Ultimate Guitar USA, LLC

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/08/27) */ The consumer's complaint is factual incorrect On 12/24/the consumer purchased lifetime access to Ultimate Guitar's Tab Pro service which was only a desktop serviceIn June 2015, Ultimate Guitar launched crossplatform (iOS/Android) Tab Pro appsUltimate Guitar offered all lifetime subscribers, including the consumer, the opportunity to purchase mobile upgrades to get access to the mobile apps for $(not $as he stated) Contrary to the consumer's assertion, Ultimate Guitar does not charge users twice for same functionalityThe desktop version of the Tab Pro app differs from the mobile apps and has more features than mobile Tab Pro apps due to iOS/Android platform technical restrictionsThe information - tablatures - visual appearance is the same, but "sound fonts" sets are completely different on different platforms Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/09/01) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The business's response does not address the original concernMy complaint was that Ultimate Guitar is charging users twice to access the same informationThat has not been addressedIndeed, from the business response: "Contrary to the consumer's assertion, Ultimate Guitar does not charge users twice for same functionalityThe desktop version of the Tab Pro app differs from the mobile apps and has more features than mobile Tab Pro apps due to iOS/Android platform technical restrictionsThe information - tablatures - visual appearance is the same, but 'sound fonts' sets are completely different on different platforms." I did not claim that users were charged twice for the same functionalityI asserted, and still assert, that users are charged twice for the same INFORMATIONUsers, myself included, are paying for the access to detailed information (tablatures and demonstrations) that UG offers as the Tab Pro serviceI did not pay for the means of access; I paid for the ability to access the informationHOW I access that information should not matter The technical jargon in the response quote above is irrelevant to the complaint, and is merely trying to draw attention away from the obviousThe technological portion of this situation does not matterIt is noteworthy here that the service has ONE NAMEIf the technology piece matters that much to UG, they should change the name of the service for eachThen, at least, it could be feasible to have separate chargesClearly, though, they are trying to offset the cost of creating the mobile solution by charging their existing users an additional cost to access the same information via mobileBeyond that, BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION IN THE RESPONSE, the information accessed in the mobile app has fewer features than when accessed on desktopIt makes no sense at all for an existing user to pay more for a less functional means to access the same information This is the big issue that I have: I have ONE ACCOUNT with UG, and I have paid for a LIFETIME subscription to TAB PROThe service, TAB PRO, has been added to and now offers mobile functionalityIt is unethical to now restrict my access to the service that I have paid for, simply because I am trying to view it on my mobile deviceONE ACCOUNT, LIFETIME subscriptionThat seems very clearWhy should I have to pay more to access the service another way?

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/10/21) */ The consumer contacted Ultimate Guitar on October 6, A refund was issued on October 7, Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (2000, 7, 2015/10/22) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) I am happy with the refund but this seems like a really tricky business policy and I'm sure many people have been duped by this websiteI think a "confirm" button should be added and an explanation of the charges that will be incurred by clicking on an "upgrade" button

Final Consumer Response /* (2000, 6, 2015/08/31) */
This issue has been resolved to my satisfactionThank you for taking the time to review my complaint in spite of the minimal dollar amountThis was more of a breach of trust than a monetary issue to me
Thank you again,
*** ***

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/10/26) */
There is no record of the consumer cancelling the trial period accountAccordingly, the consumer was charged and a "soft fail" error appeared on the consumer's PayPal accountThe company has cancelled attempts to charge the consumer's PayPal
account
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2015/10/28) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
I attempted to cancel twice using their software, carefully following all instructions--as many others appear to also have doneI was notified with a "hard fail" error not once, but three times after instructing PayPal to refuse paymentI am, however, satisfied that the account has been cancelled

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/12/02) */
Ultimate Guitar has a link to the customer support portal on every web page in footerThis provides a conspicuous and effective method of contacting the customer support team
Ultimate Guitar has no record of any registered cancellation
requests from consumer in their support system
3.Using the consumer's email address from the complaint, the customer support team found her account and cancelled her month subscriptionTherefore, the consumer won't be charged anymore
4.Although the consumer cancelled more than days after signing up for the service, Ultimate Guitar has issued a refund for the last transaction

