Demand for Relief Pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 93A, § 9

Sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, and by email to Mailchimp support case 15165480069

This letter is a written demand for relief under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A, Section 9. You have thirty (30) days from receipt to make a reasonable written tender of settlement. Please route it immediately to counsel or to a representative with settlement authority; front-line responses restating policy will be treated as non-responses.

The Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices

1. 1.In June 2026, I requested a downgrade of my Mailchimp account from the $900/month Premium plan, confirmed by your own automated email of July 1, 2026. Your system canceled the change silently — disclosing no reason at any time, though your own published instructions state the downgrade flow will disclose required changes before completion — and you charged me $956.25 on July 2, 2026 (invoice MC23517747) and August 5, 2026 (invoice MC23704743).
2. 2.On August 20, 2026, after a screen-share session with your Customer Success Advisor lasting well over two hours, your Advisor confirmed in writing that my account was “successfully downgraded,” effective September 4, 2026.
3. 3.On September 5, 2026 — one day after your own written effective date — you charged $956.25 (invoice MC23906963), withdrawn via PayPal directly from my bank account, causing another scheduled payment to be returned with bank fees.
4. 4.Your billing personnel then conditioned any refund review on my account being “canceled, paused, or downgraded to a free status,” writing that you were “unable to conduct the account review or process any refunds while the account is still active,” and, on September 9: “inform me once the account has been closed.” When I moved to pause under that condition, your system offered approximately $2,700 in free service to remain active — an offer that, by your own stated condition, would have extinguished my refund review.
5. 5.Across September 7–16, 2026, your agents offered six mutually contradictory explanations for the failed downgrade. On September 16, your agent admitted in writing that “a prior agent had confirmed it was successful,” while refusing any refund and — the same day she warned that a chargeback would disable my account — recommending in writing that I “reach out directly to your financial institution.”
6. 6.Your own refund policy states refunds are issued when “a system malfunction caused a problem.” A system that silently cancels a change your own staff confirmed in writing, then bills through it, is that malfunction. Your only offer to date — $956.25 as account credit, to a paused account — concedes the amount and refuses only the currency.
7. 7.On September 21, 2026, your Billing Support wrote: “We fully acknowledge the lack of communication on our part regarding these account requirements” — the second written admission that the error was Mailchimp’s own — while refusing any refund in the same message on the ground that your “standard Refund Policy limits us from issuing a direct refund for these charges.” Read with your prior written statement that this “was not a software malfunction” but a failure of your team, your stated position is that your own admitted billing errors are categorically non-refundable when made by employees rather than software. A discretionary internal policy is not a limitation on Mailchimp; it is a choice Mailchimp is making about its own admitted error.

These acts — billing after a documented and confirmed plan change; conditioning refund review on destruction or freezing of the account; contradictory and shifting justifications; retention inducements designed to defeat the refund condition you yourselves imposed; and refusal of relief for an error you have now admitted in writing twice — are unfair and deceptive acts and practices within the meaning of Chapter 93A. They were committed knowingly and willfully: your own written correspondence establishes that you confirmed the downgrade, failed to honor it, knew both facts, acknowledged your fault twice, and refused relief at every turn — most recently on September 21, 2026, in the same message that acknowledged your fault for the second time.

Injury and Demand

My documented injury is $2,868.75 in charges billed after my June 2026 downgrade request (invoices MC23517747, MC23704743, and MC23906963), plus bank fees caused by your September 5 withdrawal. Chapter 93A provides for double to treble damages, plus attorneys’ fees, for willful or knowing violations — here, $5,737.50 to $8,606.25 before fees.

To fully and finally resolve this matter without litigation, I will accept payment of $5,737.50, refunded to my original payment method — not issued as account credit — within thirty days of this letter.

If no reasonable tender is made within thirty days, I will pursue all available remedies, including an action seeking treble damages and fees; my complaints to the Massachusetts Attorney General, the Georgia Attorney General, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Better Business Bureau; and my pending PayPal dispute — which your own agent recommended in writing that I pursue. Please be advised that an unreasonable refusal to settle in response to this demand may itself support an award of multiplied damages.

All facts stated herein are supported by dated invoices, account records, and your company’s own written correspondence in support case 15165480069, compiled in the attached report, which will be filed as-is with each body named above.