beautometry.com

In Response to Complaint Regarding Beautometry Order # [redacted] Order was initially placed by the customer on February 20, as part of a pre order saleOur pre order policy states that instock items will be shipped with the pre ordered merchandise, in an effort to combine shipping costs for the customerWe even added additional items to her initial order - per her request - so that she would not incur additional shipping charges When Ms [redacted] placed her order, our inventory management system showed no items out of stockAn error in the number of bottles on hand of the Hit The Bottle Stamping Polish in [redacted] was not discovered until we attempted to fulfill Ms [redacted] 's orderOnce we corrected the stock quantity - no one was able to order the item - our system does not allow for back order or over sellingOur item count was off by five - meaning that unfortunately Ms [redacted] and four other customers were affected by this inventory errorThis error was not discovered by our staff until April 12, Customers were contacted via a notification in their shipments that their " [redacted] " polish would ship separatelyThese polishes are hand crafted in small batches and shipped in internationally, so getting additional polishes to rectify these orders is not a quick or easy taskWe chose to ship her order to her, minus this item, because of the already extensive wait she had encounteredWe were not expecting for her to pay additional shipping on the item, Our error caused her to be shorted her order item and we were more than happy to cover the additional shipping expense once the polish reached us as a gesture of apology We anticipate that this item will be back in stock with us in a a few weeksThe manufacturer is currently waiting on a bottle shipment to fulfill our order with themThis order does include the polishes that were over sold so that once it is received the items can be shipped to these customers - at our expense Upon receiving Ms [redacted] 's inquiry into the status of her polish, we informed her that a stock error had occurred on our end and that we chose not to delay her order further and shipped the instock items upon the arrival of her preordered itemsHuman error, not bait and switch or poor business practices, have caused the unfortunate delay to Ms [redacted] We have refunded her purchase price for this productWe, as the importing partner for this manufacturer, are unable to get our product any faster so Ms [redacted] 's request to have her polish expedited to her is unreasonable and her amount of compensation that she is requesting is exorbitant Unfortunately, our mistake has inconvenienced a valued customerWe understand her displeasure and frustration with the situation, however her borderline abusive tone in her emails is unwarranted and unappreciatedWe work very hard to communicate effectively with our customers and provided transparency that an error had occurred, refunded the full purchase price and maintained a professional and cordial communication with her - despite her unabating accusations that we have sold her polish to another customerSimply put, a stock error caused an oversell of a product - human errorA mistake which we regret has caused Ms [redacted] such distress Ms [redacted] has been refunded $for her polishShe is welcome to place another order for this item but due to the situation and her conduct - we have chosen to cancel the existing order

