Posted by Desireeroman on 7/9/05 2:22pm
Msg #50774

BEWARE 50STATENOTARY.COM LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP PURCHASE

FOR THOSE WHO MISSED THE LAST POSTING:
I purchased a lifetime listing on 50statenotary.com in 2003. This month, I received an email asking for me to upgrade my listing or it would be removed. I told them I purchased a lifetime membership, and received the following explanation as to why my listing would be removed if I didn't "upgrade":

"We no longer offer Lifetime Listings for $14.95. Those were prices you paid in 2003 --TWO YEARS AGO. Lifetime means the lifetime of the program. 50 State Notary's website has grown considerably since then and you cannot expect to recieve a ride forever on only $14.95.

You need to upgrade or your listing will be removed. Future prices will put lifetime listings at $525.00 so you have the ability now to save money now. If you are recieving work from the Notary Directory you should be happy to upgrade. If you are not, let me know and I will remove you immediately so you receive no future email notices."

I then argued that a lifetime listing purchase should be just that - as long as the website is up, my listing should be there. Seems like Ms. Ring isn't exactly sure of what she's doing, as she then quoted me all these other prices in her next communication:

"When the price is increased to $249.00 per year, you may be able to realize the opportunity I have extended to you.

Bottom line -- your listing has been removed! Any previous policies that were in effect in 2003 are null and void. If you value your web page you need to comply with the new standards. (Companies do change and update policies.) However, the automated software has removed your listing, so if you wish to renew now, you will need to pay the full price of $49.99 or $179.99 for a lifetime listing. The price will increase to $489.00 for a lifetime listing within the next 2 weeks."

EXACTLY WHAT IS THE CORRECT PRICE?? As for my previous "lifetime listing purchase" my receipt doesn't say anything about policies being subject to change. When you purchase a lifetime membership, how is that subject to change, especially when it's not DISCLOSED that it was subject to change??

BUYER OF THE LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP BEWARE! ACCORDING TO THIS POLICY, YOUR MEMBERSHIP IS NOT REALLY FOR A LIFETIME. IN MY EYES, THIS IS FRAUD. I HAVE CONTACTED SEVERAL ORGANIZATIONS TO REPORT THIS, AND WOULD WELCOME FEEDBACK FROM ANYONE ELSE WHO EXPERIENCED THIS WITH THEM.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 7/9/05 8:16pm
Msg #50805

Desiree
Can you post this information to my message board too?

http://members2.boardhost.com/FLSigningAgent/

Reply by Desireeroman on 7/9/05 8:24pm
Msg #50806

No problem~

Reply by Anon on 7/9/05 9:28pm
Msg #50809

Do not accept VR's poor business practice. Between what you have written here and her advertising fiasco at the NNA convention, it seems to me that people who are being finacially harmed, or not being given the goods they purchased as told to them, should be writing to the State Attorney General's Office to have them investigate to see if what VR is doing constitutes perpetrating a fraud!!!

What happens in two years when VR decides the $525.00 Lifetime Listing should no longer exist???

If the people who believe that VR has behaved in a way that demonstrates MISREPRESENTATION, FALSE ADVERTISING, FAILURE TO DELIVER GOODS PURCHASED, OR CHANGES RULES OF A PROGRAM TO GET MORE MONEY FROM THE SUBSCRIBERS WHO THOUGHT THEY BOUGHT THE PRODUCT ALREADY, then you are the people who need to write the State Attorney General's office of the state in which you reside as well as the state in which VR does business.

I certainly am glad that finance companies can not change the terms of the loans just because they purchased them from someone else. A contract is a contract, and it would appear that VR is in breach of her own contract! I believe those who feel they are harmed in some way should take legal action immediately or forever hold their peace.

Reply by Iris_WA on 7/10/05 12:35am
Msg #50815

NNA Advertising Fiasco

Because I loathe unjustness and because silence in the face of observed unjustness serves to perpetuate it, I am moved to present another perspective with reference to what you called the NNA advertising fiasco."

