Action Moving Services, Inc.

I am rejecting this response because:
The policy mentioned in the response, which I assume is the "Full Value Protection Policy," was never furbished to me despite repeated requests via email to view this following our August move with Action. While the analogy provided by Action Moving makes sense - you do not replace an entire car when a bumper is damaged - it is rarely the party that has damaged the bumper that gets to decide if the repair was done right. Because I was never informed of my rights/options for the product I had purchased, I signed off on repairs that were done in my homeHowever, one of our items still looks visibly damagedThus, if we extend the analogy, if a bumper was broken and the fix didn't repair the bumper well, the consumer would expect a refund or a replacement. I am happy to provide a copy of all of my correspondence with Action if needed. Regards,*** ***

RE: ID #***Complaint Background: Full Value Protection InsuranceCustomer is requesting a refund for the cost of the Insurance Premium on a Loss and Damage Claim after the policy had been executed within the guidelines of a Loss and Damage Claim.Customer is stating they are dissatisfied with the
move process citing damagesWhile we strive to make every move damage free, there can be instances where Loss and Damage occasionally does occur.Customer elected to purchase the Insurance Certificate for Full Value Protection with no deductible prior to their move and was given information within a day of their move surveyIf the customer did not request Full Value Protection, the shipment would be released at a reduced valuation rate of $per pound per article.Customer filed their claim thirteen days after their moveUpon receipt, their claim was acknowledged and was assigned to a third party company for inspection and repairs, as repairs are our first option when damage does occurTheir appointment was scheduled within daysSince the items that were damaged were repairable, the repairs were performed at the appointmentThe customer signed their satisfaction of repairs report.If the customer did not want the repairs performed, they have the responsibility to communicate that with the assigned repair firmIt is now after the claim has been executed and all repairs have been made as of August 2017, the customer is now requesting a refund of their premium of the policy as well as replacing a certain item at its full retail cost.As per the policy, if an item is repairable within its value, repairs are authorized by the mover as indicated in the policyIf the customer does not want the repairs performed, the cost of the repair is offered as a settlementIf an item is not repairable, consideration is given for replacement cost of items with like kind and qualitySince the items that were damaged were repairable, repairs were performed and the customer signed their satisfaction of repairsThere has been nothing submitted to date in regard to any dissatisfaction with the repairs until this report was filed.If an analogy could be made, if you damage your bumper on your car, your insurance will cover the cost of the repairs but not replace your carIf your roof gets damaged, your insurance will repair the roof, but will not replace your homeYou would still pay any deductibles with premiums that go along with the policy and you would not get a refund of the premiums you have paid after the policy has been executed.In addition, the customer is citing in their complaint that they have reached out to our company several times after repairs were done for documentation that they never receivedWhile we/they had contact on the timeline they have listed on this report, they have also failed to mention further communications on our part September 5th, 6th, 10th, December 4th and particularly on December 6th when we asked what it is was they were seekingTheir response did not make a demand, only citing dissatisfactionIt was only until this report was filed, the demand was outlined.We feel we are unable to grant their request as the claim has been processed in its entirety as per the policy and we consider this matter closed

