Trayden Ozx
map-marker San Bruno, California unautorized charge

Foster Care and Adoptive Community - unautorized charge
Certificate issued was in the State home licence name which is two names. The web site issued an unauthorised additional charged to my credit card account a month later then, emailed and said they had a right to do so. The email from said because two names are on the certificate that two persons had taken the course online. Contacted the bank which replied charges have been already processed. Reported to the bank ID stolen and to stop any additional transactions. Try to contact this place through email without success. Will never use this web site again.
View full review

Ira, why haven't you guys changed the web site to address this issue? It's been 3 years since this was posted.

I don't doubt that you guys provide a good service and you probably do get good feedback from people who don't encounter this problem, but placing such an important detail in a list with a link that is barely legible cannot be defined as "prominent". Also, I should add that I was also treated rudely when I called about the issue. The tone of that call and the tone of your comments here seem to echo the sentiment that you believe the people who fall into this error are *** and not worth your time. The fact that you have not addressed the issue seems to confirm that attitude.

If you really do want foster parents to be aware of this potential extra charge - and you are right that you have every right to charge it - why haven't you changed the web site to make it more visible?

You work so hard to help foster parents. Why are you so resistant to this improvement?


Our "per person" fee policy is clearly explained in several prominent places on our website. The vast majority of our customers have no difficulty understanding it, and virtually all of the email feedback we receive from the relatively few customers who violate it is apologetic.

Of course, there are always a few who are trying to get something without paying for it.

"Foster Parent" ordered several courses from us, choosing to pay for just one copy of each course. Then she and her husband BOTH generated certificates of completion by taking two of the course tests twice (once in each of their names), despite having only paid for one person. Accordingly, pursuant to our "per person" fee policy that she agreed to when she placed her order, we charged her for the second person for those two courses.

Initially she emailed us claiming this was an "accident," but stating "if you feel the need to charge us anyway, so be it." I wrote her back and politely reiterated our clearly posted fee policy, and she then proceeded to send us 8 separate emails, calling us thieves, "ignorant," and saying she was emailing us so often in order to waste our time.

Incidentally, all of our major competitors also charge on a "per person" basis, because it is the most fair way to operate. If we didn't charge on a "per person" basis, we would have to double our prices, which would be unfair to single foster parents, and those who for whatever reason only need one spouse to take the training (such as because the other spouse attended live training).


BEWARE - this company just did the same thing to me as they did to the previous poster, FPLuke. They charged me an extra $14.90 because they felt they had "the right to do so".

My case worker has been notified and when she replied with her concern, she told me they would no longer refer future clients to this organization because this is not the first time they've heard of this problem with FCAC.


The same thing happened to us. Not only did we miss the "per person" language, our FC office told us to do it this way and incur only a single charge.

Someone give me an example of any other business that charges you a second time without telling you that you are about to incur a second charge. If I had known there would be a second charge, I would have opted for another training opportunity.

If that puts me in the minority, Ira, then I wear that as a badge of wisdom. Not only do I seriously doubt your claim that most people apologize to you, but I am SHOCKED to find out all of the testimonials on your web site are positive.

(Seriously?) Unlike the original poster, I did successfully contact them and was treated rather rudely. Not only is this my last purchase on, I plan to speak to the FC office in my state about using other resources and dropping this one for future training.

reply icon Replying to comment of Guest-504950

Again, it is hard to imagine how you "missed" the "per person" language, considering that it is displayed prominently at the top of the page from which you placed your order. There are only 6, very short, numbered instructions, and our "per person" policy is number 2. Anyone can easily verify this for him/herself, by checking out our website.

Regarding your foster care office telling you to "do it this way and incur only a single charge," we have absolutely no connection at all to your FC office. We have no control over what they may have told you, nor do they have any authority to speak on our behalf. It is as if your agency told you to go to a movie theater with your spouse, pay for one ticket, and sneak your spouse in through the emergency door. Just because they may have told you to do it, doesn't make it right -- especially given our clearly posted instructions to the contrary.

You say that if you had known there would be a charge for the second person, you would have gone elsewhere. Both of our major competitors also charge on a "per person" basis. That is simply the standard way of providing online training to foster parents.

As for the responses we receive from underpaying customers we charge per our clearly posted fee policy, you can "doubt" whatever you like, but I assure you it is the complete truth. We get a minute number of people such as yourself and the original poster who complain about being charged for the second person after we email them to explain the charge. The number of complaints is easily exceeded by apologies by a factor of about 10 to 1. We even get people who call us for the sole purpose of saying that they just wanted to make sure that we didn't think they were trying to cheat us, because they love our training and don't want to be banned from continuing to use it!

Of course all the testimonials on our website are positive, but every single one is legitimate and sent to us unsolicited by satisfied customers. We don't have room to post but a fraction of the positive emails we receive, but even the ones we do post substantially outweigh the number of negative comments we have ever received in all of our nine years in business.

As for your allegedly being "treated rather rudely," when you contacted us, I find that very hard to believe. There are only two people who take phone calls -- myself and the owner -- and neither of us treat customers rudely. Indeed, many of the emails we receive (and some of the posted testimonials) specifically praise our excellent customer service, on which we pride ourselves. Perhaps what you perceived as "rudeness" was simply our refusal to allow you to take training for two while only paying for one?


I am an employee of, and wish to present our side of this story.

Our terms and conditions are very clearly posted right on our ordering page (not buried in fine print). It plainly states "Course fees are per person (not per family or group). You may choose quantity in Checkout." In addition, there is a link right there to "Fee Terms and Conditions." That presents even more detail, specifically including that only one person may appear on a certificate for one payment, and that anyone who underpays will be charged for additional people. Customers agree to this when they place their order.

We have found that it is more fair to charge by the person, rather than simply charging more and allowing a couple to pay as one. That way, anyone who only needs training for him or her self only has to pay for one person, and not subsidize couples. Nor are we unique in this. Both of our major competitors also charge on a "per person" basis. And we work very hard to keep our prices as low as possible. We charge half of what our main competitor charges (who also uses "per person" pricing).

We have been in business for eight years (and offered free training for several years before that), are extremely honest, and get rave reviews from the vast majority of our customers (many testimonials are listed on our website). Most customers pay correctly, ordering two copies if two people will be listed on certificates. Among those who do not, the large majority who email us after we charge them for the unpaid second person apologize to us for any inconvenience, and tell us how great our courses are. Of course, a very few (like the original poster here) have a different opinion.

Lastly, the original poster's claim that they tried to contact us through email without success is unlikely at best. We have "contact us" links all over the website, and also our phone number. In addition, simply replying to any email from us, including the automated receipts, will also get through to us. We respond to every email from a customer without exception.


I would be pissed off to Thanks for reporting this. I was also thinking of going online for training required by DHS each year.

It's like buyer beware.

What bank do you use that left you unprotected from online money hungary sites. :(

View more comments (6)

Why Trust Reviews on PissedConsumer?

  • Professional auto and live moderation
  • 100% user-generated content
  • Equal opportunity and protection
  • Zero tolerance for fake reviews
  • Verified content
  • PissedConsumer is on the Inc. 5000 list

For more information read Blog article