CompuMail Corporation

[redacted] asked CompuMail to mail their letters the cheapest way possible, which we did [redacted] was supposed to drop off their letters on Monday and bring a check with them for postageThey brought them on Tuesday and wanted to pay for the postage with a credit cardWhen told they would have to pay a 3% fee (approx $7.50) they chose to come back the next day with a checkTheir letters mailed Wednesday, the same day they brought us the postage check Their actions did not give us any indication that time was critical The plain white #envelopes were already stuffed and had a mailing label on them There was not a return address and there was nothing about them that was "personalized" - nothing about them indicated that they were invitations In our industry we rarely, if ever, see an invitation in a #envelope, so we had no reason to question their request There have been several times in the past that we have advised a client to pay first class postage rather than use our services - we would have never mailed these at bulk rate with less than a week to the event Even at first class rate, less than a week is a very short time period for an invitationThe facts of this incident are included in my original response [redacted]

[redacted] called inquiring about CompuMail mailing out a letter that had already been printed, inserted into an envelope, and addressed for a discounted postage rateWe sent them an estimate for postage and services on September 22, They said they would deliver the letters to us on Monday, September 29, We notified them that we require payment for postage prior to mailing, so to bring a check for postage along with the lettersOn Tuesday, September 30, 2014, [redacted] representatives dropped off the letters, a day later than they were originally expected [redacted] brought a credit card to pay for the postage, and we told them that payments for postage by credit card were subject to a 3% processing feeAfter discussing, they decided to pay by check insteadThey returned on Wednesday, October 1, 2014, with a check for postageThe letters mailed the same day, on October 1, We received a call from [redacted] on October 8, with concerns about its "Grand Opening" event [redacted] stated that the event was that evening, and no one had received the invitations yetShe stated that she had contacted every person on the mailing list and asked if the letter was receivedShe then asked how can CompuMail find a solution to this problem of no one having had received the letter? No one at CompuMail was aware that the letters were actually invitations; the letters were already inserted into the envelopes when they were dropped off The instructions we received were to mail them the "cheapest way possible" There was no mention at all that this was a time sensitive mailingThe complaint states that four CompuMail employees all confirmed that the letters would be received by October 6, - this is falseNo CompuMail employee did, or ever would, guarantee a postal service delivery dateThe only date we ever confirm with a client is the date the mail will be delivered to the post office - this is the only date that we control.In an effort to help [redacted] , [redacted] immediately called CompuMail's postal representative at the [redacted] post office who confirmed that the mail did clear on October 1, 2014, and had gone to the [redacted] post office that dayShe offered to call her counterparts at both the [redacted] and [redacted] post offices to see when the mail cleared their post officesWhile waiting for a return call from the post office, [redacted] spoke with [redacted] again She asked [redacted] to provide us with the mailing list so that we could verify it for outdated or invalid addresses We also needed to provide a sampling of the addresses to our postal rep so the carriers on those routes could be contacted to try and confirm where in transit the mail was [redacted] would not provide that information, and instead she wanted a solution to the problem immediatelyWe offered to send an email invitation to all of her recipients, but she unfortunately did not have email addresses [redacted] insisted that if CompuMail did not provide an answer, then [redacted] would contact a lawyer in an attempt to get a refund [redacted] sent us a certified letter that was received on October 16, I contacted the attorney who was carbon copied on the letter and informed him that we did not agree with most of what was stated in the letter I told him that CompuMail fulfilled its obligation to mail the letters the most inexpensive way possible as requested.Typically, we print and address the mail that we processWe helped [redacted] because they were referred to us by the post office If we had known that they were mailing a time sensitive piece, we would have told them they needed to mail it first class Bulk mail can take up to days to process - we would never have mailed it bulk rate had we known [redacted] provided us with a plain white #envelope with a mailing label and no return addressWe would have suggested a return address on the envelope and perhaps a tag line that stated " Invitation enclosed" in an effort to get the envelope opened by the recipient If [redacted] had called us earlier in the process we would have suggested an eye catching postcard to invite people to their event [redacted] 's event was advertised via email blast to all members of the [redacted] and listed on the [redacted] websiteOn October 9, 2014, [redacted] posted on its company [redacted] page that the event "was a successful night" and "special thanks to lots of people for helping make it a success"CompuMail takes these allegations very seriously and we strongly disagree with this complaintWe have been serving our community for years and this is the first Revdex.com complaint that I can recall Please contact me if you require further information[redacted]

