State of Washington Sues SEO Firm

Spiders dig optimized code. Search Engine Optimization discussion, including W3C code standards, and new tools and tricks for lightweight coding.

State of Washington Sues SEO Firm

Postby Steven on Fri Nov 14, 2008 7:09 pm

http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/35218

These are the kinds of charges that can send a company's customers fleeing ... and certainly should if they're proven to be true.

The State of Washington has filed suit (.pdf) against a Redmond-based search engine optimization and Web services outfit that has done business under the names Visible.net, Captures.com and WebMarketingSource.com. In essence, the state attorney general contends that these entities have ripped off their mostly mom-and-pop clientele through a pattern of unfulfilled performance promises and financial shenanigans. While the clients may be on the smaller end of the spectrum, they have been forking over real money, with initial startup charges ranging from $3,750 to $9,750, plus a monthly fee of $40 to $100.

The attorney general has charged the company and its owner, Gilbert Walker, with:

* Misrepresenting the ability to significantly increase traffic to customer Web sites by achieving top search-engine rankings and failing to deliver other promised services.

* Falsely claiming an affiliation with other marketers including Specialty Merchandise Company, a so-called drop-ship wholesaler.

* Claiming that its customer service representatives can be reached at any time when, in fact, customers are often unable to reach representatives and sometimes do not receive return calls.

* Failing to provide refunds or honor cancellation requests.

* Continuing to bill the credit cards of some consumers who have attempted to cancel and submitting alleged debts to collection agencies.

* And, failing to register with the Department of Licensing as a commercial telephone solicitor and failing to provide written confirmation of a consumer's rights under the Commercial Telephone Solicitation Act.

The attorney general says 90 complaints have been lodged against the company in the past four years. And it doesn't take a lot of Googling to see that Visible and its various iterations have attracted detractors.

In reply to my request for comment on the state's allegations, Matt Franklin, the company's marketing director, writes: "At this time we are not responding to inquiries about the (attorney general's) press release. Our official response will most likely be posted to our blog. Appreciate the inquiry, sorry I can't be of much help as of yet."

Visible.net customers are likely to be anxious to read that official response. Would-be customers even more so.
"You've got to pay the troll toll..."
User avatar
Steven
Site Admin
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 2:02 pm

Re: State of Washington Sues SEO Firm

Postby maruschka on Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:47 pm

How can the state sue the SEO firm? Are they doing it on behalf of the customers?

I'm not saying the company shouldn't be sued, I'm just surprised that it's the state that is suing them. I could see a class action lawsuit, or individual lawsuits by customers who were ripped off, but what is the state's interest in this?

I don't know anything about this SEO company, and they may deserve all of the criticism they're getting, but I've had some tense conversations with unhappy customers who refused to have any patience at all with organic SEO efforts, claiming that what we did "just isn't working" and they're not getting any new customers. This is after the entire process has been explained and the customer signed an agreement that spelled it all out in detail. With some businesses, they either didn't implement the things we recommended or sometimes they had someone else make changes to their site that invalidated what we did. And sometimes, especially with new sites, they just didn't want to wait for results. One of our customers hired a company to build links for them since that wasn't a service we offered, and that company added a few pages to the site with tons of spammy outbound links to a link ring with thousands of spammy inbound links. Another customer bought a bunch of additional domain names and mirrored their website after we did the SEO. I have lots of examples of how customers sabotaged their own results in spite of our best efforts.

Every technique I use or recommend for customers is white hat, and I consider myself to be a very patient, ethical person who doesn't overpromise. I'd hate to have the state come after me because of some irrational, angry customers.
can you hear me now?
User avatar
maruschka
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:42 am
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Re: State of Washington Sues SEO Firm

Postby Steven on Fri Nov 14, 2008 9:58 pm

Well, apparently there are 90 angry, irrational customers that files separate complaints.

To your point, maybe they weren't doing their job very well. But, it will be interesting to hear what the clients thought they were getting vs what was sold to them. I've heard sales people try to sell SEO before... and it usually involves a great deal of misunderstanding and over-promising.
"You've got to pay the troll toll..."
User avatar
Steven
Site Admin
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 2:02 pm

Re: State of Washington Sues SEO Firm

Postby maruschka on Fri Nov 14, 2008 10:24 pm

Don't get me started on what sales reps will say! This company probably deserves the lawsuit, from what I've read, but it will be interesting.

This is entertaining... from Ripoff Report. Haha!

p.s. Hey Ripoff Report, your website needs some SEO!
can you hear me now?
User avatar
maruschka
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:42 am
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Re: State of Washington Sues SEO Firm

Postby Steven on Sun Nov 30, 2008 2:26 pm

Image

...sorry, not exceptionally appropriate, but I've been dying to use it somewhere. :1:
"You've got to pay the troll toll..."
User avatar
Steven
Site Admin
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 2:02 pm

Re: State of Washington Sues SEO Firm

Postby barty on Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:40 pm

maruschka wrote:Every technique I use or recommend for customers is white hat, and I consider myself to be a very patient, ethical person who doesn't overpromise. I'd hate to have the state come after me because of some irrational, angry customers.


Maruschka, this is something that troubles me, because I also try to practice good SEO techniques, but clients always expect miracles. They are always disappointed that they don't get bigger and faster results even though I never purposely increase their expectations.

Is there a guide like a template that can show me how to write a contract to set expectations by the client and to also protect myself?
User avatar
barty
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 7:44 pm

Re: State of Washington Sues SEO Firm

Postby maruschka on Wed Jan 07, 2009 3:24 am

HI Barty!

Sorry I didn't see your post till today...

Always have your clients sign an agreement before you start work. Here are a couple of samples:

http://www.seo-scoop.com/2005/08/22/sam ... -contract/" rel="nofollow

http://www.seomoz.org/ugc/seo-contract- ... written-on" rel="nofollow
can you hear me now?
User avatar
maruschka
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:42 am
Location: Fort Worth, Texas


Return to SEO

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron