DealDash

Complaints & Reviews on USAComplaints

USAComplaints currently maintains 98 historical complaints about DealDash, published between 2011 and 2013. No approved complaints have been published on this site during the last three years. For a current reputation snapshot, see the independent sources below.

• Consumer ReportPublished Jul 29, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Consumer ReportPublished Jun 23, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Consumer ReportPublished May 27, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Consumer ReportPublished Apr 25, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Consumer ReportPublished Apr 11, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Dalpay. IS 187786 What a rip-off - Saw commercial on television and it sounded like a good opportunity - What a shamPublished Jan 17, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Dealdash.com DealDash steals peoples money, had shill bidders/bots, does not have ethical practicesPublished Jan 15, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Never received services, held items due to them putting EXPIRED on them, they marked items shipped and date they should arrive... Never received most of items, overcharged on items, etcPublished Jan 10, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• They offer a DEAL and in a DASH you loosePublished Jan 5, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Walmart gift cards not goodPublished Jan 5, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• D.D. Deal Dash Ripped Did NOT Sending ALL the APPLE Gift Cards I Won/Purchased. Totaling $450.00. They Tried to make me settle for Only 1 Gift Card. No DicePublished Jan 4, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Total scam, just legalized thieveryPublished Jan 3, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Won't let me return items. Numerous emails and calls, no customer service to return 2 items I paid $250. For and don't want. Need ra numbers from them to return. Wheres there no hassle easy returnsPublished Jan 2, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Does dealdash use computer bots against us. I should have won many auctionsPublished Jan 2, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Did not receive won auctionsPublished Jan 1, 2013 · Historical consumer allegation
• Consumer ReportPublished Dec 30, 2012 · Historical consumer allegation
• Consumer ReportPublished Dec 30, 2012 · Historical consumer allegation
• Consumer ReportPublished Dec 30, 2012 · Historical consumer allegation
• I have been Ripped Off, not once but 3 times by these people. One purchased item and two won items. They were to be delivered no later than 12-19-12 but have not come. I have sent 12 messages toPublished Dec 29, 2012 · Historical consumer allegation
• Online auction scamPublished Dec 29, 2012 · Historical consumer allegation

Complaint Themes

Each tag reflects a complaint's single primary theme (not every angle it raised), and complaints outside any problem theme — a positive report, or one later retracted by its author — aren't tagged. Counts may total less than the full complaint count above.

Independent Sources

Shown for context — not merged with USAComplaints' own numbers.

Contacts

• Official website: https://www.dealdash.com/
• Support and refunds (company Easy refunds page): +1 855-455-3325 2 complaints mention this number
• Support (company Easy refunds page): [email protected]
• Privacy requests (Privacy Policy): [email protected]
• Corporate site (about, careers, suppliers): https://dealdashcompany.com/

Locations

DealDash refunds, bids, shipping and complaints: routes and policy wording (checked October 11, 2026)

Everything below is taken from DealDash's own pages as opened on October 11, 2026: the Terms of Use ("Last Updated: July 2nd, 2026"), the Easy refunds, Frequent Questions, Shipping and Returns and Platform Rules pages, and the Privacy Policy (updated November 6th 2024). Pages that disagree are both quoted.

How to reach the company. The Easy refunds page lists [email protected] and +1 855-455-3325 and says "Our support team is online right now (24/7)." The Terms of Use give this postal address for cancellations: DealDash Inc, 2042 Wooddale Drive Suite 250, Woodbury, MN 55125 (the separate notices clause prints it as "042 Wooddale Drive Suite 250").

Refund of a bid pack. The Easy refunds page says: "We offer a 100% Money Back Guarantee on your optional first purchase," and asks for a name and email address to find the transaction; the page is headed "Instant refunds" and says "No questions asked. We can refund your charge immediately." The Terms of Use give more conditions: to qualify "users must email [the support address] within 90 days of purchase," "The refund will be credited back to you in 7 business days," it "will be granted regardless of if you have won or lost auctions, or whether you have Bids left on your account or not," and "Only 1 refund per person." The two pages are quoted side by side; we did not test which timing applies in practice. For later purchases the Terms say only Bids acquired by purchasing Bid Packs at the then-current full price have "a right for refund within 30 calendar days of purchase (90 calendar days for first Bid pack purchase)," and that "Bids obtained during the Buy it Now process do not have any rights to refund."