[redacted] asked CompuMail to mail their letters the cheapest way possible, which we did [redacted] was supposed to drop off their letters on Monday and bring a check with them for postageThey brought them on Tuesday and wanted to pay for the postage with a credit cardWhen told they would have to pay a 3% fee (approx $7.50) they chose to come back the next day with a checkTheir letters mailed Wednesday, the same day they brought us the postage check Their actions did not give us any indication that time was critical The plain white #envelopes were already stuffed and had a mailing label on them There was not a return address and there was nothing about them that was "personalized" - nothing about them indicated that they were invitations In our industry we rarely, if ever, see an invitation in a #envelope, so we had no reason to question their request There have been several times in the past that we have advised a client to pay first class postage rather than use our services - we would have never mailed these at bulk rate with less than a week to the event Even at first class rate, less than a week is a very short time period for an invitation The facts of this incident are included in my original response [redacted]

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:
First I would like to address that the *** *** at no point had any contact with *** 24/in anywayEverything was handled by *** ***, whom I assume is ***'s daughter, except 10/when payment was deliveredOn 10/the only people there to help us were the Secretary at the front desk (I believe her name was ***), *** from accounting came out to answer our questions, and someone came out in ***'s place(unsure of her name)We made it very clear that these were our Grand Opening invitations and that our event was being held on 10/All three assured us that there would be no problem having them mailed AND received prior to 10/It was stated that they would likely be received by 10/Mrs***'s response that there was 'no mention that this was time sensitive' is complete trashShe wasn't even present and neither was her daughterShe is trying to make a rebuttal to something that she wasn't present to hear, so therefor her statements are invalid and most of what she has to say is less than hearsayHer statement that 'no employee confirmed a delivery date' is also falseAgain, she was not present for any conversations so perhaps she needs to retrain her employees not to say things that they can't stand by.At no time was it EVER stated or made clear that delivery could or would take daysHad this been the case and the fact that our material was time sensitive we obviously would not have chosen to use CompuMailIf this was clearly stated to us I ask that they provide proof of documentation signed by us stating itOn 10/when *** called because none of our invitations had been receivedCompuMail offered no solution and offered to do nothing that would help usThey offered to email the invites? I can do that myself, but this was supposed to be more personalized, hence why we took the time to stuffed and address every single one ourselvesSecondly, what good would it have been to email the invites that day only a couple hours prior? The solution wasn't a solution it was a poor attempt to make the problem go away and was beyond unacceptableYes, we sent them a certified letter and CC'd our attorney on itWhat CompuMail stated to the attorney doesn't matter because it turns out our attorney represents them also and can have nothing to do with it due to conflict of interestCompuMail in NO WAY fulfilled its obligation to mail our invitations when it was stated to us by THREE different employees that it would be no problem to have our INVITATIONS received by 10/Again, perhaps Mrs*** should have had the employees whom were actually present to state this to us respond to our complaint instead of attempting to write this through hearsay from her daughter who wasn't present wither when we delivered paymentTheir 'suggestions' of a postcard or eye catching 'invitation enclosed' are a wonderful idea, but make absolutely no difference at this time and I have no clue why she is suggesting what they would have doneMrs *** wouldn't have suggested anything since she was never present as it isOur *** post of a 'successful night' is what she brings up? What is someone going to post, that it was a terrible failure due to the mailing house screwing up? The only people that showed up were a handful of Chamber of Commerce members and family/friendsSo is that what we were supposed to say? 'Thanks to everyone for a terrible failure of a night!' No, you do your best and keep moving forwardThe people that helped make it a successful night were the staff and family that ran it, so in that sense it was a successDue to the mailers being received 10/(yes, our members and chamber members called to make us aware when they finally received them) it was an unsuccessful Grand Opening in the sense that there were zero people who joined CompuMail did not make us aware of the day mailing periodCompumail did not follow through with the agreement to have them there by 10/Had we known this would be the outcome we would have mailed it ourselvesCompuMail's negligence to make us aware of a day mailing period, verbal assurance by separate employees that it would be received prior to the Grand Opening, and refusal to rectify the problem cost our new business nearly $not including time.
Sincerely,*** *** ***