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/06/27) */
In reference to the above complaint, This is a move in progress that was setup on short noticeWe accommodated the shipper on pickup date she wanted 6/and a shipment this size going that distance this time of year requires a
certain delivery spread and we explained that to her originally we set delivery for 6/through 7/but she advised us her apartment would not be available until 6/so she was made aware that the new delivery spread would be 6/through 7/( delivery spreads always start on the first day of availability ) THE SHIPMENT WILL BE DELIVERED WITHIN THE AGREED DELIVERY DATES and she has also been advised of thatThis is the first we heard about a problem with packing? If upon receipt of her goods there is damage she can file a claim either on line or we will have Atlas mail her a claim formWe do not understand her sudden blow up about thisWe offered to FedEx a couple boxes to her if there was something she needed sooner but got no response just rudenessWe have absolutely done nothing wrong and shouldn't even have to be responding to a complaintThe cost for the move even came in less than estimated Please let me know if you have any questions or need further informationI have attached move documents and salesmen's comments
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2014/06/27) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
As I stated previously in my complaint, the communication was not clear
From the e-mail of *** ***:
"I told her about the delivery window the first time we talked over the phone." This information is not trueThe communication with *** regarding the delivery was on e-mail and was not clear and vagueOn June *** wrote: "It could be as long as three weeksMost likely will be shorterBut there's no telling until the rest of your semi truck is routed."
Regarding the language barrier and broken English that *** stated in his e-mailIf *** had problems to understand me, he should state it clearly when we have multiple communicationsHe never said it beforeWhen I called last time he told something like this when I started to explain the situtaion: "I don't understand is it still in delivery window? Then what is the problem? ***, everything was written for you to read." I did not have any comments regarding this kind of response and just thanked him and hung up the phoneI don't beleive it is appropriate response from a professional who is there to help people and understand people concerns
"She was a last minute call-in." It doesn't sound right to me tooI have contacted Atlas at the beginning of June and never was told they could not help with the moveAdditionally, I told *** (another representative) that it is OK if they pick up the stuff later than June
Regarding packing issuesI had the discussion with *** regarding this beforeI stated that in my e-mails
There was a representative from Atlas-***, who truly wanted to help and was concerned with situationHe made several calls and tried to helpHowever, Action Moving representatives never updated me on situtation and I never got impression that they are concerned with the situationI would not comment on my "broken English" as *** stated, but I really hope that the fact some people are not native English speakers and that they came from different culture is not a basis for different treatment
I have all e-mail communications, if needed

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/11) */
November 11,
Revdex.com
Burnsville, MN
Re: Case Number ***
To Whom it May Concern,
This letter is in response to the above mentioned case filed with the Revdex.com of MinnesotaPlease be
aware that Action Moving Services booked this shipmentThis shipment was hauled by an Atlas Van Lines driverAction Moving Services Certified Claims Analysis is handling this claim on behalf of Atlas Van LinesFrom the complaint filed, the following items are in question:
1.) Missing poles to a shelf
2.) Missing medium size carton
3.) Large brown bar
4.) Several boxes crushed and items in them destroyed
5.) One box was wet and the items in the box had black mold
6.) Missing container
Here is our response to the items listed above
Missing Container - Attached are the three claims filed with Action Moving ServicesA missing container does not appear on any of the claims filed
Missing Medium Carton - Attached are the three claims filed with Action Moving ServicesA missing medium carton does not appear on any of the claims filed
Several boxes crushed and items in them destroyed - Attached are the three claims filed with Action Moving ServicesThere is no mention of cartons crushed and items destroyed
One box was wet and the items in the box had black mold - This item was claimed on their original claim formThis carton was packed by owner and we do not know what was insideThe carton was thrown out before we could inspect itThis item was denied for this reason on our settlement offer
Large Brown Bar - This item was on a supplemental claim form filed on August 27thThis item was shown to the inspector on August 18thUpon inspection, damage was noted on the "back panel, screw holes damaged"Action Moving offered $as cost to repairNo other damage was noted at the time of inspectionAlso, Action was not notified of the new damage until after the shipper had moved againOnce this piece was moved by another carrier, our liability ends
Missing poles to a shelf - This was filed on a supplemental claim on August 31stThe claim filed is very vagueThese units are sold with four shelvesWhy could this not have been inspected on August 18th? It is our policy to send an inspector out to residence only once per claimIt would not make sense to send the inspector out to just look at the shelving
In conclusion, Action has offered a generous settlement offer, which I have enclosed, that fairly addresses the claims filed by the shipperAction Moving will honor that settlement offer for another days and will also add a good will gesture of $for the shelvingAction Moving Services/Atlas Van Lines will not honor anymore claims filed, because the shipper has now moved with another carrier
Respectfully,
ACTION MOVING SERVICES, INC
Paul ***
Controller
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/11/12) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
We would like to see the total settlement offer in writingThank you!
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/11/16) */
***Corresponding document attached
RE: Atlas Van Lines Reg# ***
Amendment to Settlement issued 09/15/
Reference Revdex.com Case # ***
Dear ***:
We have received further correspondence regarding the request to see the total settlement offer in writingAs such, we have amended our settlement offer on the wire rack from a denial, to a customer service gesture in the amount of $as stated with no admission of liability on the part of the carrier
All other items that are referenced in our September 15, settlement letter remain
This brings the original settlement of $to the new settlement amount of $with no deductible
This is our complete, full and final offer and/or denial of your claim for the items you have claimed
Attached is a release in the amount of $Please sign and return the release at your earliest convenienceUpon receipt of the signed release, we will commence with paymentPlease see the release for further details
Again, we thank you for your patience and cooperation throughout the claims process
Sincerely,
Sue ***, CCA
Operations/Claims
Final Consumer Response /* (2000, 11, 2015/11/20) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/11/11) */
November 11, 2015
Revdex.com
Burnsville, MN 55337
Re: Case Number [redacted]
To Whom it May Concern,
This letter is in response to the above mentioned case filed with the Revdex.com of Minnesota. ...

