Business ProfileforBroz, Inc.

On 10/25/22, I powered the *** 3 device I purchased for $188.99 on 10/18/22 and noticed that the product advertised as "quiet" was in fact loud. I wrote BROZ **** dba LELO **** (hereinafter BROZ) asking for to return the defective product for a refund. Under product details at www.lelo.com/ora-3, there is a warranty tab, which fails to (1) disclose limitations regarding the return and refund of opened, defective products, or (2) include a link to BROZs full warranty. And there is a manual tab that includes a link to the manual, but the manual also fails to provide the full terms of the warranty or a specific website where the consumer can find the full warranty terms. In addition, BROZs main menu fails to include a link to its warranty and using BROZs search engine to search for warranty fails to return any results. BROZ failed to satisfy the requirements set forth in 15 U.S. Code 2302(a) and 2302(b).After scouring the web for BROZs inconspicuous full warranty terms and conditions, the consumer determined that BROZs exchange/return policy is not the only terms and conditions that are unclear. Indeed, BROZs return and exchange policy states, opened pleasure objects may only be returned under warranty ONLY if they are malfunctioning. BROZs return/exchange policy fails to unequivocally state that malfunctioning products must be replaced rather than returned and refunded. The only time BROZ states we cannot accept returns for refund regarding a defective product is in its email of October 26, 2022, which was in response to my email requesting to return the defective product for a refund. Moreover, BROZs warranty states, we dont offer a refund clause. What does that mean? Rather than offering a refund clause, BROZ considers refunds on a case-by-case basis? BROZs warranty fails to unequivocally state that BROZ will not make a refund for a defective product which must be opened to discover the defect, within 14 days of receipt.