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:First I would like to address that the [redacted] at no point had any contact with [redacted] 24/7 in anyway. Everything was handled by [redacted], whom I assume is [redacted]'s daughter, except 10/1 when payment was delivered. On 10/1 the only people there to help us were the Secretary at the front desk (I believe her name was [redacted]), [redacted] from accounting came out to answer our questions, and someone came out in [redacted]'s place(unsure of her name). We made it very clear that these were our Grand Opening invitations and that our event was being held on 10/8. All three assured us that there would be no problem having them mailed AND received prior to 10/8. It was stated that they would likely be received by 10/6. Mrs. [redacted]'s response that there was 'no mention that this was time sensitive' is complete trash. She wasn't even present and neither was her daughter. She is trying to make a rebuttal to something that she wasn't present to hear, so therefor her statements are invalid and most of what she has to say is less than hearsay. Her statement that 'no employee confirmed a delivery date' is also false. Again, she was not present for any conversations so perhaps she needs to retrain her employees not to say things that they can't stand by.At no time was it EVER stated or made clear that delivery could or would take 10 days. Had this been the case and the fact that our material was time sensitive we obviously would not have chosen to use CompuMail. If this was clearly stated to us I ask that they provide proof of documentation signed by us stating it. On 10/8 when [redacted] called because none of our invitations had been received. CompuMail offered no solution and offered to do nothing that would help us. They offered to email the invites? I can do that myself, but this was supposed to be more personalized, hence why we took the time to stuffed and address every single one ourselves. Secondly, what good would it have been to email the invites that day only a couple hours prior? The solution wasn't a solution it was a poor attempt to make the problem go away and was beyond unacceptable. Yes, we sent them a certified letter and CC'd our attorney on it. What CompuMail stated to the attorney doesn't matter because it turns out our attorney represents them also and can have nothing to do with it due to conflict of interest. CompuMail in NO WAY fulfilled its obligation to mail our invitations when it was stated to us by THREE different employees that it would be no problem to have our INVITATIONS received by 10/6. Again, perhaps Mrs. [redacted] should have had the employees whom were actually present to state this to us respond to our complaint instead of attempting to write this through hearsay from her daughter who wasn't present wither when we delivered payment. Their 'suggestions' of a postcard or eye catching 'invitation enclosed' are a wonderful idea, but make absolutely no difference at this time and I have no clue why she is suggesting what they would have done. Mrs [redacted] wouldn't have suggested anything since she was never present as it is. Our [redacted] post of a 'successful night' is what she brings up? What is someone going to post, that it was a terrible failure due to the mailing house screwing up? The only people that showed up were a handful of Chamber of Commerce members and family/friends. So is that what we were supposed to say?  'Thanks to everyone for a terrible failure of a night!' No, you do your best and keep moving forward. The people that helped make it a successful night were the staff and family that ran it, so in that sense it was a success. Due to the mailers being received 10/10 (yes, our members and chamber members called to make us aware when they finally received them) it was an unsuccessful Grand Opening in the sense that there were zero people who joined.  CompuMail did not make us aware of the 10 day mailing period. Compumail did not follow through with the agreement to have them there by 10/6. Had we known this would be the outcome we would have mailed it ourselves. CompuMail's negligence to make us aware of a 10 day mailing period, verbal assurance by 3 separate employees that it would be received prior to the Grand Opening, and refusal to rectify the problem cost our new business nearly $1000 not including time. 
 
