[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response If you wish, you may update it before sending it.] Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that although there are additional statements submitted by the business, this resolution is satisfactory to me Looking back, I find nothing I could have done differently (short of driving for hours or more for 'training' at the factory) would have altered the outcome with respect to the realized efficacy of the unit.It would help customers if 1) the user manual was complete and accurate, 2) a training video was available instead of requiring customers to travel hours or days to the factory for 'training'.I did not do sufficient research before purchasing this unit There are better devices available I made a bad purchasing decision and learned from that.Thank you, ***, for making this right Regards, [redacted] ***
The purchaser, ***, said to us in an email that he did not have time to read the instructions of the unitThis is not a automated coffee machine, it is a supercritical COfluid extraction system, which is sold as a manually operated systemIt has high pressures, which can be dangerous when not used properly We, the seller, have provided [redacted] with unlimited support, which is not included in the purchase price The purchaser said that the unit would not build pressure, and he was not able to get any extract out of the unit, he concluded it therefore did not work properly We offered the purchaser free training, at our shop, so we could show him that the unit indeed performed as advertised The purchased scheduled a preliminary date for training, then cancelled out because "he didn't have time." The customer then said he had his engineer look over the system to check for leaksHe found that the pressure safety relief valve was venting pressure This valve only vents when there is a over pressure (it is a safety item)So at some point, he had it over 2,psi, when he claimed it would not build sufficient pressure to operate (which is lower than the maximum safety pressure) The customer then requested a refund, after he decided that he did not have time to get adequate training on the unit, and would not read the instructions We do not offer refunds on this type of equipment, especially since he has exceeded the safety pressure relief valve, and that valve vented excess pressure to the atmosphere On the invoice, it specifically says that warranty on the system is void if this relief valve is popped (which means the user has exceeded safe operating parameters)We offered [redacted] a refund less a percent restocking fee, and less our delivery charge, which ended up being $1,since we provided personal delivery of unit We only deducted $for the delivery on the refund [redacted] returned unit, and we took a surveyThe unit was configured wrong, so there is no way it would build pressureWe configured correctly and it built pressure just fine
We have responded at length in emails to ***'s attempts to run the unit.We have offered him training and testing at our shop to show him how to properly operate the unit.The customer first accepted this offer, then declined the training, tell us he had no time for it.We can resolve all of the customer complaints by having proper training.We received the unit back in a condition, that would not allow it to have any extract operation, so I understand why the customer is so angry.The fact is, this is not a coffee machine Proper operation requires that you read and understand the operation of it, or it will not produce any extract If the customer would have allowed for proper training, he could have had the machine operate as advertised. We cannot help a customer, who is unwilling, or unable to take the time to operate the machine properly
[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that although there are additional false statements submitted by the business, this resolution is satisfactory to me. Looking back, I find nothing I could have done differently (short of driving for 10 hours or more for 'training' at the factory) would have altered the outcome with respect to the realized efficacy of the unit.It would help customers if 1) the user manual was complete and accurate, 2) a training video was available instead of requiring customers to travel hours or days to the factory for 'training'.I did not do sufficient research before purchasing this unit. There are better devices available. I made a bad purchasing decision and learned from that.Thank you, [redacted], for making this right.
Regards,
[redacted]
1. The purchaser, [redacted], said to us in an email that he did not have time to read the instructions of the unit. This is not a automated coffee machine, it is a supercritical CO2 fluid extraction system, which is sold as a manually operated system. It has high pressures, which can be dangerous...