From your words, it appears you (like myself) are not one of those being harmed by any of 50StateNotary's decisions or practices. It is unfortunate that there are some here who have been injured (by VR's lack of foresight and subsequent poor business decision to renege on her original "lifetime" offer). However, as the woman herself would be quick to point out, "We reap what we sow." So, while I do agree those 'victims' (for lack of a better word) have an absolute right to take whatever legal measures are afforded them, I also think it's not cool to jump on the underdog, especially without justification.

If you (I speak to all readers here) took the time to fully read VR's version of the NNA advertising incident in question (in her post-NNA convention newsletter), then you would most likely conclude, as I have, that what happened was totally out of her hands. She apparently was very concerned about her subscribers' rights and expended much energy negotiating with NNA to give her subscribers a fair shake, even if the outcome wasn't as she originally planned. (I cannot speak to this, since I am neither a member of her organization, nor an advertiser, nor an attendee at the convention.)

As an aside, if she has not already done so, it would be interesting to see what might happen if VR mailed to each of the participating advertisers a copy of the ORIGINAL printed 50StateNotary programs, since the money was spent and the programs printed anyway. For the cost of bulk mailing rates, a proactive action such as this on her part might go a long way toward restoring some of the credibility she has lost with some injured parties. It might even serve to salvage some potentially valuable relationships with notary-members she might otherwise stand to lose.

At any rate, as unjust as it may seem, "stuff happens" to all of us. That's life, like it or not! We may react, then perhaps we adjust and move on! It seems to me that is just what VR did, and this issue is substantially different from the lifetime guarantee issue.

Please, let's try to keep our objectivity, given that we are subjective critters. Let's not 'mix apples with oranges' and be so quick to fall to become part of a 'pack consciousness' just to give ourselves a voice.

After all is said and done and the 'victims' take appropriate measures in the lifetime guarantee situation, they have the right to shrug, say "It was $14.95, I can write it off as a business expense," and then move on to free up their energies to do business with other individuals, if they choose. That, in itself, might be 'just rewards' in the circumstances.

Sending good wishes to you all, and a hope that your evening is a happy one!

Reply by Anon on 7/10/05 6:28am
Msg #50826

Re: NNA Advertising Fiasco

I would like to agree with you, but I can not. VR created a project, a business plan, and a promise to advertisers without first getting the necessary approval from the organization sponsoring the event. Sponsors of her advertising scheme had the right to expect her to deliver what she promised and hold to the assumption that she had the authority to do what she advertised. Had the sponsors known that she had not sought approval from NNA prior to the convention, would they have purchased her advertising space? Was there anything in the sales agreement that said she reserved the right to change the project without notice? Was there anything in the sales agreement that said she had the right to change sponsors' ads without prior written notice?

As for the "Lifetime Membership;" was there anything in VR's "Terms and Conditions" defining "Lifetime Membership?" Laws have been created to protect the consumer from misleading ploys such as the ones exhibited by VR. She seems to be a ver intelligent businessperson; I doubt she doesn't know what she is doing when she creates her projects or decides to change the conditions of a purchase made two years prior by her clients. This indicates, to me, that she uses shady business practices, and these seemingly shady practices must be stopped dead in their tracks. The person responsible must answer for her actions, thus I do not agree that the client should simply agree to lose the money they paid for a product purchased. Looking the other way is what gives businesspeople the right to continue violating the rights of others, and I can not agree to that under any conditions or circumstances, ever!!!

Reply by Iris_WA on 7/10/05 8:19am
Msg #50827

Re: NNA Advertising Fiasco

In no way do I disagree with you regarding the lifetime guarantee. My only point was intended to be that it happened ... and the injured parties should take advantage of whatever legal remedies they have available to them ... and then move on! The loss of their business relationships and the loss of good will in the notary community is a direct consequence to VR of her own actions.

As to the points you make about the advertising fiasco, I had no knowledge of some of the points you make, and they are good ones, if things happened as you say. I got the distinct impression that NNA HAD pre-approved the advertising, and then withdrew their permission after VR printed per the plan she sold to her advertisers. If I am wrong about that, I stand corrected.

Hope your Sunday is a sunny and happy one!

