Court Awards Partial Refund of Woman’s Fee : Dating Club Fails Expectations

A Superior Court judge has awarded a 37-year-old Los Angeles woman more than half the money she paid for membership in a video dating service, after she complained that the service had not fulfilled its contract to help her find dates.

Judge Robert Lopez last week awarded Patricia Gail Parker $750 of the $1,250 she paid Great Expectations of Westwood. The dating service had appealed a Small Claims Court decision last January that awarded Parker the full amount.

Company’s Computers

Lopez said he agreed to the $750 award after Great Expectations’ attorney admitted that the company’s computers caused problems with Parker’s membership. In her legal brief, Parker claimed that because of computer problems she was not contacted when two men expressed interest in dating her, and that a computer match-list included the names of men whose interests matched hers but who were no longer active members.

Judge Lopez said he reduced the Small Claims award because Parker stated in court that she had met people and “gained some benefit” from the service.

Parker, a legal secretary who wrote her own legal brief and argued the case in court, said that she filed the suit after Great Expectations failed to answer her request last October to refund part of her $1,250 one-year membership fee.

Idea Is ‘Very Good’

“The idea behind GE is very good. It seemed (like) one way to get out of the singles bars and the workplace and meet people,” she said. “It could be a forum for people to meet people if their staff were doing their job and kept their records current. But each time I had a question on something, they’d say, ‘Oh, computer problem.’ It’s just too bad things were so disorganized.”

Jeff Ullman, founder and president of Great Expectations, said he believes that the company had fulfilled its contract with Parker, and denied that it has computer problems. He said the company enjoys a good reputation, and serves 40,000 members from 13 offices, mostly in the Western United States. About 2,500 people who met through the service since he started it in 1976 have married, he said.

“We have a tremendous track record . . . . We firmly believe we have provided a service (to Parker),” Ullman said.

Ullman said he believes that his company was in the right, but that he may not appeal the settlement because of legal costs.

Videotape Made

Parker said she joined Great Expectations last year after receiving a company flyer in the mail. After she joined, the service made a brief videotape of her and had her write a short profile of herself. Both were made available in the company’s office at 11050 Santa Monica Blvd. to men enrolled in the service.

She said her membership entitled her to unlimited use of the company’s video library and access to a computer that provided lists of men whose backgrounds and interests were similar to hers.

Men or women interested in meeting one another are sent “membergrams” by the company to come in and see the profile and video of a member who would like to date them. If the person is interested, they exchange names and telephone numbers. If not, the other is informed of the rejection.

But Parker said that the company failed to send membergrams for two men who wanted to meet her. She said a company employee explained that it was because of a computer error. The same reason was given when she was told that a man on her computer list whom she was interested in reaching was no longer a member, she said.

Eight Men Declined

All eight of the men she asked to meet declined to date her, she said. Last September, when she complained to Great Expectations in person, she said a company employee told her there was a man who wanted to meet her, and a dinner-date was arranged at a restaurant in Westwood.

But the date was a strained encounter, she said.

Later, she said, the man told her that he, too, was disgruntled with the service and had been urged by the service to date her even though their personal profiles revealed they had little in common.

“That’s the whole point of GE, that you get some idea so you’re not ending up going out with complete strangers,” Parker said. “You do the choosing, they say. But it was like a blind date. That’s not why you choose that service.”

Ullman said his company does not guarantee that its members will find a compatible mate.

“We present a person’s pluses and minuses,” he said. “The names and phones numbers (are exchanged among) people who are compatible. If somebody says no, it’s not GE’s fault.”

Profiles Did Not Match

Parker’s date, a 42-year-old processing clerk who asked not to be identified, said that he asked the company’s activity director last September to recommend someone to him after he failed in several attempts to find a date.

“If Pat and I had looked at each other’s profile on our own, I don’t think we would have chosen each other,” he said.

But he said that since then he has successfully arranged dates with 20 to 30 women through Great Expectations, and for that reason he recently renewed his one-year membership. He has not experienced problems with the company’s computer, he said.

Such Cases Are Few

Shirley Goldinger, director of the Los Angeles County Office of Consumer Affairs, said that Parker’s award was unusual because few people take dating services to court, and many with consumer complaints are afraid to come forward.

“I would say that people would be reluctant to file because they would be embarrassed,” she said. “It takes a particular kind of courage to say that you called 20 people and they would not go out with you.”

Most complaints about dating services come from people who succumb to high-pressure sales tactics and who use up the referrals allowed by a service without a successful date, Goldinger said.

Consumers should have a friend or a lawyer look over the membership contract before signing it, make sure the number of referrals are spelled out, and watch for clauses that allow companies to change membership procedures, she said.

Parker, who now is dating a man she met through a volunteer group, said that as a result of her experience she would not use another dating service, but will try to meet men through more traditional ways.

“I’ll just have to go hit-and-miss,” she said. “You might meet someone working out at the gym or when you go out dancing with your girlfriends. The modern means have been a big goose egg.”