Sole society Subsidiary of Nordstroms, affiliated with HauteLook Contest sponsored, but when completed, company refused to adhere to rules, defrauded participants. Internet

On 09/24/2012, Sole Society (referred to hereafter in this letter as the company)sent out an email to members, enticing them to connect with other members via the address book on the companys website, by offering one free credit ( value 49.95) per each 20 new connections made by each member, with the grand prize being a years worth of free shoes ( 12 months, one pair
per month) to the member who made the most connections.  New connections were defined as members that were not currently showing connected or linked in each members personal address book.  This was to continue until 11:59 p.m. on 09/30/2012 and credits earned would then be posted to each members account on 10/01/2012.  This is the gist if the original email.  There was naturally excitement, but also confusion, about some of the contest rules and regulations, which were addressed on the companys fan page on Facebook.  The employees that responded to queries on that site confirmed that there was no loophole, no limit to how many connections could be made by each member, and thereby, no limit to the amount of credits that could be earned.  The employees stated that the purpose of the contest was to get the word out and have
members connect with each other.   On 10/01/2012, a statement was released that the response had been overwhelming and the company would need 7-10 days to sort thru and remove duplicate accounts, connections and misrepresentation, and would award the credits once that had been completed.  On the 10th day, 10/12/2012, just at close of business for the company, an email was sent to state that there was too much misrepresentation  to the rules and spirit of the contest and the company would not be adhering to the previous stipulations outlined in the original email.  Several members, but not all, were awarded a single credit and the decision was termed final.

Above are the basics of the contest and results.  However, the backlash, you will find, is not so easily summed up. I will attempt to do so in as concise a manner as I am able. To begin with, please be aware that the skeptics among us retained copies of the emails, including all times, dates and pertinent info intact.  We also took screen shots of the fan pages wherein the confirmation of the rules were discussed and displayed, to include the FAQs that were posted by the company, on their own personal fan page on Facebook. Many still have screen shots of their address books, with all email connection listed, in case of further shenanigans by the company in an attempt to keep its collective bottom out of legal or ethical hot water. It is interesting to note that a similar contest, in conjunction with Refinery29, was also posted to another social media site,   Pinterest.which has since disappeared.  I am not a member, I was informed of this thru those who are, but I digress.

Since the release of the secondary email, informing members of the outcome of the contest, there has been an outcry raised to determine the reasoning behind this stance reversal and refusal by the company to adhere to the terms outlined by them for this contest.  To wit, the refusal to award the appropriate amount of credits to all members who successfully completed the tasks given within the set time frame, using the rules we were given and which we confirmed repeatedly. The customer service line either gave a cookie cutter answer that the decision was final, or the representatives, in some cases, hung up once they knew what the call was regarding. The live chat line also gave the pat answer, the scripted answer, or simply disconnected.  When Nordstroms was contacted about it, via their social media sites, at first concern was expressed, but very shortly thereafter, the same answer was handed down and no further assistance was offered, and communication about this issue was halted.  On the companys social media sites (Facebook, Pinterest and Twitter) any person raising a complaint or query to this effect was summarily blocked or banned, their comment or post deleted.  This strikes me as the actions of a company that knows it made a huge mistake and is trying very hastily to cover its corporate butt.