Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/04) */
Ms [redacted] was called the day after her dogs were picked up so that we could receive payment. She did not return our call, and we called two more times and left messages for her. She never returned our phone calls, nor did she contact us...
regarding what she is stating on her complaint. When Ms. [redacted] did finally return our last phone call on Monday 7/27/15, she was asked why she had not brought this matter to our attention when she took her dog to the vet, she stated that she was busy. We told Ms. [redacted] repeatedly that we had video footage of the her dogs entire stay and that she was more than welcome to come down and see them that day if she liked. She stated that she had no interest in reviewing the footage. She told us that our staff member repeatedly yanked on her dog at the time of pickup, and then stated that he dragged her dog down the kennel hallway to his parents. We reviewed the footage and saw that no dog was treated abusively while in our care. We again called Ms. [redacted] back to inform her that she could come down and see this footage for herself and she again refused. When asked if she would like the owner to contact her she stated that she would be getting her attorney involved. We called the vet she took her dog to and had them fax over the records of his visit to us, and also spoke with the vet who stated that there was no evidence that her dog was injured while in our care. We still have footage of her dogs visit on file and again would be more than happy to have her and anyone else who would like to view this footage come down and review it. We pride ourselves on the reputation we have upheld at our facility and in no way would ever let an animal be treated in the manner Ms. [redacted] has accused our company.
We have cameras throughout our entire facility and when we moved her dogs into a bigger area for sleeping it was because her dogs tore apart the suite they were assigned, and we felt that for their safety, and to keep them as stress free as possible, that we should move them into a bigger sleeping area.
Yes, in response to her claim that we should have contacted her, I can fully understand her frustration, but my staff was thinking of the safety of the dogs and felt that they were acting in accordance with the daycare agreement, paragraph 5, which Ms. [redacted] signed upon bringing her dogs in to our facility, stating: "I understand and agree that any problems with my dogs (behavioral, medical, or otherwise) will be treated as best deemed by the staff at Charlie's Place in their discretion, and is what they view is in the best interest of the animal. I understand that I receive full financial responsibility and all liability for any and all expenses incurred in regard to the behavior and health of my dog."
We feel that our staff followed all guidelines in accordance with our policies and procedures and again have no problems in having Ms. [redacted] come down to our facility to view the video we have on file for the entire length of her dogs stay with us.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/08/05) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The claim of a phone call made to me on 7/25 is false. No contact was made with me until Monday, 7/27 and it was via a voicemail. The call was promptly returned, which began my conversation with the staff member titled "GM". I did not tell her that the reason for not calling after my visit to the vet was due to being "busy". I explained that I wanted to speak with my son, who was noted in their file as the first contact while the dogs were boarded, and he was out of cell phone range until late 7/26. The "GM" did offer to let me view the 4 days of video, but stated that she needed to contact the company who managed the video system. NEVER did the "GM" offer to let me speak with the owner. Quite the opposite occurred, where I asked repeatedly and was 1) put on hold several times and 2) told that he was unavailable and she would need to put a message in with his secretary.
Since Mr. [redacted] was not present, he has obviously conferred with his staff and chosen to ignore the concerns of customer. My complaint is simple and I am sure that if anyone had the time to sit and review 4 days of video footage, it would show signs of my dog coughing and having a difficult time breathing. This is not something that began when we picked him up and there was negligence in the lack of contact.
Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/04) */
Ms [redacted] was called the day after her dogs were picked up so that we could receive payment. She did not return our call, and we called two more times and left messages for her. She never returned our phone calls, nor did she contact us...
regarding what she is stating on her complaint. When Ms. [redacted] did finally return our last phone call on Monday 7/27/15, she was asked why she had not brought this matter to our attention when she took her dog to the vet, she stated that she was busy. We told Ms. [redacted] repeatedly that we had video footage of the her dogs entire stay and that she was more than welcome to come down and see them that day if she liked. She stated that she had no interest in reviewing the footage. She told us that our staff member repeatedly yanked on her dog at the time of pickup, and then stated that he dragged her dog down the kennel hallway to his parents. We reviewed the footage and saw that no dog was treated abusively while in our care. We again called Ms. [redacted] back to inform her that she could come down and see this footage for herself and she again refused. When asked if she would like the owner to contact her she stated that she would be getting her attorney involved. We called the vet she took her dog to and had them fax over the records of his visit to us, and also spoke with the vet who stated that there was no evidence that her dog was injured while in our care. We still have footage of her dogs visit on file and again would be more than happy to have her and anyone else who would like to view this footage come down and review it. We pride ourselves on the reputation we have upheld at our facility and in no way would ever let an animal be treated in the manner Ms. [redacted] has accused our company.
We have cameras throughout our entire facility and when we moved her dogs into a bigger area for sleeping it was because her dogs tore apart the suite they were assigned, and we felt that for their safety, and to keep them as stress free as possible, that we should move them into a bigger sleeping area.
Yes, in response to her claim that we should have contacted her, I can fully understand her frustration, but my staff was thinking of the safety of the dogs and felt that they were acting in accordance with the daycare agreement, paragraph 5, which Ms. [redacted] signed upon bringing her dogs in to our facility, stating: "I understand and agree that any problems with my dogs (behavioral, medical, or otherwise) will be treated as best deemed by the staff at Charlie's Place in their discretion, and is what they view is in the best interest of the animal. I understand that I receive full financial responsibility and all liability for any and all expenses incurred in regard to the behavior and health of my dog."
We feel that our staff followed all guidelines in accordance with our policies and procedures and again have no problems in having Ms. [redacted] come down to our facility to view the video we have on file for the entire length of her dogs stay with us.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/08/05) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
The claim of a phone call made to me on 7/25 is false. No contact was made with me until Monday, 7/27 and it was via a voicemail. The call was promptly returned, which began my conversation with the staff member titled "GM". I did not tell her that the reason for not calling after my visit to the vet was due to being "busy". I explained that I wanted to speak with my son, who was noted in their file as the first contact while the dogs were boarded, and he was out of cell phone range until late 7/26. The "GM" did offer to let me view the 4 days of video, but stated that she needed to contact the company who managed the video system. NEVER did the "GM" offer to let me speak with the owner. Quite the opposite occurred, where I asked repeatedly and was 1) put on hold several times and 2) told that he was unavailable and she would need to put a message in with his secretary.
Since Mr. [redacted] was not present, he has obviously conferred with his staff and chosen to ignore the concerns of customer. My complaint is simple and I am sure that if anyone had the time to sit and review 4 days of video footage, it would show signs of my dog coughing and having a difficult time breathing. This is not something that began when we picked him up and there was negligence in the lack of contact.