Please be aware that Action Moving Services booked this shipment. This shipment was hauled by an Atlas Van Lines driver. Action Moving Services Certified Claims Analysis is handling this claim on behalf of Atlas Van Lines. From the complaint filed, the following items are in question:
1.) Missing poles to a shelf
2.) Missing medium size carton
3.) Large brown bar
4.) Several boxes crushed and items in them destroyed
5.) One box was wet and the items in the box had black mold
6.) Missing container
Here is our response to the items listed above.
Missing Container - Attached are the three claims filed with Action Moving Services. A missing container does not appear on any of the claims filed.
Missing Medium Carton - Attached are the three claims filed with Action Moving Services. A missing medium carton does not appear on any of the claims filed.
Several boxes crushed and items in them destroyed - Attached are the three claims filed with Action Moving Services. There is no mention of cartons crushed and items destroyed.
One box was wet and the items in the box had black mold - This item was claimed on their original claim form. This carton was packed by owner and we do not know what was inside. The carton was thrown out before we could inspect it. This item was denied for this reason on our settlement offer.
Large Brown Bar - This item was on a supplemental claim form filed on August 27th. This item was shown to the inspector on August 18th. Upon inspection, damage was noted on the "back panel, screw holes damaged". Action Moving offered $175 as cost to repair. No other damage was noted at the time of inspection. Also, Action was not notified of the new damage until after the shipper had moved again. Once this piece was moved by another carrier, our liability ends.
Missing poles to a shelf - This was filed on a supplemental claim on August 31st. The claim filed is very vague. These units are sold with four shelves. Why could this not have been inspected on August 18th? It is our policy to send an inspector out to residence only once per claim. It would not make sense to send the inspector out to just look at the shelving.
In conclusion, Action has offered a generous settlement offer, which I have enclosed, that fairly addresses the claims filed by the shipper. Action Moving will honor that settlement offer for another 30 days and will also add a good will gesture of $125 for the shelving. Action Moving Services/Atlas Van Lines will not honor anymore claims filed, because the shipper has now moved with another carrier.
Respectfully,
ACTION MOVING SERVICES, INC.
Paul [redacted]
Controller
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/11/12) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
We would like to see the total settlement offer in writing. Thank you!
Final Business Response /* (4000, 9, 2015/11/16) */
[redacted]Corresponding document attached.
RE: Atlas Van Lines Reg. # [redacted]
Amendment to Settlement issued 09/15/15
Reference Revdex.com Case # [redacted]
Dear [redacted]:
We have received further correspondence regarding the request to see the total settlement offer in writing. As such, we have amended our settlement offer on the wire rack from a denial, to a customer service gesture in the amount of $125.00 as stated with no admission of liability on the part of the carrier.
All other items that are referenced in our September 15, 2015 settlement letter remain.
This brings the original settlement of $1193.00 to the new settlement amount of $1318.00 with no deductible.
This is our complete, full and final offer and/or denial of your claim for the items you have claimed.
Attached is a release in the amount of $1318.00 Please sign and return the release at your earliest convenience. Upon receipt of the signed release, we will commence with payment. Please see the release for further details.
Again, we thank you for your patience and cooperation throughout the claims process.
Sincerely,
Sue [redacted], CCA
Operations/Claims
Final Consumer Response /* (2000, 11, 2015/11/20) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