I placed an order on February 20, 2019. I have not received that order yet. When I placed that order, everything was in stock. I have tried to contact the company 4 times. No one will respond. My next step is to contact PayPal for my money back. The customer service is terrible.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.] This solution is really not a solution, but an attempt at falsifying the recordsMy order was placed on the first day the item was reported as back in stock. Therefore I purchased an actual item in stock. The item showed as "in stock" for several days afterwards, so I certainly paid and purchased an item that the merchant was in possession of when the transaction was made, and not an "overbuy" item. At the time that I have purchased the item, the ownership was transferred to me. That the item was going to be shipped with the pre-ordered items is of not consequence - it was already my property the moment the merchant accepted the paymentThe fact that the merchant decided not to put it aside as already bought and paid for hardly changes the actual legal status of this transaction.2. I was not contacted about this mistake on April 12, when the merchant claims it was discovered. I only found out when I opened the package. There was a note "*** will be shipped separately" without any sort of explanation/apology/timeframe. At this point it's hardly surprising that I was upset, considering that I waited for the items for months, only to discover I have to wait for at least another two, because the merchant, through their own fault sold and shipped the item already owned by me to another customer. I would appreciate to be given a chance to cancel the entire order/hold the shipment/add more items while waiting for another two months until the merchant fixes her mistake. I am not incompetent, and can make my own decisions as to my purchases, I do not need the merchant to make them for me. 3. I contacted the manufacturer, and was informed that an express order for the item the merchant double-sold could have been placed as an small express order. That the merchant choose not to do so is certainly dictated by the economics of this transaction, and not by a good-faith and the will to resolve the problem in a way that is satisfying to the customer. As I stated, the item that is $would take around $to replace. This, however is caused by the staff employed by the merchant, and should not be my concern. Love the comment about the shipment charges covered as a gesture of apology. After selling item owned by me to another customer, refusing to apologize for that, and considering that another two-month wait is not worth mentioning, this certainly makes it all better. Did I expect to be paying additional shipping charges because the merchant made a mistake? Well, not really. I expected an express shipment of the missing item. Additional shipping costs would not occur if the merchant kept correct inventory.4. I was indeed informed about the error - no apology was issued. Did I feel as a valued customer at that point? Certainly not. A valued customer did receive the item that was double-sold, I did not. 5. I am surprised at the claim that the merchant is offended by my "borderline abusive" behavior and chooses to punish me for itSo let's re-assume:Merchant sells an item owned by me and ships it to another customer;Merchant chooses not to contact me about it letting me to decide the course of action;Merchant chooses to send an incomplete order out, without any apology;Merchant chooses to disregard their own policy of sending the pre-ordered items with the items ordered and in stock at the time of placing the order;Merchant chooses not to apologize for this (in the entire chain of the emails there is no an apology to me or offer of fixing this mistake other than me waiting for another two months or more), or take any action replacing the item other than a regular re-stock of the large quantity of the polish;Merchant decides to penalize me for this by cancelling my order, therefore cheating me out of the free shipping, because she is surprised and hurt by the fact that I did not feel entirety satisfied with that transaction, and choose to express this dissatisfaction. I sure could order the item when it is in stock, thank you. However, in this case I do not think this is a solution. The merchant is bound by laws, and I am not a child to be punished for nasty behavior, but rather a customer that was cheated in this transaction due to the incompetence of merchant's staff. Refund was made against my directions to the merchant, and I do feel that it was not at this point merchant's decision to make. Once accepting a payment for the in-stock item merchant is under an obligation to fulfill the order. Changing the status of my order without notifying me is a questionable business practice. I therefore expect the item to be shipped to me upon the receipt of the additional stock by the merchant. I have no hope that the merchant will really attempt to fix the mistake and express-order the items, but at this point I do not feel I need to keep an eye on the re-stock status. I already paid for the item, the ownership was already transferred to me, and if the merchant choose to ship the item I at this point OWNED to another customer it should be merchant's responsibility to amend I did not request the refund, I requested the item. I expect that the item will be shipped to me at the earliest date. I do not expect to pay the shipping charges, or any additional charges prior to receiving the item I own. I did not agree to re-sell this item to the merchant, and the refund made against my instructions is immaterial and does not void the original transaction. Issuing the refund was merchant's choice and attempt at getting out of this transaction with the least problems, but this solution is unacceptable to me.All of this for a bottle of nail polish seems excessive, however the way I was treated by the merchant is unacceptable, be it a $bottle of nail polish, or $100,car. Double-selling should not be allowed, and the mistakes and inconvenience to the "valued" customers should be fixed in the ways convenient and acceptable to the customer, not to the merchant who made the "mistake".Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the offer and/or response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
[Provide details of why you are not satisfied with this resolution.]
This solution is really not a solution, but an attempt at falsifying the recordsMy order was placed on the first day the item was reported as back in stock. Therefore I purchased an actual item in stock. The item showed as "in stock" for several days afterwards, so I certainly paid and purchased an item that the merchant was in possession of when the transaction was made, and not an "overbuy" item. At the time that I have purchased the item, the ownership was transferred to me. That the item was going to be shipped with the pre-ordered items is of not consequence - it was already my property the moment the merchant accepted the paymentThe fact that the merchant decided not to put it aside as already bought and paid for hardly changes the actual legal status of this transaction2. I was not contacted about this mistake on April 12, when the merchant claims it was discovered. I only found out when I opened the package. There was a note "*** will be shipped separately" without any sort of explanation/apology/timeframe. At this point it's hardly surprising that I was upset, considering that I waited for the items for months, only to discover I have to wait for at least another two, because the merchant, through their own fault sold and shipped the item already owned by me to another customer. I would appreciate to be given a chance to cancel the entire order/hold the shipment/add more items while waiting for another two months until the merchant fixes her mistake. I am not incompetent, and can make my own decisions as to my purchases, I do not need the merchant to make them for me.
3. I contacted the manufacturer, and was informed that an express order for the item the merchant double-sold could have been placed as an small express order. That the merchant choose not to do so is certainly dictated by the economics of this transaction, and not by a good-faith and the will to resolve the problem in a way that is satisfying to the customer. As I stated, the item that is $would take around $to replace. This, however is caused by the staff employed by the merchant, and should not be my concern. Love the comment about the shipment charges covered as a gesture of apology. After selling item owned by me to another customer, refusing to apologize for that, and considering that another two-month wait is not worth mentioning, this certainly makes it all better. Did I expect to be paying additional shipping charges because the merchant made a mistake? Well, not really. I expected an express shipment of the missing item. Additional shipping costs would not occur if the merchant kept correct inventory4. I was indeed informed about the error - no apology was issued. Did I feel as a valued customer at that point? Certainly not. A valued customer did receive the item that was double-sold, I did not.
5. I am surprised at the claim that the merchant is offended by my "borderline abusive" behavior and chooses to punish me for itSo let's re-assume:
Merchant sells an item owned by me and ships it to another customer;
Merchant chooses not to contact me about it letting me to decide the course of action;
Merchant chooses to send an incomplete order out, without any apology;
Merchant chooses to disregard their own policy of sending the pre-ordered items with the items ordered and in stock at the time of placing the order;
Merchant chooses not to apologize for this (in the entire chain of the emails there is no an apology to me or offer of fixing this mistake other than me waiting for another two months or more), or take any action replacing the item other than a regular re-stock of the large quantity of the polish;
Merchant decides to penalize me for this by cancelling my order, therefore cheating me out of the free shipping, because she is surprised and hurt by the fact that I did not feel entirety satisfied with that transaction, and choose to express this dissatisfaction.
I sure could order the item when it is in stock, thank you. However, in this case I do not think this is a solution. The merchant is bound by laws, and I am not a child to be punished for nasty behavior, but rather a customer that was cheated in this transaction due to the incompetence of merchant's staff. Refund was made against my directions to the merchant, and I do feel that it was not at this point merchant's decision to make. Once accepting a payment for the in-stock item merchant is under an obligation to fulfill the order. Changing the status of my order without notifying me is a questionable business practice.
I therefore expect the item to be shipped to me upon the receipt of the additional stock by the merchant. I have no hope that the merchant will really attempt to fix the mistake and express-order the items, but at this point I do not feel I need to keep an eye on the re-stock status. I already paid for the item, the ownership was already transferred to me, and if the merchant choose to ship the item I at this point OWNED to another customer it should be merchant's responsibility to amend I did not request the refund, I requested the item. I expect that the item will be shipped to me at the earliest date. I do not expect to pay the shipping charges, or any additional charges prior to receiving the item I own. I did not agree to re-sell this item to the merchant, and the refund made against my instructions is immaterial and does not void the original transaction. Issuing the refund was merchant's choice and attempt at getting out of this transaction with the least problems, but this solution is unacceptable to meAll of this for a bottle of nail polish seems excessive, however the way I was treated by the merchant is unacceptable, be it a $bottle of nail polish, or $100,car. Double-selling should not be allowed, and the mistakes and inconvenience to the "valued" customers should be fixed in the ways convenient and acceptable to the customer, not to the merchant who made the "mistake"Regards,
*** ***

