False Advertising + Thinks he cant be held resposnible, @pollymydolly, 8$ scam (lol)

[833]

Scammers Profile Link: https://cracked.st/pollymydolly
Sales Thread: https://cracked.st/Thread-%E2%AD%90CLAUD...RTING-5-99
Amount or Item(s) Scammed: 8$ (ikr)
Screenshots of Communication: I will send to the staff member who takes this on dm the full telegram chats.
Additional Information:
tldr: he is reseller of notokenlimit which is fine,
but whats not fine is false advertisement, and false claims on this thread and telegram chat where
he says you will gain access to "Access to Claude Opus 4.8, Sonnet 4.6 and much more models" 

Which is simply false, the service he makes the claim + resells is simply using free opensource models
which are prompted to provide false info ( https://ibb.co/0yXLqs4R https://ibb.co/4RdHqH1J).
I dont want even want to get into the facts that their vscode plugin dosnt work, or their cli is useless, or that their linux app dosnt even open etc etc

My problem is with the fact he thinks because he is a reseller he can make just lie about a product and think he wont be held responsible at all.
Product dosnt work as advertised, I suggest him to actually try something before he sells.

(did i comeback after a year just to post this, yeah because i hate lies)
Crypto address for a refund: ...

[1]

System bot message: @pollymydolly (pollymydolly) has been notified about this dispute via private messages and has 24hours to reply in this thread

 

Taking care of cracked.sh's leechers. Every day.
If you have a question regarding your leeching level, click here.

[191]

First of all, hello everyone.
 
I will post a definitive and clear response regarding this matter, and then I will request that a moderator review the issue. The entire chat log is available if needed; I can send it upon request.
 
1- First, the customer saw the thread on the forum. Then, they contacted me to make a purchase. They are an advanced user.
While asking for details about the product, we had a conversation like the one shown in the image.  https://i.imgur.com/AkK5vqa.png

2-Then he sent me links to two platforms and said he had tried them and found them to be fake. He asked if this product looked like those. I’m not an expert or knowledgeable in software either. I told him that I didn’t know anything about this topic, but I shared with him all the details about the product that I could. I wrote to him, saying that if he’s curious, he can buy the product and try it out. You can take a look at the image.  https://imgur.com/a/8ikY9Vt

3-  Then, as shown in the image, he thanked me and placed an order at the store.  I also handed the product over to him. He made a one-day purchase purely on a trial basis.

4- On the website where I sell the product, the product details clearly state—in a way that the customer can easily see—that the item is delivered as-is and that no exchanges or returns are accepted. 

5-After that, he started saying that the models above were fake and so on, and said he wasn’t satisfied with the product. I told him that I had already explained the details to him and that the product couldn’t be returned. He got angry and threatened to file a complaint—and then actually did.

6- I did not provide any information that would mislead the customer. When he asked me a question, I told him I didn’t know the answer and suggested he buy it and try it out—that’s all.
 
Additionally, as he mentioned, I’m curious: how can a fake platform have over 1,000 customers?
 
I extend my regards to management.

[5.062]

Based on the information provided, I would side with @KIRA3301.
The core issue is not whether the seller is a reseller, nor whether the buyer only paid $8. The allegation is false advertising. The sales thread explicitly advertises access to Claude Opus and Sonnet models. If the service delivered does not actually provide those models and instead uses different/open-source models while representing them as Claude models, then the product is not being delivered as advertised.
 
The seller argument mainly relies on "I am not an expert," "I am only a reseller," and "no refunds are accepted." None of those points remove responsibility for the accuracy of claims made in a sales thread. A reseller is still responsible for ensuring the product description is accurate. A no-refund policy also does not override a valid claim that the product materially differs from what was advertised.
 
The buyer appears to have raised concerns specifically about the advertised models rather than simply disliking the service. If evidence provided in DM supports that the advertised Claude models were not actually available, then the complaint is justified.
 
@pollymydolly needs to issue a refund to the buyer. Do so within 24h.

ON A DEAL DISPUTE RIGHT NOW? READ THIS: https://cracked.st/Thread-Staff-COMMUNIT...-THE-FORUM
 

[833]

Hello, thank you for the quick response Alex,
I sent you a dm with the details of the product, proof of false advertisement, proof of payment, and the full chat logs from telegram.
Thank you in advance.

