re complaint ID [redacted] submitted 12/4/2015Note; The name of the individual shown on your complaint, is NOT the name of the individual I spoke with on Thursday December 3,'15 regarding the issue outlined in the complaint. That being said, the following is the other side of the...
story.On the morning of Saturday November 28, 2015, a new customer know to us as "J.R." brought his recently rescued cat into our grooming facility asking for the cat to be bathed and clipped. The conversation was started with a groomer that was not going to be doing the work, so the conversation was picked up by the actual groomer who is willing and able to groom cats. This groomer was trying to explain to the client, that due to the obvious stress that his cat was experiencing, she would not push the cat beyond what a bath and brush would do.The client was not happy to hear the groomers explanation and his attitude became somewhat negative. When all was said and done, the cat was left to be bathed and brushed. Upon the clients leaving the grooming office, he was asked to be sure to close the gate on his way out, as he had left the security gate open when he came in from the parking lot.When I viewed our security video, at 8:;28 A.M. the client (known to us as J.R.) exited to the parking lot. The video shows J.R. pulling the gate beyond the latching point toward himself. At that point the gate struck him on the back of his leg & foot and causing him to loose his balance and snstumble. The video shows Mr. R then closing the gate, entering his car and immediately drove away.As for the dogs being outside in the snow. Yes, there had been a light snow over night and the dogs were in the outside exercise area while the indoor facility was being washed and disinfected. This process is done every morning and it allows the dogs time to be outdoors away from the washing procedure., and giving the dogs some sense of their normal (at home) routine. We do not want to disrupt the 'house breaking" schedule an;y more than is necessary.The claim of an over payment seems to be the fact that the wife of Mr. R included a $3.00 TIP to the groomer... (Total of $40.40 inclu. tax and tip)The gate is not in need of repair, and had Mr. R not pulled the gate into himself, the chain link could not have made any contact with his shoe.During my phone call with MR. R, I did apologize and told him that I was very sorry that his experience was not what any of us wanted but that I was not comfortable giving any compensation for his problem at our gate. I never told the man I spoke with "too Bad", as theperson filing the complaint states.We have not had any other customers, before or since, having any problem with the gate.
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The account from the Business Owner is somewhat erroneous. For the record, I am using my middle initials with this complaint. Firstly. the cat was not in a state of distress and his ability to want to 'cuddle' with strangers let alone those the animal is familiar with is apparent. Secondly, the groomer who butted in to the initial conversation was at best an attempt to relieve the front desk lady from putting her foot even deeper into her mouth with her rudeness.Thirdly, the groomer opened the conversation with everything she 'wouldn't do' before I ever reiterated what was told to my wife on the call when the appointment was made. Because I respect my wife I followed through and asked about specific services which were told to me as 'not something they do' despite admitting it was the way in which they secured the appointment. Fourthly, the gate does still open and close, albeit loosely, but the bottom of the gate is incredibly dangerous and in a state of urgent repair (image attached) which caught my leg and foot and as can be seen on the security footage - hacked at me and caused me to loose balance, ripping a large hole in very expensive imported shoes. I expressed my thoughts on the matter immediately on the phone as I was needing to run to work that morning (yes on a weekend) and was late owing to the new need to drive home then to work. The over payment was indeed for services that were not carried out satisfactorily and for the shoes (partial) and does not include the lost earnings. The response states they have not received anything bad at any time in the past - this is incorrect, just look at the yelp link below or the google reviews showing the number of dissatisfied customers who were also treated poorly. Yelp actually has more than 50% terrible treatment and poor service reviews and google poor reviews date back consistently over the past several years! Perhaps I am the first to contact the Revdex.com and bring to light what others have only been able to do in their reviews. Similarly, perhaps I am the first person to suggest several modes of settlement from issues that arose as a direct result of their negligence that has persisted to the correct authorities. It is not unlike a business to try and bully their way into and out of situations with customers, I simply will not be bullied by this business and have sought the appropriate avenue to work toward a remedy.I am still open to settlement of this dispute but I am almost certain I will receive a "too bad" 'apology' as before. The fact they hung everything on their "you're the first person to EVER have an issue is evident of their conceitedness in this matter as the review links clearly show a number of people. Had I taken time to check their reputation before all of this, I would have suggested my wife make an appointment at another clinic. She was simply trying to get to a place that was convenient enough to our address. It is a shame that I have had to go this far simply because of neglect, rudeness, unsatisfactory services and ill treatment.