when not used properly. 2. We, the seller, have provided [redacted] with unlimited support, which is not included in the purchase price.3. The purchaser said that the unit would not build pressure, and he was not able to get any extract out of the unit, he concluded it therefore did not work properly.4. We offered the purchaser free training, at our shop, so we could show him that the unit indeed performed as advertised. The purchased scheduled a preliminary date for training, then cancelled out because "he didn't have time." 5. The customer then said he had his engineer look over the system to check for leaks. He found that the pressure safety relief valve was venting pressure. This valve only vents when there is a over pressure (it is a safety item). So at some point, he had it over 2,000 psi, when he claimed it would not build sufficient pressure to operate (which is lower than the maximum safety pressure). 6. The customer then requested a refund, after he decided that he did not have time to get adequate training on the unit, and would not read the instructions.7. We do not offer refunds on this type of equipment, especially since he has exceeded the safety pressure relief valve, and that valve vented excess pressure to the atmosphere. On the invoice, it specifically says that warranty on the system is void if this relief valve is popped (which means the user has exceeded safe operating parameters). We offered [redacted] a refund less a 30 percent restocking fee, and less our delivery charge, which ended up being $1,000 since we provided personal delivery of unit. We only deducted $600 for the delivery on the refund.8. [redacted] returned unit, and we took a survey. The unit was configured wrong, so there is no way it would build pressure. We configured correctly and it built pressure just fine.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
The business has submitted false statements. Among other false statements, we DID read the instructions front to back before using the device. Also, the engineer here on-site observed the pressure-release valve malfunctioning at approximately 1550 PSI. I asked [redacted] about this (see the attached document) and received no reply.The business also stonewalled us in our attempts to resolve the issues BEFORE we decided to return the unit. Please see attached document as a relevant excerpt of the email chain. Very specific questions were asked but NOT answered. This, along with the non-functioning unit led is to the conclusion that the description of the unit and the estimates made with respect to the expected output were exaggerated beyond extreme. The delivery person, Ray, told me that they did not see much output from the device when tested at the factory. I was shocked that he told me that and, in hindsight, should have refused the delivery. I was hoping it would actually function as advertised.In the attached document, I ask [redacted] if the ROI used as part of the promotion of the unit was based on actual experimental data. No response. No response to all my other questions, either. My conclusion was that [redacted] is falsely advertising the unit with wildly exaggerated claims. My personal experience and my engineer's observations when using the unit bore this out; the unit does NOT work as advertised and [redacted] does not answer customers' specific questions. At NO TIME did I EVER say that I had no time to read the manual. This is a provable lie and is indicative of [redacted]'s approach to business.
Regards,
[redacted]
[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response If you wish, you may update it before sending it.] Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that although there are additional statements submitted by the business, this resolution is satisfactory to me Looking back, I find nothing I could have done differently (short of driving for hours or more for 'training' at the factory) would have altered the outcome with respect to the realized efficacy of the unit.It would help customers if 1) the user manual was complete and accurate, 2) a training video was available instead of requiring customers to travel hours or days to the factory for 'training'.I did not do sufficient research before purchasing this unit There are better devices available I made a bad purchasing decision and learned from that.Thank you, ***, for making this right Regards, [redacted] ***
The purchaser, ***, said to us in an email that he did not have time to read the instructions of the unitThis is not a automated coffee machine, it is a supercritical COfluid extraction system, which is sold as a manually operated systemIt has high pressures, which can be dangerous when not used properly We, the seller, have provided [redacted] with unlimited support, which is not included in the purchase price The purchaser said that the unit would not build pressure, and he was not able to get any extract out of the unit, he concluded it therefore did not work properly We offered the purchaser free training, at our shop, so we could show him that the unit indeed performed as advertised The purchased scheduled a preliminary date for training, then cancelled out because "he didn't have time." The customer then said he had his engineer look over the system to check for leaksHe found that the pressure safety relief valve was venting pressure This valve only vents when there is a over pressure (it is a safety item)So at some point, he had it over 2,psi, when he claimed it would not build sufficient pressure to operate (which is lower than the maximum safety pressure) The customer then requested a refund, after he decided that he did not have time to get adequate training on the unit, and would not read the instructions We do not offer refunds on this type of equipment, especially since he has exceeded the safety pressure relief valve, and that valve vented excess pressure to the atmosphere On the invoice, it specifically says that warranty on the system is void if this relief valve is popped (which means the user has exceeded safe operating parameters)We offered [redacted] a refund less a percent restocking fee, and less our delivery charge, which ended up being $1,since we provided personal delivery of unit We only deducted $for the delivery on the refund [redacted] returned unit, and we took a surveyThe unit was configured wrong, so there is no way it would build pressureWe configured correctly and it built pressure just fine
We have responded at length in emails to ***'s attempts to run the unit.We have offered him training and testing at our shop to show him how to properly operate the unit.The customer first accepted this offer, then declined the training, tell us he had no time for it.We can resolve all of the customer complaints by having proper training.We received the unit back in a condition, that would not allow it to have any extract operation, so I understand why the customer is so angry.The fact is, this is not a coffee machine Proper operation requires that you read and understand the operation of it, or it will not produce any extract If the customer would have allowed for proper training, he could have had the machine operate as advertised. We cannot help a customer, who is unwilling, or unable to take the time to operate the machine properly
[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that although there are additional false statements submitted by the business, this resolution is satisfactory to me. Looking back, I find nothing I could have done differently (short of driving for 10 hours or more for 'training' at the factory) would have altered the outcome with respect to the realized efficacy of the unit.It would help customers if 1) the user manual was complete and accurate, 2) a training video was available instead of requiring customers to travel hours or days to the factory for 'training'.I did not do sufficient research before purchasing this unit. There are better devices available. I made a bad purchasing decision and learned from that.Thank you, [redacted], for making this right.