---

Address to refund:
Solana: 8ReruiGyCv6GbcExTB4S7RREFYk6hGycFM14GHhwRzrp

[191]

Based on the information provided, I would side with @KIRA3301.
The core issue is not whether the seller is a reseller, nor whether the buyer only paid $8. The allegation is false advertising. The sales thread explicitly advertises access to Claude Opus and Sonnet models. If the service delivered does not actually provide those models and instead uses different/open-source models while representing them as Claude models, then the product is not being delivered as advertised.
 
The seller argument mainly relies on "I am not an expert," "I am only a reseller," and "no refunds are accepted." None of those points remove responsibility for the accuracy of claims made in a sales thread. A reseller is still responsible for ensuring the product description is accurate. A no-refund policy also does not override a valid claim that the product materially differs from what was advertised.
 
The buyer appears to have raised concerns specifically about the advertised models rather than simply disliking the service. If evidence provided in DM supports that the advertised Claude models were not actually available, then the complaint is justified.
 
@pollymydolly needs to issue a refund to the buyer. Do so within 24h.

First of all, you’re saying that if the evidence is valid. I didn’t confirm what he said.
 
It’s not even clear which model he was talking to in the images he posted. As you can see in the images, he didn’t receive a response like, “I’m actually DeepSeek,” after talking to Claude Opus. That’s why I’m rejecting the claim. The evidence and photos he posted are nonsense.
 
He’s posting cropped images. You’re expecting me to act without verifying their content or authenticity. Isn’t that unfair?
 
DeepSeek v4 says there are two cropped images. The DeepSeek model is already included in the product.
 
Can you confirm this, Alex?
 
First of all, when you ask the AI, “Which AI am I talking to?” you get the necessary information.
 
To be absolutely sure, I contacted the provider and tested it myself directly through my Google subscription.
 
Here’s the test I conducted:
 
I spoke with Gemini. To determine whether the AI I was talking to was a fake version of Opus, I asked it to prepare a prompt for me. Then, I sent the result I received back to Gemini and asked it to verify it. Now I’m sharing all the results.
 
You can see the results in these two images.
 
Additionally, when I contacted the owner, you can see from this image that it is the original Claude. I’ve included the evidence.
 
Now I’m waiting for Alex to review this and make a final decision. After that, I’ll act according to the administration’s decision.

https://i.imgur.com/2GWPxsn.png​​​​​​​
https://imgur.com/a/pfB9GDi
https://i.imgur.com/cdFoaba.png

 
1. This image is one I obtained directly from the AI.
2. This image shows me verifying the product using Gemini.
3. This image serves as proof that the platform was created using the original Claude API I received from the AI’s owner.
 
In other words, there is no misleading information.
 
On top of all that, when I ask him to return the account, he refuses and demands that I give it back. And he swears at me. :) 

https://i.imgur.com/vRrggwK.png

@Alex;

[5.062]

After reviewing the report, responses from both parties, and the additional evidence submitted privately, I find in favor of @KIRA3301.
 
The complaint is not based on dissatisfaction alone. The buyer has raised specific concerns regarding the authenticity of the advertised models and the accuracy of the product description. Additional evidence was provided showing alleged discrepancies between what was advertised and what was actually delivered, along with reports of various advertised features not functioning as expected.
 
While @pollymydolly disputes these claims, the evidence provided in defense does not conclusively establish that the advertised models are genuinely the models being provided. Screenshots of AI responses and statements from an upstream provider are not sufficient verification of the advertised claims. As the seller and advertiser of the product, responsibility for the accuracy of the listing rests with @pollymydolly, regardless of whether the product is being resold from a third party.
 
For that reason, I find that the buyer's concerns regarding misrepresentation have more support than the seller's rebuttal.
 
@pollymydolly should issue a refund to @KIRA3301. Upon receipt of the refund, @KIRA3301 must return any account credentials or access received as part of the purchase and discontinue use of the service. This restores both parties to their pre-transaction position.

ON A DEAL DISPUTE RIGHT NOW? READ THIS: https://cracked.st/Thread-Staff-COMMUNIT...-THE-FORUM
 

[191]

@Alex; the refund has been processed.
 
Also, you found the evidence I provided insufficient. You found the evidence he provided to be credible. I hope the evidence he presented isn’t just the two images he shared on the topic.
 
For future purchases, even if I’m confident in the evidence I’ve provided, I want to be absolutely sure of the situation. I’d appreciate it if you could send me the evidence he sent you via private message to prove that it’s fake.
 
Additionally, your account still has more than 12 hours of remaining usage time. I want it transferred immediately without any delay. If they send it after the subscription period ends, that would be unfair to me. Thank you.
 
They need to send it right away.