Sincerely,
[redacted] review link Yelp - showing more than half of their customers reviews are 1 star (across recommended and non recommended): [redacted]
re complaint ID [redacted] submitted 12/4/2015Note; The name of the individual shown on your complaint, is NOT the name of the individual I spoke with on Thursday December 3,'15 regarding the issue outlined in the complaint. That being said, the following is the other side of the...
story.On the morning of Saturday November 28, 2015, a new customer know to us as "J.R." brought his recently rescued cat into our grooming facility asking for the cat to be bathed and clipped. The conversation was started with a groomer that was not going to be doing the work, so the conversation was picked up by the actual groomer who is willing and able to groom cats. This groomer was trying to explain to the client, that due to the obvious stress that his cat was experiencing, she would not push the cat beyond what a bath and brush would do.The client was not happy to hear the groomers explanation and his attitude became somewhat negative. When all was said and done, the cat was left to be bathed and brushed. Upon the clients leaving the grooming office, he was asked to be sure to close the gate on his way out, as he had left the security gate open when he came in from the parking lot.When I viewed our security video, at 8:;28 A.M. the client (known to us as J.R.) exited to the parking lot. The video shows J.R. pulling the gate beyond the latching point toward himself. At that point the gate struck him on the back of his leg & foot and causing him to loose his balance and snstumble. The video shows Mr. R then closing the gate, entering his car and immediately drove away.As for the dogs being outside in the snow. Yes, there had been a light snow over night and the dogs were in the outside exercise area while the indoor facility was being washed and disinfected. This process is done every morning and it allows the dogs time to be outdoors away from the washing procedure., and giving the dogs some sense of their normal (at home) routine. We do not want to disrupt the 'house breaking" schedule an;y more than is necessary.The claim of an over payment seems to be the fact that the wife of Mr. R included a $3.00 TIP to the groomer... (Total of $40.40 inclu. tax and tip)The gate is not in need of repair, and had Mr. R not pulled the gate into himself, the chain link could not have made any contact with his shoe.During my phone call with MR. R, I did apologize and told him that I was very sorry that his experience was not what any of us wanted but that I was not comfortable giving any compensation for his problem at our gate. I never told the man I spoke with "too Bad", as theperson filing the complaint states.We have not had any other customers, before or since, having any problem with the gate.
Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:The account from the Business Owner is somewhat erroneous. For the record, I am using my middle initials with this complaint. Firstly. the cat was not in a state of distress and his ability to want to 'cuddle' with strangers let alone those the animal is familiar with is apparent. Secondly, the groomer who butted in to the initial conversation was at best an attempt to relieve the front desk lady from putting her foot even deeper into her mouth with her rudeness.Thirdly, the groomer opened the conversation with everything she 'wouldn't do' before I ever reiterated what was told to my wife on the call when the appointment was made. Because I respect my wife I followed through and asked about specific services which were told to me as 'not something they do' despite admitting it was the way in which they secured the appointment. Fourthly, the gate does still open and close, albeit loosely, but the bottom of the gate is incredibly dangerous and in a state of urgent repair (image attached) which caught my leg and foot and as can be seen on the security footage - hacked at me and caused me to loose balance, ripping a large hole in very expensive imported shoes. I expressed my thoughts on the matter immediately on the phone as I was needing to run to work that morning (yes on a weekend) and was late owing to the new need to drive home then to work. The over payment was indeed for services that were not carried out satisfactorily and for the shoes (partial) and does not include the lost earnings. The response states they have not received anything bad at any time in the past - this is incorrect, just look at the yelp link below or the google reviews showing the number of dissatisfied customers who were also treated poorly. Yelp actually has more than 50% terrible treatment and poor service reviews and google poor reviews date back consistently over the past several years! Perhaps I am the first to contact the Revdex.com and bring to light what others have only been able to do in their reviews. Similarly, perhaps I am the first person to suggest several modes of settlement from issues that arose as a direct result of their negligence that has persisted to the correct authorities. It is not unlike a business to try and bully their way into and out of situations with customers, I simply will not be bullied by this business and have sought the appropriate avenue to work toward a remedy.I am still open to settlement of this dispute but I am almost certain I will receive a "too bad" 'apology' as before. The fact they hung everything on their "you're the first person to EVER have an issue is evident of their conceitedness in this matter as the review links clearly show a number of people. Had I taken time to check their reputation before all of this, I would have suggested my wife make an appointment at another clinic. She was simply trying to get to a place that was convenient enough to our address. It is a shame that I have had to go this far simply because of neglect, rudeness, unsatisfactory services and ill treatment.
Sincerely,
[redacted] review link Yelp - showing more than half of their customers reviews are 1 star (across recommended and non recommended): [redacted]