UPDATE #2: On the morning of 8/29/2014, the various Accessory Outlet sites were all pulled down and replaced with a message saying they were “undergoing maintenance.” 
 
 —— 
 
 Buried at the bottom of the Terms page for OnlineAccessoryOutlet.com, you’ll find the following insanely overreaching stipulations (bolded for emphasis): 
 
 “You agree not to file any complaint, chargeback, claim, dispute, or make any public forum post, review, Better Business Bureau complaint, social media post, or any public statement regarding the order, our website, or any issue regarding your order, for any reason, within this 90 day period, or to threaten to do so within the 90 day period, or it is a breach of the terms of sale, creating liability for damages in the amount of $250, plus any additional fees, damages – both consequential and incidental, calculated on an ongoing basis.” 
 
 The Terms also claim the customer agrees that, even after the 90 days are up, the “sole method of dispute resolution in all cases… shall be binding arbitration to take place in New York City, with all expenses paid by the respective parties.” 
 
 So if your purchase is late, lost, damaged, broken, etc., and you even make the vague statement of “I’m going to write about this on Facebook” or “I’m going to call my bank to cancel this charge,” Accessory Outlet will tag you for $250.  A Wisconsin woman has filed a lawsuit in New York state court against a shady online retailer, Accessory Outlet, which had threatened her by saying, “You are playing games with the wrong people” after she attempted to cancel an order for a $40 iPhone case that did not arrive on time. “You agree not to file any complaint…” 
 
 The story begins on July 6, 2014, when Cox placed an order for $39.94 for an iPhone case. On July 10, Cox received an e-mail from Accessory Outlet saying that her order had shipped and provided her with a tracking number. When Cox went to check the tracking number online, she discovered that the package was not being processed via the United States Postal Service. Accessory Outlet informed her that the order could not be refunded as it had already shipped. The customer checked the USPS tracking number again and then replied to Accessory Outlet that she would be requesting a chargeback from her credit card company because she believed the retailer was lying about whether the order had actually shipped. The company told her in an e-mail that not only would she be hit for the $250 penalty but that her account would be sent to a collections agency, which would “put a negative mark on your credit for 7 years and will also result in calls to you home and/or work.” 
 
 Accessory Outlet also threatened her with the prospect of “additional fees for any correspondence with your card issuer… billed to you on an hourly basis and a flat rate $50 fee for the dispute or claim.” 
 
 When the customer replied that she had the right to contact her credit card company, the retailer replied that she now owed them “damages” and that her account would be referred to “multiple collections agencies.” 
 
 After receiving additional, similar e-mails from Accessory Outlet, the customer responded that she was getting a lawyer. “Contact your lawyer, spend more time and money if you wish.” 
 
 Accessory Outlet responded with rhetorical force, saying that it would impose its aforementioned $250 penalty and would employ a collections agency to get its money. You will be billed and the amount we will bill you for will continue to rise with every email and every second we dedicate to correspondence of any kind pertaining to your breach of the terms of sale. Thank you.” 
 
 A subsequent e-mail from Accessory Outlet personally attacks the customer and closes on a menacing tone: 
 
 “Read the agreement or have someone competent do so for you since your emails make it clear you did not read the agreement or do not understand the clauses contained therein. You obviously do not know how to use the tracking or are ignoring it… You are playing games with the wrong people and have made a very bad mistake given the legally binding contract we have in place. One we have successfully enforced on many individuals the same we will do with you.” 
 
 The customer eventually received her order — nine days after it supposedly shipped — and claims it was defective and unusable. “But I’m afraid Accessory Outlet will claim I owe it more money and try to ruin my credit.” 
 
 “Accessory Outlet is using unfair terms hidden in fine print, along with threatening emails, to bully a customer into keeping quiet about her bad experience with the company,” said Scott Michelman, the Public Citizen attorney handling the case. “But terms that prevent a customer from speaking publicly about her transaction and from contacting her credit card company are unreasonable and unenforceable.” 
 
 UPDATE: While we had assumed that Accessory Outlet’s touted “A+” rating from the Better Business Bureau was as real as the time I made out with Scarlett Johansson, a reader points us to the New York BBB site, where Accessory Outlet not only has an “F” rating, but where the BBB states in all caps that “THIS FIRM IS NOT CURRENTLY A BBB ACCREDITED BUSINESS,” and that it has been served a cease-and-desist demanding it remove the badge from the site.
– You think fining people $500 for a crummy hotel review is bad? OnlineAccessoryOutlet.com will take $250 from your pocket if you even threaten to leave a less-than-stellar review. Customers "agree not to file any complaint, chargeback, claim, dispute, or make ... any public statement regarding the order," or threaten to do so, within a 90-day period after their order, or they'll be fined the $250 "plus any additional fees [and] damages," according to the site's terms of sale, spotted by Consumerist. That's right: Tell the website you'll post about a late order on Facebook—even if you don't actually do it—and you're out hundreds of dollars. One Wisconsin customer, however, is fighting the fine. Cindy Cox was fined after informing the retailer she'd be requesting a chargeback when an iPhone case she ordered didn't seem to have shipped after the retailer said it had. When she refused to pay the fine, the retailer sent it to a collections agency and allegedly informed her, "This will put a negative mark on your credit for seven years and will also result in calls to your home and/or work." The site allegedly added, per Ars Technica, "You are playing games with the wrong people." Cox wasn't deterred. She filed a suit, which notes the "terms are unenforceable, both because they are unconscionable as a matter of law and because [the plaintiff] never agreed to them." Consumerist adds that, as far as it can tell, at no point during the purchase process are the site's terms even mentioned. (Click to read about a customer who was fined $3,500 three years after complaining online about an order that never arrived.)