Iris

Reply by sue on 7/10/05 8:31am
Msg #50828

Re: NNA Advertising Fiasco

...impression that NNA HAD pre-approved the advertising, and then withdrew their permission after VR printed per the plan she sold to her advertisers...

While I know nothing of her specifics either, if this is the case she should have refunded monies to her advertisers and sued the NNA for any out of pocket costs - not passed her 'problem' on to her advertisers

Reply by Iris_WA on 7/10/05 9:39am
Msg #50834

The Specifics of the NNA Advertising Fiasco-per VR

Sue -

She addressed the subject of refunds in her report. You might want to read it for yourself ... it's posted at her website (not in a newsletter as I erroneously stated in my first post) http://www.50statenotary.com/conference/report.html, and the relevant paragraphs follow:


----Four days prior to Gloria Joyce and I leaving for the Notary Conference in Las Vegas, I received an email from Max Zaidi at the National Notary Association informing me that I was not permitted to distribute the Conference Booklet (containing ads from paid advertisers) at the 50 State Notary booth. Although I had received nine separate prior approvals from the NNA for distribution of the booklet (covering a period from November through May), Mr. Zaidi stated he had the final authority in the matter and he was just made aware the booklet existed.

----The reason I was given for this abrupt decision was that the 50 State Notary ads were considered to be a "conflict of interest" for the NNA (which I still do not understand). But the bad and ugly part of it all was that I was faced with a major problem. The conference booklet I had received approval for distributing at our paid vendor booth had $6,000 worth of paid advertising in it from other notaries and signing companies. 50 State Notary did not receive any profit. Instead, we took the entire $6,000 and invested it into typesetting and magazine-quality printing. My promise to the advertisers was that the booklet would be distributed at the notary conference. If I was not able to distribute it, I would be forced to refund everyone's money. Since I had already paid the typesetter and printer, there was no money left for refunds. It would have been very difficult for 50 State Notary to suffer a financial loss of $12,000 ($6.000 in refunds and $6,000 in overhead costs), so I began a 2-day negotiation with Max Zaidi and Deborah Thaw of the NNA.

----We finally came to a compromise. The NNA would print (at their expense) 1,000 conference books with my notary book ad removed from the back cover. This way, I still fulfilled my promise to the advertisers to distribute the booklet at the conference and there was no financial loss for the company. The only thing I lost was my own advertising -- but the paid advertisers were the people who actually paid for the entire booklet so I felt they were the ones that deserved precedence.

These don't sound to me like the words of someone engaged in 'shady dealings.' Rather, it seems to me she worked quite diligently to SATISFY her promise to her advertisers.

I maintain it is a separate and distinctly different occurrence than that of the lifetime guarantee situation.

Please have a delightful day!

Reply by Notary4U on 7/10/05 10:06am
Msg #50840

Re: The Specifics of the NNA Advertising Fiasco-per VR


and she could've came up with that story and just printed 1000 copies only and pocketed the rest. Just another angle that could be taken.

But then if they were to be reprinted...why, when she had FULL knowledge, would she not correct the mistakes that she made PRIOR to giving the NNA her info to print? She was able to take her info off, why not correct everyone elses (and I say that because there were several others who have said they had ads wrong). Just another question that she wouldn't answer. I contacted VR of the mistake within an hour of having had the emailed version sent to me and there was still 2 1/2 weeks prior to the convention so the corrections could have been done.


Victoria Ring IS shady in her business practices and the facts are there to prove that.

Reply by Anon on 7/10/05 3:07pm
Msg #50867

Re: The Specifics of the NNA Advertising Fiasco- per others

If VR had an agreement in writing, and I have no doubt that a project of this scope must be in writing, then her right to distribute could have been enforced. If her agreement was verbal, then as they say, "A verbal agreement isn't worth the paper it's printed on." I saw nothing in her notes that stated she had any of those nine approvals in writing, thus Mr. Zaidi was within his rights to refuse her any distribution at all.

Again, this makes me believe that she tried to pull the proverbial wool over someone's eyes, and the end result is she still did not deliver what she promised according to the many complaints made on these forums shortly after the convention.

