Return the $6,500 you took from Shannon Elizabeth Johnson.

In 2023, I purchased Attraction Marketing’s program for approximately $6,500. After requesting a refund within their stated refund period, Attraction Marketing refunded my purchase in full. That refund is undisputed.

In 2024, I purchased the program again. Shortly thereafter, I contacted Attraction Marketing to request a refund. Their recorded telephone message instructed customers requesting refunds within the applicable refund period to leave their name, telephone number, and the email address used to purchase the program, stating that refunds would be processed with “no questions asked.” I followed those instructions exactly.

“If you'd like a refund and it's within the thirty days, we will gladly accept your refund request. Leave your name, your phone number, and your email address that you used while signing up, and we will refund your money, no questions asked.”

Despite complying with their stated refund procedure, I never received the promised refund.

As a result, I filed a dispute with PayPal. PayPal initially credited my account and requested supporting documentation from Attraction Marketing.

Attraction Marketing responded with approximately 37 pages of AI-generated customer history. Much of the material focused on my 2023 purchase and the refund that had already been issued that year. The documents also acknowledged my 2024 purchase but did not address my 2024 refund request or explain why, despite their published refund procedure and recorded instructions, my refund was denied.

Faced with a substantial volume of documentation, PayPal ultimately reversed the provisional credit and ruled in Attraction Marketing’s favor. The decision letter did not include the documents submitted by Attraction Marketing but advised me that I could request them. After obtaining and reviewing those materials, I found that they primarily documented the prior year’s transaction rather than addressing the merits of my 2024 refund request.

At the time, I believed I had exhausted my options and that there was nothing further I could do.

Shortly thereafter, however, I suffered a serious medical emergency while driving that resulted in a significant automobile accident. My recovery required extensive medical treatment and neurological medications that substantially affected my ability to manage legal and financial matters for an extended period. Because of these extraordinary circumstances, I was unable to pursue the matter further.

As I have recovered, I have revisited the facts with the assistance of research and legal tools. I now believe this matter warrants reconsideration. My concern is not the existence of my 2023 refund — which is undisputed — but rather that my separate 2024 refund request was never properly evaluated under Attraction Marketing’s own published refund policy.

As a disabled senior citizen, I also recognize that consumer protection laws and agencies may provide additional assistance in reviewing this matter. My objective is straightforward: to obtain a fair review of the evidence surrounding my 2024 transaction and to recover the $6,500 that I believe should have been refunded under Attraction Marketing’s stated policy.

Pennsylvania is a treble damages state. Under Pennsylvania consumer protection law, when a company wrongfully withholds money from a vulnerable senior citizen, the claimant may be entitled to recover three times the amount taken, plus legal fees. On a $6,500 loss, that exposure exceeds $20,000 — before attorney fees are added.

I have already engaged the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office and other appropriate government channels on behalf of vulnerable senior citizens. I am giving Attraction Marketing a legal opportunity to make this right on their own volition before further action becomes necessary.

The path to resolution remains simple: return the $6,500. No interest. No penalties. No lawsuit. No state action. This page comes down when the refund is issued. The longer this is delayed, the more costly it becomes — not for me, but for the company that chose to keep money it did not earn.

“A fair company refunds what it owes. A wise company does so before the law forces its hand.”