In Response to Complaint Regarding Beautometry Order #[redacted]Order was initially placed by the customer on February 20, 2016 as part of a pre order sale. Our pre order policy states that instock items will be shipped with the pre ordered merchandise, in an effort to combine shipping costs for the...

customer. We even added additional items to her initial order -  per her request - so that she would not incur additional shipping charges. When Ms. [redacted] placed her order, our inventory management system showed no items out of stock. An error in the number of bottles on hand of the Hit The Bottle Stamping Polish in [redacted] was not discovered until we attempted to fulfill Ms. [redacted]'s order. Once we corrected the stock quantity - no one was able to order the item - our system does not allow for back order or over selling. Our item count was off by five - meaning that unfortunately Ms. [redacted] and four other customers were affected by this inventory error. This error was not discovered by our staff until April 12, 2016.Customers were contacted  via a notification in their shipments that their "[redacted]" polish would ship separately. These polishes are hand crafted in small batches and shipped in internationally, so getting additional polishes to rectify these orders is not a quick or easy task. We chose to ship her order to her, minus this item, because of the already extensive wait she had encountered. We were not expecting for her to pay additional shipping on the item, Our error caused her to be shorted her order item and we were more than happy to cover the additional shipping expense once the polish reached us as a gesture of apology. We anticipate that this item will be back in stock with us in a a few weeks. The manufacturer is currently waiting on a bottle shipment to fulfill our order with them. This order does include the polishes that were over sold so that once it is received the items can be shipped to these customers - at our expense. Upon receiving Ms. [redacted]'s inquiry into the status of her polish, we informed her that a stock error had occurred on our end and that we chose not to delay her order further and shipped the instock items upon the arrival of her preordered items. Human error, not bait and switch or poor business practices, have caused the unfortunate delay to Ms. [redacted]. We have refunded her purchase price for this product. We, as the importing partner for this manufacturer, are unable to get our product any faster so Ms. [redacted]'s request to have her polish expedited to her is unreasonable and her amount of compensation that she is requesting is exorbitant. Unfortunately, our mistake has inconvenienced a valued customer. We understand her displeasure and frustration with the situation, however her borderline abusive tone in her emails is unwarranted and unappreciated. We work very hard to communicate effectively with our customers and provided transparency that an error had occurred, refunded the full purchase price and maintained a professional and cordial communication with her - despite her unabating accusations that we have sold her polish to another customer. Simply put, a stock error caused an oversell of a product - human error. A mistake which we regret has caused Ms. [redacted] such distress. Ms. [redacted] has been refunded $7.00 for her polish. She is welcome to place another order for this item but due to the situation and her conduct - we have chosen to cancel the existing order.