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2016/01/26) */
The consumer selected "Refund and switch to month subscription plan" instead of "Your current subscription plan", so he got a refund for Lifetime and was switched to month subscription planUltimate Guitar has refunded $to the
consumer
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 9, 2016/01/27) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
Received refund for both charges from the company

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/24) */
It appears that the consumer has multiple accounts with Ultimate GuitarUltimate Guitar is unable find any subscriptions associated with the email account referenced in the complaintThere are no requests from the consumer's email address in
Ultimate Guitar's customer support systemConsumer indicates that he followed the instructions from the FAQ with no success, so it is possible that he was logged in under different Ultimate Guitar account, and that is why he did not receive a processed refundIf the consumer can promptly provide the email address that he used to sign up for the subscription, Ultimate Guitar will process the refund

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/06/09) */
The "Cancel" button was always available for Complainant's daughter, but as Complainant states that her daughter followed the instructions http://support.ultimate-guitar.com/knowledgebase/articles/XXXXXX-how-do-i-cancel...⇄ /> and did not see the "Cancel" button, it is believed that she was logged in under an alternate Ultimate Guitar account
In any event, Ultimate Guitar has cancelled her Tab Pro subscription, and Complainant will no longer be charged

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/27) */
The consumer's complaint is factual incorrect.
On 12/24/14 the consumer purchased lifetime access to Ultimate Guitar's Tab Pro service which was only a desktop service. In June 2015, Ultimate Guitar launched crossplatform (iOS/Android) Tab...

Pro apps. Ultimate Guitar offered all lifetime subscribers, including the consumer, the opportunity to purchase mobile upgrades to get access to the mobile apps for $19.99 (not $39.99 as he stated).
Contrary to the consumer's assertion, Ultimate Guitar does not charge users twice for same functionality. The desktop version of the Tab Pro app differs from the mobile apps and has more features than mobile Tab Pro apps due to iOS/Android platform technical restrictions. The information - tablatures - visual appearance is the same, but "sound fonts" sets are completely different on different platforms.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/09/01) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The business's response does not address the original concern. My complaint was that Ultimate Guitar is charging users twice to access the same information. That has not been addressed. Indeed, from the business response:
"Contrary to the consumer's assertion, Ultimate Guitar does not charge users twice for same functionality. The desktop version of the Tab Pro app differs from the mobile apps and has more features than mobile Tab Pro apps due to iOS/Android platform technical restrictions. The information - tablatures - visual appearance is the same, but 'sound fonts' sets are completely different on different platforms."
I did not claim that users were charged twice for the same functionality. I asserted, and still assert, that users are charged twice for the same INFORMATION. Users, myself included, are paying for the access to detailed information (tablatures and demonstrations) that UG offers as the Tab Pro service. I did not pay for the means of access; I paid for the ability to access the information. HOW I access that information should not matter.
The technical jargon in the response quote above is irrelevant to the complaint, and is merely trying to draw attention away from the obvious. The technological portion of this situation does not matter. It is noteworthy here that the service has ONE NAME. If the technology piece matters that much to UG, they should change the name of the service for each. Then, at least, it could be feasible to have separate charges. Clearly, though, they are trying to offset the cost of creating the mobile solution by charging their existing users an additional cost to access the same information via mobile. Beyond that, BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION IN THE RESPONSE, the information accessed in the mobile app has fewer features than when accessed on desktop. It makes no sense at all for an existing user to pay more for a less functional means to access the same information.
This is the big issue that I have: I have ONE ACCOUNT with UG, and I have paid for a LIFETIME subscription to TAB PRO. The service, TAB PRO, has been added to and now offers mobile functionality. It is unethical to now restrict my access to the service that I have paid for, simply because I am trying to view it on my mobile device. ONE ACCOUNT, LIFETIME subscription. That seems very clear. Why should I have to pay more to access the service another way?

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/10/21) */
The consumer contacted Ultimate Guitar on October 6, 2015. A refund was issued on October 7, 2015.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2015/10/22) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
I am happy...

with the refund but this seems like a really tricky business policy and I'm sure many people have been duped by this website. I think a "confirm" button should be added and an explanation of the charges that will be incurred by clicking on an "upgrade" button.