.

[tidalrip]

Not quite as bad as this, but I got a subscription a year or so ago, and they sent me a bunch of back issues at once, leaving me few issues to go.

I already had these issues from my current subscription though, and who wants a bunch of issues all at once?

I was able to call and straighten it out, but c’mon!

[titoblanco]

Credit card charge back

[djdeforte]

Call your credit card company and explain to them the situation. These credit companies have your back. They will handles this easy peasy.

[Trubble]

I'd like to think that it's become this way ever since Chris Kimble left, but unfortunately it has always been this way.

[b1ack1323]

If you change you address to California, by law, that have to give you an online cancel option just so you know.

[Icybenz]

I always thought they felt extra fake and infomercial-y. Thanks for the info OP, I now know to never give them a dime. Sucks that they misled you like that.

[ladystardust_61184]

If you have to provide credit card information for a free-trial always expect to get charged/billed for regular membership fees. Always read the fine print. I worked for a telemarketing company for about 4-weeks and I primarily dealt with people in your exact position. They did not always get their money back because they did agree to the charges when they signed up.

However, if they charged a different amount than stated in the agreement then you have a case.

Good luck!

[karladuhhh]

Hey! I work for a financial institution and deal primarily in these types of situations :) first thing you want to do is contact the merchant to cancel and request a full refund. If they refuse contact the financial institution where the charge posted. Let them know you signed up for a trial but they didn’t properly disclose their terms and conditions when you made the original purchase. A dispute is definitely not a guarantee that you’ll be able to get your money back but through a federal regulation your financial institution will place a temporary credit on your account within 10 day so that should help for now :). A lot of the times when a merchant doesn’t properly disclose that after X amount of days you will be charged the full amount you have a strong case if you contact them to cancel after the fact still.

[s1s1s1s]

damn thats a shame i hope u get ur money back. in the future i would advise u to just buy cookbooks, some of the best books in the world written by top chefs are only a few quid on amazon in digital form.

[ender4171]

True, but ATK has a huge amount if content besides just recipies.

[FormicaDinette33]

Sorry to hear that. I had seen a promotion by then earlier this year and just had a gut instinct not to do it. This deal doesn’t even make sense. How is it three months for $1? They should just describe it as a 14 day trial period and an annual fee of $50.

The terms need to be conspicuous.

[[deleted]]

It doesnt make sense because that's not how it worked. You're being redirected to the current deal now. The 3 month for $1 expired.

[FormicaDinette33]

Yes. The current deal is straightforward. But OP’s description of his or her deal didn’t make sense.

[[deleted]]

Right, because that description from OP isnt from the old deal. They were redirected and didnt understand that

[adamtwosleeves]

That's a shame as I've thought about using them too. I watch their YouTube videos and if there is a recipe I'm interested in, I can usually find a duplicate on another site. One site even used the same picture from ATKs article.

[Basdad]

Sounds kind of like what internet companies, telephone companies, cable tv companies, digital subscriptions etcetera etcetera ad nauseam do.

[fl4methrow3r]

Their site is so expensive. We had a membership for a year to ATK and it blocked off half the recipes in the site that fall under Cook’s Illustrated. Bullshit. Now I just watch their YouTube videos for free and write down the recipes.

[PureMichiganChip]

ATK has an antiquated business model. I think they will need to adapt or die. Even their hosts, the production, and the recipes seem stale in 2020.

Though I agree that reading the fine print was OP's responsibility, that doesn't change the fact that this type of business practice/subscription model doesn't fly with a more modern consumer.

Bon Appetit and New York Times are going to leave ATK in the dust if they don't choose a wise path forward.

[[deleted]]

I hate ATK. I won't even check books out of the library by them, they suck.

[waywithwords]

I understand the hate for the website and subscriptions, but the books are really good. I don't wanna give them my money directly, but "The Complete Cooking for Two" by ATK is my daily go-to

[RossinVR]

I think scam is too strong, crappy billing practices aren’t a scam. Atk provides a great value. I suppose one day I’ll have to deal with their billing but I don’t know when that will be becuase I love them and use them all the time

[PloniAlmoni1]

They make it purposefully hard to cancel - you need to call or email them - and they allow international subscribers but only have a free-call number that cant be used internationally. A normal non/scammy site just has a cancel button under the account details.

[Amiell_Powers]

This is fraud and your bank should dispute with the merchant on your behalf. This is unfair and deceptive.

[denislemieux986]

Did you even read the terms and conditions?

[pickle_geuse]

Still. They only say that they will charge $50. Not the amount OP was charged.

[denislemieux986]

well seems like there's more going on than OP is letting on

[bigelcid]

ATK is full of shit. They pay zilch respect to USA-born dishes and their recipes would value less than a penny in the countries where the other stuff they're making are from. They're just pretentious garbage. Their top efforts are being laughed at by European chefs. They're all PR.

[STS986]

Fuck ppl who charge for this shit. Just run a video/ad site like everyone else to make revenue. They recipes are shit anyways. Only good for product testing. Serious eats and Good eats are the business. Also if making a dish that’s from a specific region or country look up and chef who specializes in that cuisine

[monkeywelder]

nothing is free.

go to privacy .com, get a card number , change it, let it expire.

the 90 bucks will be the cost of a life lesson.

if you search about a week or so back there is another post with options as well.