Complaints

• Initial Complaint

  12/21/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Sales and Advertising Issues

  Status:

  Unanswered

  More info

  This is a continuation of my complaint from 8/7/2024. That was sort of resolved by **** agreeing to a subscription rate $128.99 for 26 weeks. I told them (as I always do) that I was opting out of their "premium editions" for which they otherwise charge extra. And, in accordance with that opt out, we were never delivered any "premium edition" papers since our renewal. In addition, we were never advised that the agreed-upon rate would be subject to any "supply change surcharge."Of course none of this is ever put in writing by SCNG. That is apparently not part of their routine business practices.And so on 12/18/2024, more than 1 month before the 26-week period expired, our credit card got charged $128.99. I inquired with SCNG by email at **************** why the card was charged, apparently prematurely. Their emailed response from customer****************, to summarize, was: [1] They applied a "Supply Chain Surcharge" to the rate, without specifying what that fee was. [2] They erroneously claimed we did not opt out of the "Premium Editions," and although specifying that each edition costs $5.95, they gave no indication how many were supposedly delivered since the subscription was last renewed. (How would we know since we never received any?) [3] They indicated that a refund of $60.20 was issued, noting erroneously that "[t]his transaction also contributed to the shortening of your subscription period. Again, we had agreed to a LOWER rate, not a SHORTENED subscription period. No wonder this company gets a C- rating from BBB, which is probably generous to them. Email exchange (redacted) is attached.

• Initial Complaint

  08/07/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Billing Issues

  Status:

  Unanswered

  More info

  I've am a subscriber of the Press-Telegram. A June 2024 postcard from the paper indicating a rate increase for a renewed 26-week subscription. It was from $128.99 to $189.19. (Note: the postcard only gave a renewal rate of $1.45 per week plus unspecified delivery fees and taxes, so the total renewal rate was unclear). I confirmed by phone call on July 3 that the $189.19 was the renewal rate, which represents about a 50% increase from the prior rate. I stated we would thus not renew our subscription because that was too high. After a couple of proposals from their end, we agreed that our renewal rate would remain the same - $128.99. But on July 18, our credit card was charged $189.19, not $128.99. So I called on July 26 to complain. The initial response from the ***** was something like "okay, we can extend the subscription to cover for the additional amount." I rejected that as a solution. I said we wanted the difference, $60.20, credited to our account instead. After a pause (presumably the ***** had to check in with a manager or supervisor) the $60.20 was agreed to, as the correct renewal rate was $128.99. But as of August 7, no credit was received. So I called again. The first ***** I spoke with indicated that the $60.20 "refund" was subject to finance department approval, and it was not their policy to approve those. I indicated that there was no indication in the July 26 call that the credit of $60.20 was somehow subject to later approval. That ***** eventually "ghosted" me and had to call again. The second ***** indicated the $60.20 credit was still pending and could take up to 3 weeks after 7/26. Meanwhile, the phone system indicated a subscription expiration date of 4/2/2025 so I wonder if the paper (erroneously) decided to extend the subscription rather than credit us. I want IN WRITING a response from the paper on this. No docs attached as paper insists on phone contacts only, although attachment has subscriber info.

• Initial Complaint

  08/02/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  They took an unauthorized amount $126.70 from my bank account in error on 1/10/2024. My account was paid current at the time. When I saw the unauthorized debit, I notified them by phone immediately of the overcharge on 1/12/2024 (spoke to supervisor ******) and they said they would correct within 48 hours. Nothing. Called again on 1/26/2024 and spoke to **** who said someone was working on it and they would call me within 48 hours. Again nothing. Called on 2/9/2024 and spoke to ***** who said it was being escalated and they would get back to me within 48 hours. Still no response. Forgot about it until I called a fourth time on 5/31/2024 and spoke to ***** who told me I should email customer service to get this resolved. I began emailing on 5/31 and their responses never addressed my complaint about them taking the ADDITIONAL $126.70. In the meantime, they have been debiting my account for the normal monthly charge for their paper. I will forward you a copy of all the emails over the last 2 months where they say they will correct their error but they still have not sent me a refund for taking the unauthorized amount. The last email said they can credit my account. I WILL NOT ACCEPT A CREDIT TO MY ACCOUNT. I DEMAND A REFUND. I request your assistance.

  Customer response

  08/27/2024

  
  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.  I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.
  
  Regards,
  
  *********************
  
   
  

• Initial Complaint

  02/21/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Paid for an ad for $344.04 for the Thanksgiving day issue of a local paper Coastal Current South. Asked after the item was paid for a copy of the ad by phone. No response. Asked for a copy of the ad by email after it was supposed to be run. No response. Let my credit card company know about the dispute and filed a claim through my credit card company for a refund. Southern California News Group did not dispute my claim. I received a refund.Southern California News Group started sending me bills for the ad. I spoke with the collection department and let them know I needed a copy of the ad so I could pay for what I received. The collection department sent an email to the sales team to request a copy of the ad. Again, no response. I called a week later and left a message. Again no return phone call from Southern California News Group.I would like my account credited and to stop receiving bills for an ad that Southern California has not shown me was actually placed.

  Business response

  02/29/2024

  Hello,

  Thank you for sharing this complaint.  We apologize for the inconvenience and this issue has been resolved with *****************.  An adjustment was issued in the amount of $344.04 on February 26, 2024 and ***************** and his team have been advised of this adjustment.  I believe this should close this issue and again we apologize to ***************** and his team for any inconvenience.

  Sincerely,

  *****************

• Initial Complaint

  04/01/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Delivery Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  On September 28, 2022 I called the Press Telegram to renew my newspaper subscription for another year. The start date was October 13, 2022 and the end date is October 13, 2023. The price, paid with my credit card, was $287.14. The subscription included home delivery seven days a week. I have been receiving the paper every day with no complaint.Two days ago, on March 30, 2023, I received a postcard in the mail from the Southern California News Group stating the following: Valued SubscriberSupply chain prices continue to be at an all-time high and have reached a level where we can no longer absorb the costs. Therefore, we will be implementing a temporary surcharge related to these price increases. The surcharge will remain separate from our usual charges and will be debited from your subscription fees. Based on your delivery schedule, the surcharge will be up to $0.15 per delivery day. Your subscription term will be shortened as a result.I do not believe this is a fair business decision. I paid for a one-year subscription at an agreed upon price. Now, the Southern California News Group / Press Telegram is changing the terms of the agreement.I do not want a surcharge debited from my subscription fees and I do not want my subscription term shortened.

  Business response

  04/03/2023

  We have reached out to the customer and worked out a resolve.
  
  The complaint came as a result of the Service Surcharge we notified customers of. 
  Customer does not want to lose any days because of this charge. 
  So, we have added a non-cash adjustment equal to the charges we would have placed between April 15th (the first week of the 15 cent a day charge).
  
  Customers subscription expiration date will not change as this account is already pre-paid.
  
  Because this charge is "temporary"we do not know, at this time, if her future subscription renewal will be affected. We apologize for the confusion caused.

  Customer response

  04/05/2023

  I am rejecting this response because a portion of the Southern California News Group response is untrue: "We have reached out to the customer and worked out a resolution."  I have not been contacted by anyone from this company concerning this issue.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  *************************************

   

   

   

   

   

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