RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT:To whom it may concern, The purpose of this response to the complaint #*** is to explain why coverage was not extended to *** *** for the purchase of the
Pug/Pomeranian crossI have attached the appropriate documents to support my rebuttal*** *** purchased Pug/Pomeranian cross for $with the payment through one of our financing companiesAt Pets Plus Inc every puppy purchase is required to complete a Puppy Warranty Sheet, this is our sales contract to make sure both parties are aware of their responsibilities after purchaseThe first part I would like to highlight is our veterinary expense coverageWe do offer treatment coverage at our approved veterinary hospitals, customers are not required to use our hospitals, but then they will be responsible for their own expenses*** *** waived this coverage when she decided to use her preferred veterinary hospitalThe second part of the contract I would like to highlight is the day notice requirementThe puppy was purchased on July 14, therefore the day cut off would have been July 28, and our preferred method of contact is email*** *** came into the store on August 12, to inform me of the issues she was having and presented me with a bill from her veterinary hospitalI informed her that this was not the course of action for treatment and recommended that *** *** transfer to one of our approved veterinary hospitals for Pets Plus Inc to help with medical expense*** *** refused this suggestionPets Plus Inc received medical documents from a different veterinary hospital on September 29, At this point *** *** had already launched a smear campaign against our company that started September 17, I have attached over pages of posts attacking our company and reaching out to gain supportersFrom what I have found and I am sure there are more left uncovered, at least different posts that lead to horrible feeds trashing our company nameThe first one started on Facebook group page September 17,on *** ***, September 28, Quantico/Stafford/Fredericksburg/Spotsylvania Online Yard Sale, October 2, *** *** ***, October 8, Quantico/Stafford/Fredericksburg/Spotsylvania Online Yard Sale, October 25, *** *** Talk sharing her husband’s review bashing the owner by namePets Plus Inc will have no contact with *** *** or her husband unless it goes through a third partyI would like all posts and reviews taken down, but the damage has already been doneAs a result of not following the contract we will not be honoring the complaint’s request. *** ***
*** *** *** *** ***
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
- The second part of the contract I would like to
highlight is the day notice requirement[The Puppy Warranty states under the Limited 14-Day Puppy
Warranty section that “Should a veterinarian diagnose this puppy with Parvo
Virus, Distemper, Hepatitis, Corona Virus, or Canine Influenza within the
fourteen-days immediately following your purchase, you may bring your puppy to
a Pets Plus Inc approved animal hospital where all reasonable diagnostics and
treatment will be at no cost to youIf your veterinarian detects any of the
above-mentioned diseases within the fourteen (14) day period immediately following
your purchase, you must notify your retailer within twenty-four (24) hours
Preferred method of contact is email: ***
Our puppy was not diagnosed with any of these issuesHe was diagnosed with a
resistant strain of pneumonia.] - The puppy was purchased on July 14,
therefore the day cut off would have been July 28, and our preferred
method of contact is email[In
addition to going to the business in person, Mrs*** and I had phone
conversations with Pets Plus Inc on July 17, 20, and September and
Pets Plus Inc was also in touch with our veterinarian and the veterinary
internal medicine specialist.] - *** *** came into the store on
August 12, to inform me of the issues she was having and presented me with
a bill from her veterinary hospital[Pets Plus Inc was aware of the cough the puppy had on the day of
purchase and presented it as just a coldMrs*** called our veterinarian while in the store completing the
paperwork and scheduled an appointment for that day.] - I informed her that this was not the
course of action for treatment and recommended that *** *** transfer
to one of our approved veterinary hospitals for Pets Plus Inc to help with medical
expense[To our knowledge,
no one at Pets Plus Inc has identified themselves as a licensed veterinarian
Thus, Pets Plus Inc is not qualified to determine the course of action
for treatmentBesides, if Pets Plus Inc knew the course of action for
treatment, why was the puppy not treated when he first exhibited symptoms
before purchase?] - Pets Plus
Inc received medical documents from a different veterinary hospital on
September 29, [These
medical documents were from the veterinary internal medicine specialist who was
acting on a referral from our veterinarianA bronchoscopy was performed in
order to determine the type of pneumonia.] - At this point *** *** had already launched a smear campaign against our company that started
September 17, [The definition
of “smear” is to damage the reputation of (someone) by accusations;