Regards,
[redacted]
1. The purchaser, [redacted], said to us in an email that he did not have time to read the instructions of the unit. This is not a automated coffee machine, it is a supercritical CO2 fluid extraction system, which is sold as a manually operated system. It has high pressures, which can be dangerous...
when not used properly. 2. We, the seller, have provided [redacted] with unlimited support, which is not included in the purchase price.3. The purchaser said that the unit would not build pressure, and he was not able to get any extract out of the unit, he concluded it therefore did not work properly.4. We offered the purchaser free training, at our shop, so we could show him that the unit indeed performed as advertised. The purchased scheduled a preliminary date for training, then cancelled out because "he didn't have time." 5. The customer then said he had his engineer look over the system to check for leaks. He found that the pressure safety relief valve was venting pressure. This valve only vents when there is a over pressure (it is a safety item). So at some point, he had it over 2,000 psi, when he claimed it would not build sufficient pressure to operate (which is lower than the maximum safety pressure). 6. The customer then requested a refund, after he decided that he did not have time to get adequate training on the unit, and would not read the instructions.7. We do not offer refunds on this type of equipment, especially since he has exceeded the safety pressure relief valve, and that valve vented excess pressure to the atmosphere. On the invoice, it specifically says that warranty on the system is void if this relief valve is popped (which means the user has exceeded safe operating parameters). We offered [redacted] a refund less a 30 percent restocking fee, and less our delivery charge, which ended up being $1,000 since we provided personal delivery of unit. We only deducted $600 for the delivery on the refund.8. [redacted] returned unit, and we took a survey. The unit was configured wrong, so there is no way it would build pressure. We configured correctly and it built pressure just fine.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
The business has submitted false statements. Among other false statements, we DID read the instructions front to back before using the device. Also, the engineer here on-site observed the pressure-release valve malfunctioning at approximately 1550 PSI. I asked [redacted] about this (see the attached document) and received no reply.The business also stonewalled us in our attempts to resolve the issues BEFORE we decided to return the unit. Please see attached document as a relevant excerpt of the email chain. Very specific questions were asked but NOT answered. This, along with the non-functioning unit led is to the conclusion that the description of the unit and the estimates made with respect to the expected output were exaggerated beyond extreme. The delivery person, Ray, told me that they did not see much output from the device when tested at the factory. I was shocked that he told me that and, in hindsight, should have refused the delivery. I was hoping it would actually function as advertised.In the attached document, I ask [redacted] if the ROI used as part of the promotion of the unit was based on actual experimental data. No response. No response to all my other questions, either. My conclusion was that [redacted] is falsely advertising the unit with wildly exaggerated claims. My personal experience and my engineer's observations when using the unit bore this out; the unit does NOT work as advertised and [redacted] does not answer customers' specific questions. At NO TIME did I EVER say that I had no time to read the manual. This is a provable lie and is indicative of [redacted]'s approach to business.
Regards,
[redacted]