When a money-back promise conflicts with the refund policy

Read the guarantee in the place the buyer encounters it

Capture the exact wording, page URL and observation date for each visible guarantee. Include badges, image text, banners, product pages and relevant cart or checkout wording. Note what a visitor sees beside the promise before opening any policy link. If a mobile view changes or hides the qualification, record that difference rather than treating the desktop view as the whole offer.

Identify what the language promises: which purchases it covers, what the buyer must do and what the business says it will return. Record only conditions actually stated. Silence about a condition is not evidence that the business offers that condition, and a staff member’s explanation does not establish that the buyer saw it before ordering.

Put the conflicting clause beside the promise

Find the policy clause addressing the same products and order circumstances. Compare any exclusions, request deadline, return condition and description of what is refunded with the guarantee’s visible scope. Distinguish a detail that explains how to request the promised remedy from a condition that narrows who receives it. Record the exact contradiction rather than labeling the whole policy unclear.

If the promotion reads as unconditional while the policy excludes the purchase being promoted, adding a policy link leaves the two statements in place. Conversely, do not assume a short guarantee contains every detail just because it is brief. Follow the actual path and record which qualifications accompany it and which require a separate search. This comparison identifies the conflicting representations; it does not decide which term legally governs an order.

Use the procedure to identify the decision the owner must make

Compare the statements with the business’s approved refund procedure. Establish which requests staff consider, who authorizes a remedy and what the procedure says will be returned. Keep operational instructions separate from evidence of what happened on any existing request. A procedure may reveal that the promotion promises more than staff can provide, or that an old policy excludes a remedy the business now intends to offer.

The policy owner needs to choose and approve a consistent position, with qualified advice where obligations are uncertain. A content editor should not invent a new exclusion, refund window or remedy to make the text agree. If the owner cannot substantiate the current guarantee, flag that promise for correction or withdrawal through the business’s approval process rather than polishing the unsupported wording.

Keep existing orders separate from future wording changes. Preserve the version and dates relevant to a real complaint; do not assume editing today’s page determines what an earlier buyer was promised. Any decision about an existing buyer’s entitlement needs the actual order circumstances and applicable advice, not a retroactive rewrite of the record.

Carry the approved position through every live statement

The FTC’s truth-in-advertising guidance calls for advertising to be truthful, nonmisleading and substantiated across media, including websites. It supports reviewing the guarantee as an advertising claim. It does not certify a money-back phrase, resolve a contract dispute or prescribe a refund window for this business.

Once the owner approves the position, update the guarantee and its qualifications together with the relevant policy and procedural wording. Check the named published surfaces, including image text and mobile presentation, against that approved version. Record any remaining location still showing the broader promise. Completion means the conflict has been removed from the surfaces examined and the procedure supports the stated offer; it is not a certification of the entire store.

Prism’s website review considers claims, policies, catalog and business disclosures together within an agreed scope. Bring the public guarantee and policy URLs, research-only product context and the exact contradiction to a consultation. Scope, fees and terms are discussed before work. Findings are informational, not legal opinions or certification. Keep customer records and payment details out of the public form; a request does not purchase a review or submit a processing application.

Guarantee contradiction record

Use one record for each guarantee and policy clause that appear to govern the same purchase. Fill the blank column with exact public wording, document references and the owner’s decision. Separate an observed conflict from an unresolved legal question, and preserve earlier versions when an existing order is involved.

Worksheet entries are not submitted by Prism’s worksheet and are not saved by the site. Use record types, availability, anonymized observations, or match/mismatch results. Do not enter government identifiers, customer names or addresses, customer messages, receipt-access links, card or bank details, passwords, or keys. Send sensitive documents only through the provider’s verified secure channel.

These are temporary notes. Leaving or reloading this page may clear them. Worksheet entries are not sent automatically. If you copy notes into the consultation message and submit the form, Prism receives them as part of your request.