Whistleblower: Deceived by dating service?

Darcy Musack just wanted to meet a man with whom she could connect. So when an Internet ad caught her eye -- "Meet singles in your area over 50" -- she was inspired to find out more about Great Expectations' dating service in Minnesota.

The 53-year-old Burnsville woman wound up paying $2,705 for a three-year membership with the company, which promises to screen potential partners and provide other services to help members find the right person.

Eleven days later, when she got her first look at the firm's available dating pool, Musack decided she had made a mistake.

"Once I got in there, I was quick to learn that 70 percent of the members are inactive," said Musack, a claims manager with Regis Corp. "They're not available for dating. This is information that is not specifically disclosed to people like me, at least not by this particular member rep."

When Musack tried to cancel her membership and get a full or partial refund, she was repeatedly refused.

Wendy Christine, director of the national dating service's franchise in Edina, said Musack is "being dishonest."

Christine said no more than 50 percent of the firm's 1,800-plus members are inactive at any time, and she said a salesperson made that clear to Musack before she signed up for the service. She said Musack spent time online and got the phone numbers of five different men between July 13 and 31. She was also invited to social events for free.

Musack's gripes about Great Expectations echo complaints from state officials in Wisconsin and Washington, which sued the company in 2009 and 2010 over deceptive marketing practices.

In Washington, the state attorney general took action after reviewing nearly 60 complaints about the service. Among the company's alleged misrepresentations: significantly overstating the number of eligible members and failing to conduct promised criminal background checks on all members.

In 2010, Great Expectations agreed to a settlement that provided partial refunds to some customers and restricted the way the company markets its services in Washington.

The Wisconsin case is on hold pending the resolution of a dispute between Great Expectations and its insurer.

Officials with the company's corporate office in Austin, Texas, referred calls to the Minnesota franchise. Christine said it's not fair to compare the local operation to other franchises because each office is owned and managed by different people.

In Minnesota, at least 10 customers have sued Great Expectations in small claims court, but court records do not show the outcome of those cases. The franchise has also drawn 11 complaints to the Better Business Bureau, which gives the company an A+ rating. Seven customers remained unsatisfied despite the company's attempts to resolve their complaints, according to the BBB.

"Eleven complaints out of 1,800 members - you think that's bad?" Christine said.

Musack said she had high expectations when she joined Great Expectations. She thought the relatively high price of the service would result in more serious and higher-caliber dating prospects than those provided by other online dating sites.

Musack acknowledged that she picked the profiles of several men, but she said she did not make contact with any of them. She said she hasn't visited the company's site since July.

Christine said it's unreasonable for Musack to expect a refund because the majority of the company's expenses are incurred when a new member signs up, such as performing a criminal background check and producing high-quality photos and videos.

The site has yet to match her up with anyone, but that might not matter. In the past week, Musack said, she has started dating a guy she's known for years. And she didn't meet him on a dating site.