1) General Eligibility for Refund Consideration
Refunds are considered only when all eligibility conditions are met.
To be eligible for consideration, you must have a compatible eyelid profile and you must follow the instructions and maintenance guidance correctly and consistently. Ongoing communication is required. You must complete at least two check-ins with an Eyelid Advisor during your first 30 days so we can verify adherence, troubleshoot instability, and confirm that the same target and method are being evaluated across time.
If, after consistent guided use, there is still no visible or measurable progress, a refund request may be considered. “Progress” includes measurable improvements such as increased crease hold time compared to your baseline, improved consistency under real daily conditions, and the ability to pass stability milestones such as nap testing.
Refund eligibility cannot be evaluated without objective comparison against your starting baseline. If a request is based on “no progress,” we may require standardized documentation, including baseline footage from the start of use and updated footage captured in consistent lighting, distance, and angles. We may also request a short routine summary and confirmation of check-ins so we can verify that the protocol was followed consistently.
In some cases, clients may report changes such as heaviness, puffiness, or day-to-day differences in appearance that can fluctuate with sleep, hydration, irritation, stress, and lighting. When this occurs, we may recommend a brief rest period and a standardized baseline re-check before determining whether a concern reflects a true change versus temporary variation. Refund decisions cannot be made fairly while the eyelid is in a transition phase or while variables are being changed frequently.
Refund consideration also requires a reasonable opportunity for guided troubleshooting. If a customer discontinues early, declines required check-ins, or refuses to provide requested documentation, we cannot verify adherence or isolate the cause of instability, and the request may become ineligible.
2) Results Guaranteed Package: Refund Eligibility
The Results Guaranteed package includes personalized analysis, calibration instructions, and ongoing troubleshooting support. This package delivers value through both service work and measurable progress over time.
Refunds are only considered in rare cases where there is no meaningful progress despite reasonable adherence to instructions and adequate guided use. Because this package includes individualized work and reserved advisor time, it is treated as a service-based program as well as a product purchase.
Refunds are not available when measurable progress has been achieved at any point during the program. Measurable progress includes, but is not limited to, extended crease hold time compared to your starting baseline, improved performance under mild adverse conditions such as slightly reduced sleep, and passing stability milestones such as a two-hour nap test.
Refunds are also not available when substantial service has already been delivered. Substantial service includes personalized review, iterative placement calibration, troubleshooting, multiple rounds of feedback, and any additional shipments or replacements provided during the program.
Eligibility decisions for this package are evidence-based. If a request is based on “no results,” we may require standardized footage and documentation to confirm baseline, verify adherence, and confirm that the same target and method were used long enough to evaluate fairly. If a client repeatedly changes variables, repeatedly targets an unstable crease height, or declines to follow calibration guidance, outcomes may not be eligible for refund consideration.
If a client reports concerns such as pulling, puffiness, or sagging, we may require a rest period and standardized baseline comparison footage before any eligibility decision is made. Because perception and day-to-day variation can change significantly with sleep, hydration, irritation, and lighting, refunds cannot be evaluated fairly without consistent comparison evidence.