slanderMrs*** and I have not made any untrue negative comments or
suggestions about Pets Plus Inc, its staff, or its productsBy contrast, Ms
Bonnie H*** has publicly referred to Mrs*** as “that crazy ***.”] - I have
attached over pages of posts attacking our company and reaching out to gain
supporters...October
25, *** *** *** sharing her husband’s review bashing the owner by
name[The initial posts
were of Mrs*** reaching out to the community to find out if anyone had
purchased a puppy from Pets Plus Inc that was exhibiting the same symptoms
This was not designed to harm Pets Plus IncShe was trying to a) find alternative
treatment options and b) reach out and offer support to those with pets
experiencing this problemMrs*** was not blaming Pets Plus Inc, she was
simply identifying it as the common denominatorWe are not in control of the
responses and in most cases reiterated that this wasn’t about puppy mills,
shutting down Pets Plus Inc, or the ownerIt was about any puppies recently
purchased from there exhibiting similar symptoms or had passed away following
exhibition of these symptomsSomething I’m sure a responsible business owner
would be concerned aboutMy October 25, letter to Pets Plus Inc was addressed
to MsBonnie H*** - she is the ownerThere was nothing stated “bashing” her
or anyone elseI simply stated what has happened and my disappointmentThis
comes down to a character issueWhile Pets Plus Inc touts itself as a
family-owned local business, it has misrepresented its product (the puppy’s
origin is not from a “licensed and inspected breeder”) and does not live up to
the character and reputation it wishes to espouseWe have documentation of
everything we have stated while Pets Plus Inc has at best offered to look into
a store credit to offset our extensive medical expenses and at worst denigrated
my wife.] - Pets Plus Inc will have no contact with *** *** or
her husband unless it goes through a third party[Due to the lack of contact from Pets Plus Inc, I have
been forced to make my concerns public regarding Pets Plus Inc.] - As
a result of not following the contract we will not be honoring the complaint’s
request. [As a point
of fact, Mrs*** and I have adhered to our part of the contractAttached
is the August 12, email Ms*** sent to Mrs***
following a conversation with our veterinarianIn it, she states, “The
veterinarian at Stafford was very helpful and sent over everything I needed to
file the claimIt was not the mega esophagus, but could be three other things
I have sent off to pre-claim until the barium x-rays are performed then we can
move on from thereAny questions please let me know.”]
Regards,
*** ***
RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT:To whom it may concern, The purpose of this response to the complaint #*** is to explain why coverage was not extended to *** *** for the purchase of the
Pug/Pomeranian crossI have attached the appropriate documents to support my rebuttal*** *** purchased Pug/Pomeranian cross for $with the payment through one of our financing companiesAt Pets Plus Inc every puppy purchase is required to complete a Puppy Warranty Sheet, this is our sales contract to make sure both parties are aware of their responsibilities after purchaseThe first part I would like to highlight is our veterinary expense coverageWe do offer treatment coverage at our approved veterinary hospitals, customers are not required to use our hospitals, but then they will be responsible for their own expenses*** *** waived this coverage when she decided to use her preferred veterinary hospitalThe second part of the contract I would like to highlight is the day notice requirementThe puppy was purchased on July 14, therefore the day cut off would have been July 28, and our preferred method of contact is email*** *** came into the store on August 12, to inform me of the issues she was having and presented me with a bill from her veterinary hospitalI informed her that this was not the course of action for treatment and recommended that *** *** transfer to one of our approved veterinary hospitals for Pets Plus Inc to help with medical expense*** *** refused this suggestionPets Plus Inc received medical documents from a different veterinary hospital on September 29, At this point *** *** had already launched a smear campaign against our company that started September 17, I have attached over pages of posts attacking our company and reaching out to gain supportersFrom what I have found and I am sure there are more left uncovered, at least different posts that lead to horrible feeds trashing our company nameThe first one started on Facebook group page September 17,on *** ***, September 28, Quantico/Stafford/Fredericksburg/Spotsylvania Online Yard Sale, October 2, *** *** ***, October 8, Quantico/Stafford/Fredericksburg/Spotsylvania Online Yard Sale, October 25, *** *** Talk sharing her husband’s review bashing the owner by namePets Plus Inc will have no contact with *** *** or her husband unless it goes through a third partyI would like all posts and reviews taken down, but the damage has already been doneAs a result of not following the contract we will not be honoring the complaint’s request. *** ***
*** *** *** *** ***
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