February 19, 2018 Complaint ID # [redacted] Response to consumer rejection of response First, we question why the repairs were signed for as being acceptable in August when the repairs were performed and now they are not. If they were unacceptable at the time of the repair in August, no contact was made on the consumer's part to our company regarding this issue. It is not only until after the claim has been fully executed and closed in August and our further questions to the consumer in December asking what they were seeking did we learn that a repair is not acceptable through a complaint to the Revdex.com at the end of January. Not once did they report an unacceptable repair to our company or the company that repaired the item. Second, if the repair to this item is still visibly damaged, we have not been afforded the substantiation of an unacceptable damage repair. If the consumer would provide evidence of this unacceptable repair, we would be willing to reopen the claim for further investigation under the rules governing the valuation coverage. We will hold our file for 30 days from the date of this letter. We cannot, however, refund an insurance premium as this file has been executed.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/11/04) */
November 3, 2014
Complaint report [redacted]
Action Moving Services, Inc. response to complaint.
Ms. M contracted with Action Moving Services, Inc. to relocate her household goods from Eden Prairie, MN to Sunland CA. in June of...

2014. In her contract, she elected to pack all of her cartons. We, as the carrier, packed the mattress cartons only. Her shipment was loaded on June 10, 2014 and was brought to our facility for a brief storage period. Her shipment loaded out of our facility on July 3, 2014 and delivered in Sunland, CA on July 12, 2014.
During transit, a few items were damaged along the way. One of which included a floor lamp. This floor lamp had a glass shade that was packed separately in a carton. This carton was packed by Ms. M.
Ms. M called Action Moving on July 25, 2014 to inquire how to file for Loss and Damage Claims. We discussed her packed by owner cartons, one of which she was claiming damage to the contents of the carton. She advised at that time there was no external damage to the outside of this carton that would give cause to damage the contents. We advised at that time, the limits of carrier liability on packed by owner cartons does not cover acts or omissions by the consignee (improper packing).
Ms. M filed a Loss and Damage claim on August 12, 2014 for the lamp and the other items that were damaged in the move. She also filed for this carton that was discussed which contained pottery that she had packed. Although we advised her that liability for this would not be accepted due to no damages to the carton prior to her claim filing, she filed for this item and indicated on her claim form that there was damage to the carton. We assigned a repair firm of W[redacted] G[redacted] in Los Angeles, CA. to view this carton for damages and to take photos. They were also assigned to repair the metal floor lamp that had damage to the bulb socket. Since this repair would need to be performed in the shop, the lamp was taken in along with a few other items that would also need to be repaired.
Her items were returned to her on September 26, 2014. Our reports from W G were received for processing on September 29, 2014. Included in this report is the lamp base only that was returned to her, as the shade was not part of the claim and was not taken to the shop. Included in this report were the photos of all the items that were claimed as well as a release signed and dated September 26, 2014, stating all repairs were completed to her satisfaction.
On October 2, 2014, we processed the remainder of Ms. M's claim, which included a denial of the packed by owner carton of pottery. The status letter was emailed to Ms. M. The same day, we received a rebuttal to the denial of the denied carton. There was no mention of a glass shade for a floor lamp whatsoever.
In turn, we contacted W G for further information regarding this carton. On October 9, 2014, we were then informed, that Ms. M was contacting them regarding the lampshade on her lamp that was repaired and signed for. We learned that while the repair firm was at the home, the repair firm placed the glass shade on the lamp. There was no damage to the shade at that time. They also advised us that Ms M had called them a few days after they were in the home and advised she noticed the cracks in the top of the glass shade when she was moving items around inside the home, one of the items she moved included this lamp.
On October 10, 2014, Ms M called us and told us how she told the repair person not to pick up the lampshade by the finial and he did and he cracked it. She then advised us that she put the shade on the lamp.
On October 11, Ms M sent us photos of the lamp and a letter via email, stating when the tech was placing the shade on the lamp, she immediately rushed over to him and lifted the shade from the bottom edge out of his hands and placed it on the lamp. I told him it was fragile and that it couldn't be handled by the finial."
On October 14, 2014, we forwarded this information to W G. On October 16, 2014 they responded, advising they would have noticed if the shade was cracked while he was at the home. If this was something they felt they had done they would take full responsibility. Since this incident had not been reported until after they had left her residence and the release was signed that everything was completed satisfactorily and this incident was after she had been moving items around inside her home, they would not be able to take responsibility. The photos that were sent along show the cracks in the top area of the lampshade and are rather obvious.
Since the information we were initially inquiring about for Ms. Ms rebuttal to her claim was for a carton containing pottery and we received the information we requested, we advised W G they did not need to contact her on our behalf. We prepared and sent our rebuttal response on or about October 21, 2014. The rebuttal response was for the denied carton as this was the only item in the rebuttal request. Since the lampshade is an issue outside of the loss and damage claim, we did not address it in the rebuttal as it was not an item on the loss and damage claim.
In regards to the dollar amount she is requesting from Action Moving Services, Inc. for the cracked lampshade, we are not in a position to offer compensation. We feel we have enough evidence to support this denial as this was not a transit damage related claim related to her relocation. This was not damaged in her home by the repair firm as she states or they would have noted this and taken full responsibility. We assert this lampshade was damaged in her home by her when she moved the lamp herself.
Thank you,
Action Moving Services, Inc.