When refunds are not available under the Terms. "If a user is suspended for whatever reason, all of their Bids will be forfeited and will not be refunded." Users "who have won an auction and paid for a product are not eligible for a refund on either Bid purchases, account activation fees, or product fees if their product has been shipped by the time of request." Bids also expire: "Bids held in user accounts must be used within 365 days."

Closing an account. The Privacy Policy says: "To delete your account, email [email protected], or navigate to Settings > Delete account in the Android or iOS app," and "If you choose to close your account, all remaining bids will be destroyed."

Buy It Now. The Terms say an auction may offer the 'Buy It Now & Get your Bids Back' option, which "will allow you to receive your spent Bids back, if you purchase the same model of an identical item at its 'Buy it Now' price"; the option is offered "for a limited period of time (usually 7 days after the auction ends)." The Terms also state that the Buy It Now price is not a measure of retail value: it "should not be seen as a reflection of product value, or used for price comparisons."

Winning, shipping and returns. The Frequent Questions page says a winner must "Pay the final auction price, plus sales tax where it applies, within 14 days" and that orders ship "usually within 2 to 5 business days of your payment ... Delivery then takes another 5 to 10 business days." The Shipping and Returns page says shipping is "always free," tracking for recent orders can take up to 10 business days from the date of payment to appear, and "You can return a product within 7 days of receiving it." The Terms of Use give a longer window: "The user may return the item in an un-depreciated condition within 30 days of receipt if not satisfied for any reason," and add "DealDash will not refund the value of the Bids spent to obtain the product." Both windows are published on the company's site today. The Terms add a separate "Right to cancel": "You may cancel your contract within 30 days in written notice (e.g. letter, e-mail) to DealDash or by returning the items, without stating your reasons. The 30 day period begins when the item is received." On returning a Buy It Now order, the Terms say "the user also forfeits all the Free Bids given to them alongside the purchase" and, if those Free Bids were used, "the user will need to purchase the equivalent number of Bids in order for DealDash to process the refund."

If you want to dispute a charge or complain outside the company. Options include the BBB complaint form on the BBB profile below, the FTC's ReportFraud site (reportfraud.ftc.gov), and, because the company is located in Minnesota, the Minnesota Attorney General's Consumer Assistance Request Form. Some archive complaints on this page say the author also opened a PayPal dispute; that is the author's account, not a company statement.

Legal disputes. The Terms of Use contain an arbitration clause and a class-action waiver (see the litigation section).

Regulators: complaints filed with them and complaint routes

Enforcement actions. No FTC, state attorney general or other government enforcement action, consent order or settlement naming DealDash was identified in the sources checked on October 11, 2026: the consumer advocacy group TINA.org's DealDash page and its 2024 follow-up article (which says the regulators it notified "have failed to take any public action against DealDash"), the court docket, and web searches. The FTC Legal Library search page did not return filterable results through our text fetch, so that database was not searched directly.

Complaints filed with regulators by TINA.org. TINA.org's DealDash page says that on June 5, 2017 it sent complaint letters to the Federal Trade Commission and to the attorneys general of Minnesota, New York, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and the District of Columbia "urging each of the agencies to take action," and that it notified the BBB the same day. The page says the BBB then changed the company's rating to "NR" (No Rating); the BBB profile now displays A+. TINA.org's June 2017 press release says the FTC "has received over 600 complaints from consumers about the company." Those are TINA.org's statements about its own complaints and about complaints it says the FTC received; they are not findings by any agency.

TINA.org's position and the company's changes. TINA.org's page states it "determined that the company operated a form of illegal gambling and used deceptive marketing tactics." The same page lists, among "Highlights," "Company made certain changes to marketing," and in a January 2018 entry says that an audit found the company had stopped advertising misleading winners' testimonials on its social media accounts and that a total-cost disclosure had appeared in a TV commercial, which TINA.org called insufficient. In 2024 TINA.org wrote that a current TV ad's fine print says the advertised deals "include[] the cost of bids." TINA.org is an advocacy organization; no court or agency finding that DealDash engaged in illegal gambling or deceptive advertising was identified in the sources checked on October 11, 2026.

Company statements. DealDash's "DealDash is Legit" page says: "there is no guarantee that you will win every auction," that if you do not win "you can buy the same item for its Buy It Now price and every bid you used comes straight back to your account," and describes a 90-day first-bid-pack refund. Its Platform Rules page says it uses "monitoring systems and anti-fraud protections to detect bidders who break" its rules against coordinated bidding.