She seems to conduct business practices for which others pay and tries to profit on them a multiple times and without the purchasers' knowledge. Case in Point: A couple of people learned that their names were on the Google Search. VR arranged her site to allow searchers to find people on her site through links on Google with just their names. Once at her site, the enticement is there to look through the entire site and to solicit business. People agreed to advertise on her site so that viewers searching can go to her site and find them; they did not expect to find themselves on general seaches to help VR build her business. I don't believe she is paying commissions or royalties, is she?

I believe what she does is shady, at best.

Reply by Notary4U on 7/10/05 9:39am
Msg #50833

Re: NNA Advertising Fiasco...Iris and anyone who cares


First I would like to say I have 1. personal experience in dealings with Victoria Ring (VR) and advertising in her NNA booklet and 2. attended the NNA conference in Vegas and her class.

Now, let's start at the beginning. I contacted VR and submitted 5 ads for her brochure under ONE company name and myself as an individual notary ...the total for that $110 (2-$40 ads & 3-$10 2-line ads). Later I submitted a different companies ad (just 1 ad) that was separate all together from my submissions. VR said she would let me just pay an additional $10 2-line ad instead of $30 since I had previously odered.

Here's were it gets corrupt. I didn't not EVER receive a proof, yet she claims to have faxed one. So when she sent out her internet version, I looked through it and discovered 2 ads only (1- $40 ad and 1-2lline ad). After reading it over again at least 4 more times, I contacted VR and asked why I didn't have the ads I paid for in the booklet? And before we get to her response let me tell you what I got FOR ads:

Should be
1- $40 ad & 2- $10 2-line ads for Company #1
1-$40 ad & 1-$10 ad for self
1-$10 2-line ad for separate Company #2

What I got was:
1 $40 ad & 1 $10 2-line ad for Company #2 ONLY

Yep, that's it, for Company #2 ONLY. AND to make it even better....she took MY typeset for the Co.#2's 2-line ad and made it a $40 ad and then proceeded to "make up her own typeset" for the 2-line ad. And insert MY information when I have no legal say to that Company. I'm not in charge of it.

How's that?

So then VR response is this:

If you did not want to submit the ad, why did you fax it to us? There is nothing that can be done at this point. The printing is complete and the publcation is in binding.



VR - "I do not understand how you can request a 100% refund when you received advertising space in the conference booklet. Refunds are only issued if the ad was totally omitted. Your ads ran in the booklet and therefore you are not eligible for a refund. You got 2 ads."

ME- WOW...I think I wanted a refund of the $110 because NONE of the advertising for myself and my company was IN the booklet and why should I pay for it?




VR- "Would you be happy if I ran your ads in 4 issues of The Notary News? We have a 27,000 subscriber base. Surely this would be more than enough compensation."

ME- "NO, I would like the money you took without performing on your end of the contract. I am not paying for another companies advertising. That was not MY fault that you submitted an extra ad for another company but only got paid for a $10 2-line ad and gave them $40 more of advertising. I want my money refunded immediately."


THEN it goes on with me contacting her and she still refusing to refund my entire amount. After my blood pressure reaching levels that would probably do damage and realizing that VR has no morals, no ethics and no intelligence when it comes to reasoning or looking at facts, I gave up and decided that should I hear of any other injustice I would band my support to helping that person or persons get their justification. So this is what happened"



VR- "Reply with the ADDRESS you want the $70.00 refund sent to and I will issue to check immediately".

VR- "Your check is being mailed tomorrow (Tuesday). I hope this finally clears up the matter and there are no hard feelings".


Hard feelings...she is the MOST vile individual I have ever encountered. I firmly believe she uses her "religious" proclaims to make her look better as an individual, thus making some trust her more. That is evil and malicious. I do not think she gives a rats about anyone but her bottom-line.


I was also at the convenstion in Vegas and it was the poorest excuse for a convention that I have ever been at. The information she gave was a horror and it's no wonder there are companies only paying $50...they're getting their monies worth when they get the "followers" of VR. It's just too bad.