August 19, 2017 Response to complaint # [redacted]   We have reviewed this consumer complaint and respond as follows:   We are Action Moving Services, Inc. an agent for Atlas Van Lines.  This shipment moved under Atlas Van Lines dispatch authority....

While we are aware that moving can be a stressful event, we apologize for any misconception on the part of the consumer regarding the delivery date spread as well as the delivery delay on behalf of Atlas Van Lines.   The consumer, Mr. M, booked his shipment with the agent with the premise the shipment would be picked up and delivered within a delivery spread. Delivery spreads are made with respect to traffic patterns in freight movements to allow for distance, Federal regulations in regard to time allowable for drivers to drive, impassable roadways and incidentals such as breakdowns. This booking / registration was packed on July 28, picked up on July 29, and had a delivery spread of August 1, to August 11.  Logistically, a shipment moving from Minnesota to Georgia could take the full spread. Mr. M was advised of this both verbally and in writing and he signed his non-binding COD estimate with these dates.   Unfortunately, we, as Action Moving Services, were advised by Atlas dispatch as to the delay of the shipment due to the high volume of traffic. We notified Mr. M via email on the 10th that his shipment is being delayed by two days. The original spread was intended to deliver by the 11th which is a Thursday. The two day delay for the delivery is August 13th, which is a Saturday. We advised Mr. M that our van operators do not have the capability to run credit cards on their vehicles and advised him they can only accept certified funds. He could contact our office to have charges placed on his credit card. This would be during normal business hours Monday through Friday 8AM to 5PM CST. He did contact our office on the 12th, only to have the charges on his credit card denied. Certified Funds were collected by the Van operator on the day of delivery.   Mr. M’s remarks regarding harassing customers for payment when goods are not delivered are not a clear picture of the actual events that did or could happen .Under Federal Regulations, if the COD transportation charges are not paid prior to the shipment unloading, the carrier has the right to deliver the goods to the nearest storage facility to set off the shipment. Any applicable storage and delivery charges are additional COD charges to the consumer with the scheduling of the delivery made by the warehouseman holding the shipment. So in essence, this could have turned into something far more inconvenient for Mr. M and his family if the payment for transportation charges were held up on a non-business day. This was not harassment on the part of the carrier. We apologize he saw it this way, but we feel it was a misunderstanding on his part.   Mr. M’s remarks in regard to the children going to school for two weeks and not having any of their things or their work necessities, our records show that two weeks prior to the delivery date is the same day as the loading date of July 29th.  If they did not have their items needed to attend school or work, this would not be attributed to anything less than an act or an omission on the part of the consumer.   Mr. M has the right to file for a Delay Claim through Atlas Van Lines. He was made aware of this prior to the shipment being delivered. We have sent the applicable forms to him via US mail which he should receive shortly.   Sincerely, Action Moving Services, Inc. Agent for Atlas Van Lines

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/06/26) */
In response to the above referenced complaint, I would like to point to the following facts
We provided the customer a non binding estimate (see attachment )
We loaded one day and held overnight on truck (at no charge also furnished...