Sincerely,
[redacted]  [redacted]

[redacted] asked CompuMail to mail their letters the cheapest way possible, which we did.  [redacted] was supposed to drop off their letters on Monday and bring a check with them for postage. They brought them on Tuesday and wanted to pay for the postage with a credit card. When told they would have to pay a 3% fee (approx $7.50) they chose to come back the next day with a check. Their letters mailed Wednesday, the same day they brought us the postage check.  Their actions did not give us any indication that time was critical.  The plain white #10 envelopes were already stuffed and had a mailing label on them.  There was not a return address and there was nothing about them that was "personalized" - nothing about them indicated that they were invitations.  In our industry we rarely, if ever, see an invitation in a #10 envelope, so we had no reason to question their request.  There have been several times in the past that we have advised a client to pay first class postage rather than use our services - we would have never mailed these at bulk rate with less than a week to the event.  Even at first class rate, less than a week is a very short time period for an invitation. The facts of this incident are included in my original response. [redacted]

[redacted] called inquiring about CompuMail mailing out a letter
that had already been printed, inserted into an envelope, and addressed for a
discounted postage rate. We sent them an estimate for postage and services on
w:st="on">September 22, 2014.  They said
they would deliver the letters to us on Monday, September 29, 2014. We notified them
that we require payment for postage prior to mailing, so to
bring a check for postage along with the letters. On Tuesday, September 30, 2014, [redacted] representatives dropped off the letters, a day later than they were originally
expected. [redacted] brought a credit card to pay for the postage, and we told
them that payments for postage by credit card were subject to a 3% processing fee. After
discussing, they decided to pay by check instead. They returned on Wednesday, October 1, 2014,
with a check for postage. The letters mailed the same day, on October 1, 2014.
We received a call from [redacted] on October 8, 2014 with concerns about its
"Grand Opening" event. [redacted] stated that the event was that
evening, and no one had received the invitations yet. She
stated that she had contacted every person on the mailing list and asked if the
letter was received. She then asked how can CompuMail find a solution to this
problem of no one having had received the letter?
No one at CompuMail was aware that the letters were actually
invitations; the letters were already inserted into the envelopes when they were dropped off.  The instructions we received were to mail them the "cheapest way possible".  There was no mention at all that this was a time sensitive mailing. The complaint states that four CompuMail employees all confirmed that the letters would be
received by October 6, 2014 - this is false. No CompuMail employee did, or ever would, guarantee a postal service delivery date. The only date we ever confirm with a client is the date the mail will be delivered to the post office - this is the only date that we control.
In an effort to help [redacted],  [redacted] immediately
called CompuMail's postal representative at the [redacted] post office who confirmed that the mail did clear on October
1, 2014, and had gone to the [redacted] post office that day. She offered to call her
counterparts at both the [redacted] and [redacted] post offices to see when the mail cleared their post offices. While waiting for a return call from the post office, [redacted] spoke with [redacted] again.  She asked [redacted] to provide us with the mailing list so that we could verify it for outdated or invalid addresses.  We also needed to provide a sampling of the addresses to our postal rep so the carriers on those routes could be contacted to try and confirm where in transit the mail was. [redacted] would not provide that
information, and instead she wanted a solution to the problem immediately. We
offered to send an email invitation to all of her recipients, but she
unfortunately did not have email addresses. [redacted] insisted that if CompuMail did not
provide an answer, then [redacted] would contact a lawyer in an attempt to get a
refund.
[redacted] sent us a certified letter that was
received on October 16,
2014. I contacted the attorney who was carbon copied on the letter and informed him that we did not agree with most of what was stated in the letter.  I told him that CompuMail fulfilled its obligation to mail the letters the most inexpensive way possible as requested.
Typically, we print and address the mail that we process. We helped [redacted] because they were referred to us by the post office.  If we had known that they were mailing a time sensitive piece, we would have told them they needed to mail it first class.  Bulk mail can take up to 10 days to process - we would never have mailed it bulk rate had we known.  [redacted] provided us with a plain white #10 envelope with a mailing label and no return address. We would have suggested a return address on the envelope and perhaps a tag line that stated " Invitation enclosed" in an effort to get the envelope opened by the recipient.  If [redacted] had called us earlier in the process we would have suggested an eye catching postcard to invite people to their event. 
[redacted]'s event
was advertised via email blast to all members of the [redacted] and listed on the [redacted] website. On October 9, 2014, [redacted]
posted on its company [redacted] page that the event "was a successful
night" and "special thanks to lots of people for helping make it a
success". 
CompuMail takes these allegations very seriously and we strongly disagree with this complaint. We have been serving our community for 24 years and this is the first Revdex.com complaint that I can recall.  Please contact me if you require further information.
[redacted]