So, there you have it...do with the information what you will. I took VR words right from my emails and cut and pasted them word for word as to her responses. Make your own judgement on what you want of the facts that are presented in front of you. When I have no experience with someone or something, I have to rely on the views of others and thus why so many companies list "customer remarks" and "customer ratings" for their companies. This is my customer experience and rating if - ZERO, ZERO, ZERO. You, the person reading this, is the only person who can determine your opinion of VR and do with it as you will.

Good luck and have a great day!

Reply by Notary4U on 7/10/05 9:52am
Msg #50836

Re: NNA Advertising Fiasco...FORGOT THIS PART


When I found out about VR NOT having permission to hand out the 2000 booklets she promised her advertisers she would hand out and she had to reprint and got 1000 booklets only to hand out, I did think about contacting her and asking for 50% more back since she did not fullfill her end of the contract even further, but thought that would be a waste of time since I had to go through hell to get what I did. I truely believe it was false advertising and fraudulant practices. I know people who have made nicer booklets for a cost of $1.00 each (when you get quantities like that) But I figured I don't have the time or energy to put into sueing her. I do feel though that all that were "wronged" would have more pull in banding together and submit it as a class action to pay for costs. And there are attorneys out there that would do it and take very little up front to get something off the settlement part. I just wonder how much money she has if she is trying to sell a company...and she is probably selling it because of the horrific treatment she has done through the company.

just my thoughts

Reply by Iris Grayson on 7/10/05 9:52am
Msg #50837

Re: NNA Advertising Fiasco...Iris and anyone who cares

Notary4U - it certainly sounds like an unpleasant round of communications and I am grateful I was not involved.

Did you ever receive the $70 check?

Reply by Notary4U on 7/10/05 9:56am
Msg #50839

Re: NNA Advertising Fiasco...Iris and anyone who cares


Yes and I specifically asked her to make the check out one way and she did not even do that. But yes, I did get the check...

Reply by Iris_WA on 7/10/05 11:29am
Msg #50847

Certainly sounds like ineptitude, at the very least

So glad you had at least the small satisfaction of getting your refund.

It's quite sunny in my part of the world -- what a change! Hope yours is equally so!

Reply by Anon on 7/10/05 3:16pm
Msg #50868

Re: NNA Advertising Fiasco...Iris and anyone who cares

I believe everyone negatively affected by VR's business practices should file lawsuits against her and file legal complaints with the State Attorney Generals' offices of their own states as well as VR's state ASAP; and that means NOW!

Reply by Teresa Welter on 7/9/05 11:31pm
Msg #50814

Hi.
I don't know exactly what you all are talking about, but I have kind of gotten the basic issue. I am not sure what state you are in but here in CA on channel 7 ABC news, there is a guy named Michael Finney (7 On Your Side) who exposes things just like this every night on the news. Alot of times once he makes the inital contact with the company, the issue is quickly resolved. I don't know if it will help, but all you have to do is email him. It is worth a try. And even if you are not in CA there are notaries (like me) who are and could be experiencing the same thing.

Just thought I would throw in my two cents! Have a great night.

Reply by Bonnie/Florida on 7/10/05 11:15pm
Msg #50904

I too was upset that she printed half the amount we were promised were to be handed out and I NEVER received anything to read before my ads went to final print. I emailed and left messages and no one ever got back to me except for some auto email from VR office stating she received my email. I continued to email asking when will I see my proof every day and again continued to receive the auto reponse email from her office. THEN after the booklet was printed, I emailed again since I said I was never given the chance to change it and I paid for my email address also to be placed in the smaller ad and it was not there (I took out two ads, large and small) and still never heard from her, yet continued to get the auto response. I finally received a copy of her original printing with her own advertisement on the back. I am curious what was really received at the NNA conference. But again, I took out the ad based on the 2000 booklets that were to be passed out and she was only allowed to hand out 1000. To this date I still have not heard from her regarding my ad which I would have liked to have seen via proof as promised and she never did send it either by fax or email. Of all the jobs I have gotten over the years and I ask where they got my name, not once has anyone ever said from 50 State Notary. So when my membership expires, I will not be renewing it.