TV ctns no chg ) and delivered the next day after her closing. When we arrived to load the crew found items pictures and pots and pans that needed to be packed we were not expecting to do this extra work but did. The whole move over the two days went two hours longer than estimated @ $160.00 per hour there is the additional amount she is complaining about. There were no complaints about the job done, customer got upset when charges were tallied but paid ( she also notes in complaint " I expected to pay more") probably was aware we did more. She later called [redacted] and called him a thief and a liar and hung up. I wasn't in on conversation so am going by what I was told. I am sorry she feels this way we are very up front and honest with people. While we did the extra work I would be willing to refund her 1 hr $160.00 simply as a goodwill gesture if she drops her complaint Let me know if you need anything further. Or if we can resolve
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2014/06/27) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Your response was inaccurate. [redacted] came out & looked at my items to be moved Over half of my stuff was already packed. He looked at everything. No appliances had to be moved. No patio furniture I believe he underbid just to get my business some of the things they packed were really big NOT pots & pans the mover that came said he new it would be more when he saw it. I WAS NOT mad when I called [redacted]. He said are you calling me a liar. I said " well yes you lied" I said " if you are going to continue to scream at me I am going to hang up " & I did. I expected it to be at least $100 more Not $361. Maybe should change your biding estimates. I would have gone with someone else because I had lower bids. I went with your company because you moved my grandson it was very happy with you

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2014/11/04) */
November 3, 2014
Complaint report [redacted]
Action Moving Services, Inc. response to complaint.
Ms. M contracted with Action Moving Services, Inc. to relocate her household goods from Eden Prairie, MN to Sunland CA. in June of 2014. In...

her contract, she elected to pack all of her cartons. We, as the carrier, packed the mattress cartons only. Her shipment was loaded on June 10, 2014 and was brought to our facility for a brief storage period. Her shipment loaded out of our facility on July 3, 2014 and delivered in Sunland, CA on July 12, 2014.
During transit, a few items were damaged along the way. One of which included a floor lamp. This floor lamp had a glass shade that was packed separately in a carton. This carton was packed by Ms. M.
Ms. M called Action Moving on July 25, 2014 to inquire how to file for Loss and Damage Claims. We discussed her packed by owner cartons, one of which she was claiming damage to the contents of the carton. She advised at that time there was no external damage to the outside of this carton that would give cause to damage the contents. We advised at that time, the limits of carrier liability on packed by owner cartons does not cover acts or omissions by the consignee (improper packing).
Ms. M filed a Loss and Damage claim on August 12, 2014 for the lamp and the other items that were damaged in the move. She also filed for this carton that was discussed which contained pottery that she had packed. Although we advised her that liability for this would not be accepted due to no damages to the carton prior to her claim filing, she filed for this item and indicated on her claim form that there was damage to the carton. We assigned a repair firm of W[redacted] G[redacted] in Los Angeles, CA. to view this carton for damages and to take photos. They were also assigned to repair the metal floor lamp that had damage to the bulb socket. Since this repair would need to be performed in the shop, the lamp was taken in along with a few other items that would also need to be repaired.
Her items were returned to her on September 26, 2014. Our reports from W G were received for processing on September 29, 2014. Included in this report is the lamp base only that was returned to her, as the shade was not part of the claim and was not taken to the shop. Included in this report were the photos of all the items that were claimed as well as a release signed and dated September 26, 2014, stating all repairs were completed to her satisfaction.
On October 2, 2014, we processed the remainder of Ms. M's claim, which included a denial of the packed by owner carton of pottery. The status letter was emailed to Ms. M. The same day, we received a rebuttal to the denial of the denied carton. There was no mention of a glass shade for a floor lamp whatsoever.
In turn, we contacted W G for further information regarding this carton. On October 9, 2014, we were then informed, that Ms. M was contacting them regarding the lampshade on her lamp that was repaired and signed for. We learned that while the repair firm was at the home, the repair firm placed the glass shade on the lamp. There was no damage to the shade at that time. They also advised us that Ms M had called them a few days after they were in the home and advised she noticed the cracks in the top of the glass shade when she was moving items around inside the home, one of the items she moved included this lamp.
On October 10, 2014, Ms M called us and told us how she told the repair person not to pick up the lampshade by the finial and he did and he cracked it. She then advised us that she put the shade on the lamp.
On October 11, Ms M sent us photos of the lamp and a letter via email, stating when the tech was placing the shade on the lamp, she immediately rushed over to him and lifted the shade from the bottom edge out of his hands and placed it on the lamp. I told him it was fragile and that it couldn't be handled by the finial."
On October 14, 2014, we forwarded this information to W G. On October 16, 2014 they responded, advising they would have noticed if the shade was cracked while he was at the home. If this was something they felt they had done they would take full responsibility. Since this incident had not been reported until after they had left her residence and the release was signed that everything was completed satisfactorily and this incident was after she had been moving items around inside her home, they would not be able to take responsibility. The photos that were sent along show the cracks in the top area of the lampshade and are rather obvious.
Since the information we were initially inquiring about for Ms. Ms rebuttal to her claim was for a carton containing pottery and we received the information we requested, we advised W G they did not need to contact her on our behalf. We prepared and sent our rebuttal response on or about October 21, 2014. The rebuttal response was for the denied carton as this was the only item in the rebuttal request. Since the lampshade is an issue outside of the loss and damage claim, we did not address it in the rebuttal as it was not an item on the loss and damage claim.
In regards to the dollar amount she is requesting from Action Moving Services, Inc. for the cracked lampshade, we are not in a position to offer compensation. We feel we have enough evidence to support this denial as this was not a transit damage related claim related to her relocation. This was not damaged in her home by the repair firm as she states or they would have noted this and taken full responsibility. We assert this lampshade was damaged in her home by her when she moved the lamp herself.
Thank you,
Action Moving Services, Inc.