- The second part of the contract I would like to
highlight is the day notice requirement[The Puppy Warranty states under the Limited 14-Day Puppy
Warranty section that “Should a veterinarian diagnose this puppy with Parvo
Virus, Distemper, Hepatitis, Corona Virus, or Canine Influenza within the
fourteen-days immediately following your purchase, you may bring your puppy to
a Pets Plus Inc approved animal hospital where all reasonable diagnostics and
treatment will be at no cost to youIf your veterinarian detects any of the
above-mentioned diseases within the fourteen (14) day period immediately following
your purchase, you must notify your retailer within twenty-four (24) hours
Preferred method of contact is email: ***
Our puppy was not diagnosed with any of these issuesHe was diagnosed with a
resistant strain of pneumonia.] - The puppy was purchased on July 14,
therefore the day cut off would have been July 28, and our preferred
method of contact is email[In
addition to going to the business in person, Mrs*** and I had phone
conversations with Pets Plus Inc on July 17, 20, and September and
Pets Plus Inc was also in touch with our veterinarian and the veterinary
internal medicine specialist.] - *** *** came into the store on
August 12, to inform me of the issues she was having and presented me with
a bill from her veterinary hospital[Pets Plus Inc was aware of the cough the puppy had on the day of
purchase and presented it as just a coldMrs*** called our veterinarian while in the store completing the
paperwork and scheduled an appointment for that day.] - I informed her that this was not the
course of action for treatment and recommended that *** *** transfer
to one of our approved veterinary hospitals for Pets Plus Inc to help with medical
expense[To our knowledge,
no one at Pets Plus Inc has identified themselves as a licensed veterinarian
Thus, Pets Plus Inc is not qualified to determine the course of action
for treatmentBesides, if Pets Plus Inc knew the course of action for
treatment, why was the puppy not treated when he first exhibited symptoms
before purchase?] - Pets Plus
Inc received medical documents from a different veterinary hospital on
September 29, [These
medical documents were from the veterinary internal medicine specialist who was
acting on a referral from our veterinarianA bronchoscopy was performed in
order to determine the type of pneumonia.] - At this point *** *** had already launched a smear campaign against our company that started
September 17, [The definition
of “smear” is to damage the reputation of (someone) by accusations;
slanderMrs*** and I have not made any untrue negative comments or
suggestions about Pets Plus Inc, its staff, or its productsBy contrast, Ms
Bonnie H*** has publicly referred to Mrs*** as “that crazy ***.”] - I have
attached over pages of posts attacking our company and reaching out to gain
supporters...October
25, *** *** *** sharing her husband’s review bashing the owner by
name[The initial posts
were of Mrs*** reaching out to the community to find out if anyone had
purchased a puppy from Pets Plus Inc that was exhibiting the same symptoms
This was not designed to harm Pets Plus IncShe was trying to a) find alternative
treatment options and b) reach out and offer support to those with pets
experiencing this problemMrs*** was not blaming Pets Plus Inc, she was
simply identifying it as the common denominatorWe are not in control of the
responses and in most cases reiterated that this wasn’t about puppy mills,
shutting down Pets Plus Inc, or the ownerIt was about any puppies recently
purchased from there exhibiting similar symptoms or had passed away following
exhibition of these symptomsSomething I’m sure a responsible business owner
would be concerned aboutMy October 25, letter to Pets Plus Inc was addressed
to MsBonnie H*** - she is the ownerThere was nothing stated “bashing” her
or anyone elseI simply stated what has happened and my disappointmentThis
comes down to a character issueWhile Pets Plus Inc touts itself as a
family-owned local business, it has misrepresented its product (the puppy’s
origin is not from a “licensed and inspected breeder”) and does not live up to
the character and reputation it wishes to espouseWe have documentation of
everything we have stated while Pets Plus Inc has at best offered to look into
a store credit to offset our extensive medical expenses and at worst denigrated
my wife.] - Pets Plus Inc will have no contact with *** *** or
her husband unless it goes through a third party[Due to the lack of contact from Pets Plus Inc, I have
been forced to make my concerns public regarding Pets Plus Inc.] - As
a result of not following the contract we will not be honoring the complaint’s
request. [As a point
of fact, Mrs*** and I have adhered to our part of the contractAttached
is the August 12, email Ms*** sent to Mrs***
following a conversation with our veterinarianIn it, she states, “The
veterinarian at Stafford was very helpful and sent over everything I needed to
file the claimIt was not the mega esophagus, but could be three other things
I have sent off to pre-claim until the barium x-rays are performed then we can
move on from thereAny questions please let me know.”]
Regards,
*** ***