[redacted] asked CompuMail to mail their letters the cheapest way possible, which we did.  [redacted] was supposed to drop off their letters on Monday and bring a check with them for postage. They brought them on Tuesday and wanted to pay for the postage with a credit card. When told they would have to pay a 3% fee (approx $7.50) they chose to come back the next day with a check. Their letters mailed Wednesday, the same day they brought us the postage check.  Their actions did not give us any indication that time was critical.  The plain white #10 envelopes were already stuffed and had a mailing label on them.  There was not a return address and there was nothing about them that was "personalized" - nothing about them indicated that they were invitations.  In our industry we rarely, if ever, see an invitation in a #10 envelope, so we had no reason to question their request.  There have been several times in the past that we have advised a client to pay first class postage rather than use our services - we would have never mailed these at bulk rate with less than a week to the event.  Even at first class rate, less than a week is a very short time period for an invitation. 
The facts of this incident are included in my original response. 
[redacted]

[redacted] called inquiring about CompuMail mailing out a letter
that had already been printed, inserted into an envelope, and addressed for a
discounted postage rate. We sent them an estimate for postage and services on September 22, 2014.  They said
they would deliver the letters to...

us on Monday, September 29, 2014. We notified them
that we require payment for postage prior to mailing, so to
bring a check for postage along with the letters. On Tuesday, September 30, 2014, [redacted] representatives dropped off the letters, a day later than they were originally
expected. [redacted] brought a credit card to pay for the postage, and we told
them that payments for postage by credit card were subject to a 3% processing fee. After
discussing, they decided to pay by check instead. They returned on Wednesday, October 1, 2014,
with a check for postage. The letters mailed the same day, on October 1, 2014.
We received a call from [redacted] on October 8, 2014 with concerns about its
"Grand Opening" event. [redacted] stated that the event was that
evening, and no one had received the invitations yet. She
stated that she had contacted every person on the mailing list and asked if the
letter was received. She then asked how can CompuMail find a solution to this
problem of no one having had received the letter?
No one at CompuMail was aware that the letters were actually
invitations; the letters were already inserted into the envelopes when they were dropped off.  The instructions we received were to mail them the "cheapest way possible".  There was no mention at all that this was a time sensitive mailing. The complaint states that four CompuMail employees all confirmed that the letters would be
received by October 6, 2014 - this is false. No CompuMail employee did, or ever would, guarantee a postal service delivery date. The only date we ever confirm with a client is the date the mail will be delivered to the post office - this is the only date that we control.In an effort to help [redacted],  [redacted] immediately
called CompuMail's postal representative at the [redacted] post office who confirmed that the mail did clear on October
1, 2014, and had gone to the [redacted] post office that day. She offered to call her
counterparts at both the [redacted] and [redacted] post offices to see when the mail cleared their post offices. While waiting for a return call from the post office, [redacted] spoke with [redacted] again.  She asked [redacted] to provide us with the mailing list so that we could verify it for outdated or invalid addresses.  We also needed to provide a sampling of the addresses to our postal rep so the carriers on those routes could be contacted to try and confirm where in transit the mail was. [redacted] would not provide that
information, and instead she wanted a solution to the problem immediately. We
offered to send an email invitation to all of her recipients, but she
unfortunately did not have email addresses. [redacted] insisted that if CompuMail did not
provide an answer, then [redacted] would contact a lawyer in an attempt to get a
refund.
[redacted] sent us a certified letter that was