August 19, 2017 Response to complaint # [redacted]   We have reviewed this consumer complaint and respond as follows:   We are Action Moving Services, Inc. an agent for Atlas Van Lines.  This shipment moved under Atlas Van Lines dispatch authority. While we are aware that moving can be...

a stressful event, we apologize for any misconception on the part of the consumer regarding the delivery date spread as well as the delivery delay on behalf of Atlas Van Lines.   The consumer, Mr. M, booked his shipment with the agent with the premise the shipment would be picked up and delivered within a delivery spread. Delivery spreads are made with respect to traffic patterns in freight movements to allow for distance, Federal regulations in regard to time allowable for drivers to drive, impassable roadways and incidentals such as breakdowns. This booking / registration was packed on July 28, picked up on July 29, and had a delivery spread of August 1, to August 11.  Logistically, a shipment moving from Minnesota to Georgia could take the full spread. Mr. M was advised of this both verbally and in writing and he signed his non-binding COD estimate with these dates.   Unfortunately, we, as Action Moving Services, were advised by Atlas dispatch as to the delay of the shipment due to the high volume of traffic. We notified Mr. M via email on the 10th that his shipment is being delayed by two days. The original spread was intended to deliver by the 11th which is a Thursday. The two day delay for the delivery is August 13th, which is a Saturday. We advised Mr. M that our van operators do not have the capability to run credit cards on their vehicles and advised him they can only accept certified funds. He could contact our office to have charges placed on his credit card. This would be during normal business hours Monday through Friday 8AM to 5PM CST. He did contact our office on the 12th, only to have the charges on his credit card denied. Certified Funds were collected by the Van operator on the day of delivery.   Mr. M’s remarks regarding harassing customers for payment when goods are not delivered are not a clear picture of the actual events that did or could happen .Under Federal Regulations, if the COD transportation charges are not paid prior to the shipment unloading, the carrier has the right to deliver the goods to the nearest storage facility to set off the shipment. Any applicable storage and delivery charges are additional COD charges to the consumer with the scheduling of the delivery made by the warehouseman holding the shipment. So in essence, this could have turned into something far more inconvenient for Mr. M and his family if the payment for transportation charges were held up on a non-business day. This was not harassment on the part of the carrier. We apologize he saw it this way, but we feel it was a misunderstanding on his part.   Mr. M’s remarks in regard to the children going to school for two weeks and not having any of their things or their work necessities, our records show that two weeks prior to the delivery date is the same day as the loading date of July 29th.  If they did not have their items needed to attend school or work, this would not be attributed to anything less than an act or an omission on the part of the consumer.   Mr. M has the right to file for a Delay Claim through Atlas Van Lines. He was made aware of this prior to the shipment being delivered. We have sent the applicable forms to him via US mail which he should receive shortly.   Sincerely, Action Moving Services, Inc. Agent for Atlas Van Lines