Where to complain. FTC: reportfraud.ftc.gov. Minnesota Attorney General: ag.state.mn.us (Consumer Assistance Request Form). BBB: the complaint form on the profile linked below.

Who runs DealDash and how the auctions work

Operator. The company's Terms of Use and the court docket name the operator as DealDash Inc ("DealDash, Inc."), 2042 Wooddale Dr, Suite 250, Woodbury, Minnesota 55125. The BBB profile lists the entity type as "Corporation," with business start and incorporation dates of February 22, 2010 in its page data, and names "Mr. Mark Streich, CEO" under business management. The company's corporate site says DealDash was "Founded in 2008" and "40+ people, 7+ countries," and lists a Utah warehouse for most products and a Texas warehouse for specialty products (company statements; the founding year differs from the BBB date). TINA.org's 2017 press release described DealDash as a Finnish company founded by William Wolfram. Federal dockets from 2018 and 2019 on CourtListener list "DealDash Oyj" (also spelled "DealDash OYJ") alongside "DealDash Inc." as parties; we did not verify the current ownership structure or how the two names relate.

How the product works. The company's "DealDash is Legit" page says: "Every bid uses one bid. Bidders buy bids in Bid Packs of 100 and other sizes ... The bids sold are what fund the deeply discounted auction prices." The Terms say "With each bid submitted, the price of the item on which the user is bidding increases by $0.01" and the last bidder wins. The Frequent Questions page says each auction "starts at $0.00 with no reserve" and each bid "resets the clock to 9 seconds." The company's "DealDash is Legit" page (separate from the Frequent Questions page) says daily discounts "often bring the price to 13¢ or less" and states: "On DealDash, if you do not win you can buy the same item for its Buy It Now price and every bid you used comes straight back to your account."

Other rules that affect bidders. Platform Rules: a user can win a particular item "at most 12 times in a 365-day period" and "a maximum of 50 auctions in a single week"; "Coordinated bidding" can lead to wins being voided and, in severe or repeat cases, permanent suspension "without a refund." The Terms say DealDash "attempts to limit some auctions to users of comparable skill ... to enhance user experience and equal chances of winning auctions" and "may limit which auctions are available to particular users based on any factors deemed appropriate by DealDash in its sole discretion, including experience of the user, historical success of the user, ... prior bidding and spending activity." The Terms also state that "Repeated online bidding can incur high costs."

Changes to the published terms. TINA.org's 2024 article quotes the company's 2015 Terms of Use as saying "Most customers will not win auctions and you are on average unlikely to save money using this Site." The current Terms of Use (last updated July 2, 2026), as read on October 11, 2026, do not contain that sentence.

Complaint record: BBB, Trustpilot, ComplaintsBoard and our archive

All figures are as displayed on October 11, 2026 and change daily. They come from different sites with different methods and are not added together or averaged.

• BBB (profile for DealDash, Inc., Woodbury, MN): rating A+; BBB Accredited Business (accredited November 4, 2014 and file opened August 13, 2014 per the page's data); 147 total complaints in the last 3 years and 54 complaints filed in the last 12 months; customer reviews average 3.93 out of 5 from 367 reviews. The first complaint displayed on the complaints tab was dated September 8, 2026, in the "Billing Issues" category and marked "Answered."
• Trustpilot: 4.3 from 4,219 reviews, 562 of them in the last 12 months; profile claimed December 2014; the page says "This company hasn't invited customers recently, so reviews may not be representative."
• ComplaintsBoard: 13 reviews and 111 complaints, profile marked Claimed, page updated October 10, 2026. These are user submissions on that site.

Our own archive. usacomplaints.com holds 98 published complaints about DealDash, all dated between December 2011 and July 2013 (1 in 2011, 82 in 2012, 15 in 2013; 76 of them from November and December 2012). We hold no DealDash complaints dated after July 2013, so the archive says nothing about the company's current service. These are unverified consumer accounts and allegations.

Subjects raised in the archive posts (keyword counts, not findings). Among the 98 posts, 52 mention items not received, out of stock or delayed shipping; 28 mention no response from customer support; 27 mention a refund, money back or payment dispute; 13 mention site crashes, freezing or lost bids; and 12 mention suspected shill or bot bidding. A post can fall in more than one group. We did not verify the underlying events.