received on October 16,
2014. I contacted the attorney who was carbon copied on the letter and informed him that we did not agree with most of what was stated in the letter.  I told him that CompuMail fulfilled its obligation to mail the letters the most inexpensive way possible as requested.Typically, we print and address the mail that we process. We helped [redacted] because they were referred to us by the post office.  If we had known that they were mailing a time sensitive piece, we would have told them they needed to mail it first class.  Bulk mail can take up to 10 days to process - we would never have mailed it bulk rate had we known.  [redacted] provided us with a plain white #10 envelope with a mailing label and no return address. We would have suggested a return address on the envelope and perhaps a tag line that stated " Invitation enclosed" in an effort to get the envelope opened by the recipient.  If [redacted] had called us earlier in the process we would have suggested an eye catching postcard to invite people to their event. [redacted]'s event
was advertised via email blast to all members of the [redacted] and listed on the [redacted] website. On October 9, 2014, [redacted]
posted on its company [redacted] page that the event "was a successful
night" and "special thanks to lots of people for helping make it a
success". CompuMail takes these allegations very seriously and we strongly disagree with this complaint. We have been serving our community for 24 years and this is the first Revdex.com complaint that I can recall.  Please contact me if you require further information.[redacted]

Review: On September 22, 2014 I received an estimate#[redacted] from [redacted] at Compumail. Inside the quote it stated for 800 pieces of mail it would be $313.60 for postage and $60.00 for the postage fee. For a grand total of $373.60. On September 23, 2014 we spoke with her advise we would be taking the service but needed to assure the invitations would be received no later then October 6, 2014. We were assured by [redacted] over the phone PRIOR to drop off this would not be an issue. We dropped off our mailing September 29, 2014 as requested the payment was dropped off October 1, 2014. It was deposited October 2 2014 and cleared our business account October 3, 2014. When we dropped off the mailing [redacted] was not available so three different associates including the front desk secretary, [redacted] from accounting and one other member of their staff all three stated they would be received no later then October 6 2014. I see cashing the check was quite timely however my mailing service was not. I had a very poor turnout at my open house because of this and when I called on October 8, 2014 no invitations had been received by any of my members. I received messages from both business owners and club members who received their invitations Friday Oct 10. I paid $243.43 from my business account check number [redacted] on October 1, 2014. there is no reason this should have occurred. I contacted Compumail on October 10, 2014 and advised [redacted] of this issue and asked for a resolution. My answer was " Oh I am trying to figure out which post office mailed these for you, I will contact [redacted] and then get back to you when I have an answer."My response was if you mailed them shouldn't you know which post office you mailed them from? I went on to tell her that shouldn't matter because either way it wasn't completed as promised. In addition, it caused my business to be out a lot of expenses from my grand opening. She apologized and stated she would get back to me shortly. I never heard back from her. the next step I took was a certified letter with an invoice requesting to be reimbursed for the expenses we incurred. That was received October 17, 2014 at 1:51 pm. I have yet to receive any resolution. I am now stepping in to ask you for help in pointing us in the right direction to settle this matter. I have copies of all the original documents if you should need anything. Please feel free to contact me.Desired Settlement: We are looking to be compensated for all the damages we incurred because of the negligence of Compumail. We were misinformed and it cost our company great loss. We now have to put on another open house. This will cost hundreds of dollars of which could have been avoided if the job was completed as expected. Please contact us with any questions.