In Response to Complaint Regarding Beautometry Order #[redacted]
Order was initially placed by the...

customer on February 20, 2016 as part of a pre order sale. Our pre order policy states that instock items will be shipped with the pre ordered merchandise, in an effort to combine shipping costs for the customer. We even added additional items to her initial order -  per her request - so that she would not incur additional shipping charges. 
When Ms. [redacted] placed her order, our inventory management system showed no items out of stock. An error in the number of bottles on hand of the Hit The Bottle Stamping Polish in [redacted] was not discovered until we attempted to fulfill Ms. [redacted]'s order. Once we corrected the stock quantity - no one was able to order the item - our system does not allow for back order or over selling. Our item count was off by five - meaning that unfortunately Ms. [redacted] and four other customers were affected by this inventory error. This error was not discovered by our staff until April 12, 2016.
Customers were contacted  via a notification in their shipments that their "[redacted]" polish would ship separately. These polishes are hand crafted in small batches and shipped in internationally, so getting additional polishes to rectify these orders is not a quick or easy task. We chose to ship her order to her, minus this item, because of the already extensive wait she had encountered. We were not expecting for her to pay additional shipping on the item, Our error caused her to be shorted her order item and we were more than happy to cover the additional shipping expense once the polish reached us as a gesture of apology. 
We anticipate that this item will be back in stock with us in a a few weeks. The manufacturer is currently waiting on a bottle shipment to fulfill our order with them. This order does include the polishes that were over sold so that once it is received the items can be shipped to these customers - at our expense. 
Upon receiving Ms. [redacted]'s inquiry into the status of her polish, we informed her that a stock error had occurred on our end and that we chose not to delay her order further and shipped the instock items upon the arrival of her preordered items. Human error, not bait and switch or poor business practices, have caused the unfortunate delay to Ms. [redacted]. We have refunded her purchase price for this product. We, as the importing partner for this manufacturer, are unable to get our product any faster so Ms. [redacted]'s request to have her polish expedited to her is unreasonable and her amount of compensation that she is requesting is exorbitant. 
Unfortunately, our mistake has inconvenienced a valued customer. We understand her displeasure and frustration with the situation, however her borderline abusive tone in her emails is unwarranted and unappreciated. We work very hard to communicate effectively with our customers and provided transparency that an error had occurred, refunded the full purchase price and maintained a professional and cordial communication with her - despite her unabating accusations that we have sold her polish to another customer. Simply put, a stock error caused an oversell of a product - human error. A mistake which we regret has caused Ms. [redacted] such distress. 
Ms. [redacted] has been refunded $7.00 for her polish. She is welcome to place another order for this item but due to the situation and her conduct - we have chosen to cancel the existing order.

Review: Merchant sold me an in-stock item, for which I paid in full, therefore at this point the ownership was transferred to me. It was a small-ticket item, stamping nail polish, but fairly hard to come by, as it's manufactured in Australia, and I already waited a couple of months for it to become available. The terms were that the shipping of the item was to be combined with the shipping of some pre-ordered items, upon the receipt of said items by the merchant. This was substantially delayed, but I did not complain about that, and neither did I check if the in-stock items purchased at the same time are still available on the website, as I assumed that the items I paid for and at his point owned owned are reserved for me. However, when the shipment finally came in, I was surprised to find that the in-stock item purchased by me two months prior is not included. There was no communication from the merchant, and the only information was a cryptic note that "[redacted] will be shipped separately." Upon inquiring about this, I was told that the merchant sold the item owned by me, without my knowledge and consent, and expects me to wait another couple of months for the restock. I declined, requesting that the merchant replace the item immediately, as she had no right to sell the item that did not belong to her. I contacted the manufacturer and found out that the express replacement is possible, albeit expensive. At this point the merchant decided that issuing a refund (despite my repeated refusal of accepting a refund as a solution) is the best way to resolve the issue. I claim that the merchant owes me to replace the item immediately, as she sold it while it belonged to me, after she accepted my payment for the item in stock. Selling the same item to a couple of customers is illegal and should be remedied by the merchant according to the client's request, not according to the whims of the merchant.Desired Settlement: I want to receive the item I paid for in full two months ago, while it was in stock. I am not interested in refund, and am not interested n months of waiting, because the merchant decided to sell the same item to several people. I fulfilled my part of the contract and expect the seller to fulfill hers immediately. Selling one item to several customers backfired this time, and he seller should bear the consequences.

Business

Response:

In Response to Complaint Regarding Beautometry Order #[redacted]