Court record: Pstikyan v. DealDash (D. Minn. 2017), other dockets and the Terms' arbitration clause

Pstikyan, et al. v. DealDash, Inc., No. 0:17-cv-01164 (D. Minn.). According to the court docket on CourtListener, Grant Pstikyan filed a class action complaint against DealDash, Inc. on April 13, 2017 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota (assigned to Chief Judge John R. Tunheim and Magistrate Judge Franklin L. Noel). The complaint was brought for "all persons who have purchased bids or merchandise" through DealDash.com or its apps and alleged violations of Minnesota consumer-protection statutes (Minn. Stat. 325F.68, 325F.67, 325D.13, 325D.12 and 325D.44) and unjust enrichment. It alleged, among other things, that DealDash's auctions were "illegal lotteries" and that many "brand name" products were cheap, generic brands sold only through DealDash and an affiliate. These are the plaintiff's allegations.

Procedural history from the docket. An amended complaint was filed July 21, 2017 by Grant Pstikyan, Carole Bennett and Ken Ford. DealDash filed motions to dismiss under Federal Rules 9(b) and 12(b)(6) on June 30, 2017 (against the original complaint) and August 21, 2017 (against the amended complaint). The second motion was referred to the magistrate judge and a hearing was held December 15, 2017, with a report and recommendation noted to issue. On January 12, 2018 the plaintiffs filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, and on January 17, 2018 the court entered an "Order Dismissing Case." The docket entries we read do not show a ruling on the motion to dismiss and do not state the reasons for the voluntary dismissal. The docket does not describe a settlement.

Arbitration and class waiver in the Terms. The Terms of Use say disputes that "cannot be resolved informally shall be submitted to binding arbitration" under the American Arbitration Association's Consumer Arbitration Rules, that claims must be brought "in your individual capacities, and not as plaintiffs or class members in any class, collective, or representative proceeding," and that the agreement is governed by Minnesota law. Disputes seeking only injunctive or other equitable relief "may be pursued in the state and federal courts in the State of Delaware."

Other federal dockets naming DealDash. A CourtListener case-name search for "dealdash" on October 11, 2026 returned five dockets in total. Besides Pstikyan, they are listed here by caption, court, docket number and the dates and nature-of-suit label shown, without inferring more from those labels:

• O'Weger v. DealDash Inc., No. 1:14-cv-02076 (N.D. Ga.): filed July 1, 2014; terminated September 15, 2014; nature of suit "710 Labor: Fair Standards"; cause "29:216(b) Labor - Minimum wage or overtime compensation." DealDash Inc. is the defendant. The entries we read do not state how the case ended.
• DealDash Oyj v. ContextLogic Inc., No. 3:18-cv-02353 (N.D. Cal.): filed April 18, 2018; terminated August 12, 2019; nature of suit "840 Trademark." The parties list DealDash Inc., ContextLogic Inc. and DealDash Oyj.
• DealDash OYJ v. ContextLogic, Inc., No. 3:19-mc-00049 (D. Conn.): filed April 22, 2019; nature of suit "990 Other"; parties include DealDash Inc., ContextLogic, Inc., DealDash OYJ and Dynata, LLC.
• DealDash Inc v. Brandie Raye LLC, No. 2:24-cv-00236 (D. Wyo.): filed November 21, 2024; terminated January 7, 2025; nature of suit "190 Contract: Other." Document 1 is described as a "COMPLAINT for Declaratory Judgment, Replevin and Injunctive Relief filed by DealDash Inc."; DealDash Inc is the plaintiff.

No other consumer class action naming DealDash was identified in the sources checked on October 11, 2026 (CourtListener case-name search and web searches).

Is DealDash Legitimate?

DealDash, Inc. is a corporation with a Woodbury, Minnesota address, listed with the BBB as an accredited business with an A+ rating as displayed on October 11, 2026; the BBB profile shows 147 complaints in the last 3 years and 54 in the last 12 months. Trustpilot shows a 4.3 score from 4,219 reviews (with the notice that the company has not invited customers recently), and ComplaintsBoard shows 13 reviews and 111 complaints. These are separate sources and are not combined.

The company says its business is selling bids that fund the auctions and that "there is no guarantee that you will win every auction." TINA.org, an advocacy group, has published its conclusion that the model is a form of illegal gambling with deceptive marketing and filed complaints with the FTC and six attorneys general in 2017. We identified no government enforcement action or court ruling against the company in the sources checked on October 11, 2026, and the 2017 class action was voluntarily dismissed in January 2018 without a ruling on the merits shown on the docket.

The company's own Terms say "Repeated online bidding can incur high costs." The refund windows and conditions are quoted in the first section.

Court & Public Records

Frequently Asked Questions