Business

Response:

[redacted] called inquiring about CompuMail mailing out a letter

that had already been printed, inserted into an envelope, and addressed for a

discounted postage rate. We sent them an estimate for postage and services on September 22, 2014. They said

they would deliver the letters to us on Monday, September 29, 2014. We notified them

that we require payment for postage prior to mailing, so to

bring a check for postage along with the letters. On Tuesday, September 30, 2014, [redacted] representatives dropped off the letters, a day later than they were originally

expected. [redacted] brought a credit card to pay for the postage, and we told

them that payments for postage by credit card were subject to a 3% processing fee. After

discussing, they decided to pay by check instead. They returned on Wednesday, October 1, 2014,

with a check for postage. The letters mailed the same day, on October 1, 2014.

We received a call from [redacted] on October 8, 2014 with concerns about its

"Grand Opening" event. [redacted] stated that the event was that

evening, and no one had received the invitations yet. She

stated that she had contacted every person on the mailing list and asked if the

letter was received. She then asked how can CompuMail find a solution to this

problem of no one having had received the letter?

No one at CompuMail was aware that the letters were actually

invitations; the letters were already inserted into the envelopes when they were dropped off. The instructions we received were to mail them the "cheapest way possible". There was no mention at all that this was a time sensitive mailing. The complaint states that four CompuMail employees all confirmed that the letters would be

received by October 6, 2014 - this is false. No CompuMail employee did, or ever would, guarantee a postal service delivery date. The only date we ever confirm with a client is the date the mail will be delivered to the post office - this is the only date that we control.In an effort to help [redacted] immediately

called CompuMail's postal representative at the [redacted] post office who confirmed that the mail did clear on October

1, 2014, and had gone to the [redacted] post office that day. She offered to call her

counterparts at both the [redacted] and [redacted] post offices to see when the mail cleared their post offices. While waiting for a return call from the post office, [redacted] spoke with [redacted] again. She asked [redacted] to provide us with the mailing list so that we could verify it for outdated or invalid addresses. We also needed to provide a sampling of the addresses to our postal rep so the carriers on those routes could be contacted to try and confirm where in transit the mail was. [redacted] would not provide that

information, and instead she wanted a solution to the problem immediately. We

offered to send an email invitation to all of her recipients, but she

unfortunately did not have email addresses. [redacted] insisted that if CompuMail did not

provide an answer, then [redacted] would contact a lawyer in an attempt to get a

refund.

[redacted] sent us a certified letter that was

received on October 16,

2014. I contacted the attorney who was carbon copied on the letter and informed him that we did not agree with most of what was stated in the letter. I told him that CompuMail fulfilled its obligation to mail the letters the most inexpensive way possible as requested.Typically, we print and address the mail that we process. We helped [redacted] because they were referred to us by the post office. If we had known that they were mailing a time sensitive piece, we would have told them they needed to mail it first class. Bulk mail can take up to 10 days to process - we would never have mailed it bulk rate had we known. [redacted] provided us with a plain white #10 envelope with a mailing label and no return address. We would have suggested a return address on the envelope and perhaps a tag line that stated " Invitation enclosed" in an effort to get the envelope opened by the recipient. If [redacted] had called us earlier in the process we would have suggested an eye catching postcard to invite people to their event. [redacted]'s event

was advertised via email blast to all members of the [redacted] and listed on the [redacted] website. On October 9, 2014, [redacted]

posted on its company [redacted] page that the event "was a successful

night" and "special thanks to lots of people for helping make it a

success". CompuMail takes these allegations very seriously and we strongly disagree with this complaint. We have been serving our community for 24 years and this is the first Revdex.com complaint that I can recall. Please contact me if you require further information.[redacted]

Consumer

Response:

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because: