Current Boutique, Inc

Thank you very much for this information I had not received *** ***'s letter If I had I surely could have addressed her concern.In her statement, it appears that our staff did correctly cite store policy with regard to the return of consignments (especially those forwarded to
our online store) However, this policy is not meant to cause hardship for our consignors, but rather to ensure that we get the opportunity to do everything we can to sell their merchandise That said, *** ***'s request is reasonable given the time elapsed and I will ensure the purse is mailed out to her address in the notice this week.Please let me know if you have any questions.Sincerely,Chris D***General ManagerCurrent Boutique(202) 549-

Again, we appreciate *** ***’s concerns regarding her
experience and the time spent making her objections known. We reiterate that we
wish her experience was enjoyable and one that left her and Current Boutique
satisfied. Unfortunately, her
experience was not satisfactory and we are sorryThat said, after a thorough review of *** ***’s
subsequent correspondence, we are left with little more that we can do. First, we have returned her
merchandise. While *** ***
states this was a unilateral decision, our team members operated under what they
perceived to be the best interests of the consignor. *** *** had demonstrated her dissatisfaction with store
policy so it was determined that *** *** would have preferred to have her
items returned. Second, based on
*** ***’s experience, we have revised our telephone procedures and
training. We are in the process of
distributing these materials and hope to have the revised training in place
shortlyAs to the newer issue mentioned of the contract not listing
each of the multiple options available to consignors for checking on account balances
and requesting a check, we will consult our attorneys about incorporating these
changesBeyond the foregoing and our previous response, we have
ended our relationship with *** *** as we no longer are in possession our
her items. We have instituted
policies to avoid any similar issues in the future. And finally, we will seek to add more disclosure regarding
the options for balance checks and check requests going forward

We appreciate the information provided by [redacted] and we are truly sorry about the inconvenience that this process has been to her.Current Boutique has been offering pre-paid postage labels for our consignors for over two years now via the USPS.  The issue encountered by [redacted] has...

not occurred before and it's not clear to us why the post office won't honor her mailing label.Regardless, we want to ensure [redacted] gets the services she desires.  As a result, we will send a pre-paid [redacted] label to her house as a substitute.  If this is acceptable, we can send it out after the holiday.We'd like to thank [redacted] for bringing this issue to our attention.Sincerely,Chris D[redacted]General Manager, Current Boutique[redacted]@currentboutique.com

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response for the following reasons.  While I appreciate Current Boutique's effort to accept some of the responsibility with respect to communication and expectations, I completely disagree with its characterization, "Most importantly . . . the manager of our Arlington location made an exception to our consignment agreement and returned [my] items and shipped them to her house.  While we would have preferred to sell these items . . . it was clear that returning the items was [my] preference."   The manager of the Arlington store - who refused to give her name so that I would have someone with whom to follow up and disingenuously cited "privacy concerns" for this refusal (even though Current Boutique has my full information including name, address, phone number and e-mail; why shouldn't I have "privacy concerns" the same as the manager?) - unilaterally returned those items because she thought she was going to get in trouble for mischaracterizing the inventory policy.  The Arlington manager repeatedly defended her statement that there was "no inventory tracking" throughout our entire conversation in many different ways (there's no "system", there's "too much inventory", etc.), and fell back on relying on the contract, to which I pointed out that the Current Boutique "contract" is like an adhesion contract with Current Boutique holding all the rights and holding no liability, the consignor having no favorable terms.  She mentioned that she was going to either forward my concerns to the Current Boutique lawyer or consult with him/her.  That is why she returned the items, not to achieve "customer satisfaction". Also, when I consigned the items, the manager told me I had to call to check if the items sold. She never once mentioned the alternatives of e-mailing or requesting a balance through the website.  In fact, those option are not on the consignment agreement, e.g., "[the consigner] may call any time to check on the status of my account." No mention of other options. Also, I have no issue with the donation policy.  It was the Current Boutique adhesion contract, the three phone calls in which Current Boutique employees told me every single phone call that there was "no way" to track inventory, and the conversation with the Arlington store manager that caused me to question every aspect of this 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 this resolution is satisfactory to me. 
Regards,
[redacted]

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response for the following reasons.  While I appreciate Current Boutique's effort to accept some of the responsibility with respect to communication and expectations, I completely disagree with its characterization, "Most importantly . . . the manager of our Arlington location made an exception to our consignment agreement and returned [my] items and shipped them to her house.  While we would have preferred to sell these items . . . it was clear that returning the items was [my] preference."   The manager of the Arlington store - who refused to give her name so that I would have someone with whom to follow up and disingenuously cited "privacy concerns" for this refusal (even though Current Boutique has my full information including name, address, phone number and e-mail; why shouldn't I have "privacy concerns" the same as the manager?) - unilaterally returned those items because she thought she was going to get in trouble for mischaracterizing the inventory policy.  The Arlington manager repeatedly defended her statement that there was "no inventory tracking" throughout our entire conversation in many different ways (there's no "system", there's "too much inventory", etc.), and fell back on relying on the contract, to which I pointed out that the Current Boutique "contract" is like an adhesion contract with Current Boutique holding all the rights and holding no liability, the consignor having no favorable terms.  She mentioned that she was going to either forward my concerns to the Current Boutique lawyer or consult with him/her.  That is why she returned the items, not to achieve "customer satisfaction". Also, when I consigned the items, the manager told me I had to call to check if the items sold. She never once mentioned the alternatives of e-mailing or requesting a balance through the website.  In fact, those option are not on the consignment agreement, e.g., "[the consigner] may call any time to check on the status of my account." No mention of other options. Also, I have no issue with the donation policy.  It was the Current Boutique adhesion contract, the three phone calls in which Current Boutique employees told me every single phone call that there was "no way" to track inventory, and the conversation with the Arlington store manager that caused me to question every aspect of this business.
Regards,
[redacted]

Thank you very much for this information.  I had not received [redacted]'s letter.  If I had I surely could have addressed her concern.
In her statement, it appears that our staff did correctly cite store policy with regard to the return of consignments (especially...

those forwarded to our online store).  However, this policy is not meant to cause hardship for our consignors, but rather to ensure that we get the opportunity to do everything we can to sell their merchandise.  
That said, [redacted]'s request is reasonable given the time elapsed and I will ensure the purse is mailed out to her address in the notice this week.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Chris D[redacted]
General Manager
Current Boutique
(202) 549-9506

aggies
Again, we appreciate [redacted]'s concerns regarding her
experience and the time spent making her objections known. We reiterate that we
wish her experience was enjoyable and one that left her and Current Boutique
satisfied. Unfortunately, her
experience was not satisfactory and we are sorry.That said, after a thorough review of [redacted]'s
subsequent correspondence, we are left with little more that we can do. First, we have returned her
merchandise. While [redacted]
states this was a unilateral decision, our team members operated under what they
perceived to be the best interests of the consignor. [redacted] had demonstrated her dissatisfaction with store
policy so it was determined that [redacted] would have preferred to have her
items returned. Second, based on
[redacted]'s experience, we have revised our telephone procedures and
training. We are in the process of
distributing these materials and hope to have the revised training in place
shortly.As to the newer issue mentioned of the contract not listing
each of the multiple options available to consignors for checking on account balances
and requesting a check, we will consult our attorneys about incorporating these
changes.Beyond the foregoing and our previous response, we have
ended our relationship with [redacted] as we no longer are in possession our
her items. We have instituted
policies to avoid any similar issues in the future. And finally, we will seek to add more disclosure regarding
the options for balance checks and check requests going forward

Review: Current Boutique, wrongfully lost an item I consigned on 19 May, a Ferragamo handbag valued between $200 and $365. Current Boutique alleges the said handbag was donated to a charity, [redacted]'s [redacted], however the charity affirms no such donation of a Ferragamo handbag was made. In addition, Current Boutique [redacted] manager, [redacted], confirmed the handbag should not have been donated, it could have been sold and she apologized for the mistake/confirming there was a mistake, which is contradictory to a follow-on email on June 14 from [redacted] who alleges the handbag was donated because they would be unable to sell it. [redacted] has firsthand knowledge of the incident, was present when I consigned on May 19 and her statement is disparate from [redacted], whom I believe is now unethically mischaracterizing the incident to meet the guidelines of the Current Boutique agreement. The fact remains, [redacted]'s [redacted] did NOT receive a donation of my Ferragamo handbag and they are willing to attest to this statement. Either Current Boutique, lost and mishandled my consigned Ferragamo handbag or someone on their staff stole it before it could be donated. Whatever the case may be, I am rightfully due financial reimbursement for this wrongful loss of property where I expected monies upon consignment, pursuant to the Current Boutique contract agreement. I provided a similar message to Current Boutique in good faith and gave them an opportunity to resolve this amicably but they have not been responsive to my request. I also notified Current Boutique that if this should remain unresolved, I would seek formal dispute resolution assistance. Current Boutique also wrongfully provided a tax exemption form from [redacted]'s [redacted] for items this charity never received. This seems inappropriate, possibly illegal, considering the charity did not receive these items and they did not fill out this form, Current Boutique filled out the form and mailed it to me directly presumably without informing [redacted]'s [redacted].Desired Settlement: A similar Ferragamo (style/make/model) handbag sold for $650. [redacted] I am seeking a reimbursement amount between $200 and $365 (the actual cost of the lost handbag).

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

1. A statement of

facts, correction to "wait time" claim: Contrary to the Current Boutique (CB)

assertion that I was not quoted an amount of wait-time to consign my items, I

was indeed told that I would have to wait at least an hour to consign my items. Although CB substantiates this claim by

asserting this is not their policy, unless they can guarantee, with 100%

accuracy, that all personnel, at all locations, since 2007 have carried out

this policy, this statement is, in fact, a moot point. It is likely impossible for CB to guarantee

this policy is carried out 100% of the time, as in my case. As I recall, the manager, **. [redacted],

emphasized the fact that it was indeed a busy Sunday and they were "backed

up." On this point alone, CB should

move to refund or reimburse my loss of property because their policy was not

carried out as stated in the consignor agreement. Had I been offered a wait time of several

minutes as they claim, I would have reasonably been more than happy to wait to

review my items. But this did not occur

and this claim is simply false.

2. A statement of

facts, correction to "items donated" claim: Unless CB can guarantee, with 100% accuracy,

that my items were picked up by [redacted]'s [redacted] on May 21st, this statement is

indeed not a fact. My allegation that my

items, specifically the Ferragamo handbag, were not donated to [redacted]'s [redacted]

has been corroborated by [redacted]'s [redacted] personnel. They assert and have confirmed that they did

not receive a Ferragamo handbag from CB.

Per their charity procedures, an item of this quality/worth/designer

label, is "flagged" for management review and set aside for their

seasonal auction to get more value out of the item and increased donations to

the charity. If CB had conducted due

diligence as I have, they would discover and learn that [redacted]'s [redacted] affirms

the fact that they did not receive a Ferragamo handbag. CB's claim regarding items donated is based

on an assumption that my handbag was properly handled in conjunction with their

store policies, however, they can't guarantee, again with 100% assurance, that

this occurred. The fact remains that the

charity of choice, [redacted]'s [redacted], did not receive this item. So, what happened to my handbag? Unfortunately, CB can't affirmatively answer

that question because their claim of donating my items is counter to what the

recipient charity, [redacted]'s [redacted], has stated on repeated occasion. My allegation and [redacted]’s [redacted] concurrence

is substantiated by the fact that CB does not have a filing or records-keeping

system for items donated, meaning confirming each and every item that has left

their store on a specific date is impossible to verify.

To elaborate, CB does not have a form of record-keeping and

structure in place for storing items to be donated. I personally eye-witnessed their

"storage area" where unaccepted items are held prior to

donation. As a statement of fact, there

are countless unlabeled trash bags that hold sorted/combined consignor items,

which are piled one on top of another with no structure or filing system

whatsoever. I estimate at least 15-25

bags, holding 10-30 items each were sitting in the "storage area" on

that one particular day, so it is possible that some items remain in the

"storage area" longer than anticipated and personnel can't possibly

account for specifics items donated on any particular donation day. This claim is somewhat absurd in nature to

claim a specific item was donated on a specific day when CB has no method of

record-keeping for items that have definitely left their store property. I encourage the Revdex.com to assess this storage area and CB's means for accounting items to be donated.

While CB claims "only managers have access to the

donation storage area," which I witnessed with **. [redacted], it is possible

that personnel can access and touch these potential donations. Unless CB can guarantee with 100% accuracy

that “only managers are allowed inside the storage area.” It is one matter to have "access,"

that I understand, but it is quite another to guarantee all other employees do

not enter the storage area and have contact with items to be

donated. In fact, I presume all other

employees do enter the storage area as part of their duties

preparing/bagging/stacking/piling items to be donated.

It is then possible for employees to touch and sort through items

and take an item without management ever knowing the difference because of the

lack of record-keeping. CB does not have

oversight or a proper filing mechanism in place to properly account for items

to be donated, from the point of determination that they will be donated to the

date of pick-up by said charity. **.

[redacted] and I rifled through these very bags together, she seemed just as

determined to help me find a handbag she knew was wrongfully placed in the

donation pile. She too had no idea which

bag might contain my items. At point she

asked, “do remember what plastic bag you left them in?” And I answered “it was

a Bed Bath & Beyond bag.” We then

began looking for said plastic bag, this was the only method of tracking my items.

I have personally seen and touched their

"filing system," which is to say that they don't have one.

a. My allegation that CB "wrongfully lost

an item" is correct - CB can't guarantee my items were donated and

[redacted]'s [redacted] affirms they did not receive said handbag.

b. My allegation that "the charity affirms

no such donation of a Ferragamo handbag was made" is correct - CB cannot

verify what [redacted]'s [redacted] representative stated because they likely haven't

asked. So, I pose the question, has CB

contacted [redacted]'s [redacted] directly about this supposedly donated item? If not, then CB cannot confirm with any

certainty the handbag left their 14th ST location via a [redacted]'s [redacted] donation

pick-up, especially because they lack a filing system for items to be donated.

CB’s claim that my items were donated to [redacted]’s [redacted] is

simply false.

3. A statement of

facts, correction to “**. [redacted]’s statement” claim: Simply put, CB is not being honest with their

rebuttal to my allegation that **. [redacted] did, indeed, apologize for the

oversight and acknowledged that “management and the owners” were convening a

meeting to “discuss the matter and what went wrong” upon **. [redacted]’s return

from Italy. How would I know about a

return from time spent in Italy if **. [redacted] didn’t share with me the timing

of a meeting to discuss what happened?

Why would **. [redacted] allow me to search and rifle through countless

trash bags of items to be donated in the “storage area” if she wasn’t willing

to concede the possibility that it could still be within their possession? Why would two personnel at other CB locations

commiserate with me on the phone about the circumstance and offer the personal

email address of **. [redacted] to reconcile the situation? On a personal level, I’m extremely

disappointed that CB is resorting to mischaracterizing the truth and conforming

their recollection to fit their store policy.

All along, on repeated accounts, I have sought help to simply determine

“what happened here” and to resolve it.

**. [redacted] was indeed sympathetic for my loss of property and was

willing to help resolve the situation because she recognized it was a lack of

oversight issue and my handbag was indeed wrongfully set aside to be

donated. To claim she did not makes

these statements or exhibit behavior in recognition of wrongdoing is flat out

false.

4. A statement of

facts, correction to “consignment specialist” claim: CB should provide, in writing as part of

their business plan or manual, what constitutes a “consignor specialist” to

claim that someone who has 1 year experience meets this threshold of

responsibility and knowledge of women’s fashion, such as clothing, shoes,

handbags, jewelry and other consignable items.

If CB does not possess said documentation to substantiate the

capabilities of an employee and their understanding of women’s fashion items,

this claim is moot and cannot be validated.

I would posit that it’s possible and likely that such a person with 1

year experience does not have the requisite capabilities to assess any and all consigned

items that enter CB. Meaning, if CB employees

aren’t held accountable by business rules and guidelines already established to

assess the quality of one item to the next, they cannot claim the knowledge

base of any person as a “specialist” in this area. This fact of what defines a “consignment

specialist” is unsubstantiated.

5. A statement of facts, correction to “**. Prosch

familiarity with policies” claim: I am

well aware of CB’s policies, which are almost identical to those of another

consignment business in the area, Secondi, where I consigned items for over 4

years and never once had an experience such as this. To allege and presume my unfamiliarity with

their policy is a personal jab at my capacity for understanding a binding agreement

and contract. I more than understand the

stipulations of the contract and in doing so expect CB to uphold their policies,

where if they had, they could have recognized their lack of accountability and rectified

the situation in a reasonable manner, which is what I requested. To this point…

6. A statement of

facts, correction to “We have responded to **. [redacted] promptly” claim: This characterization is incorrect based on

multiple opportunities to respond to my emails, phone calls and in-person. I reached out to **. [redacted] and other CB

personnel on Jun 9, 11th, 14th and the 17th. This includes emails, in-person meetings at

CB and repeated phone call attempts with voicemails to reach **. [redacted]

personally to seek help. The only

response I received was from **. [redacted] on June 14th offering a

[redacted]’s [redacted] tax exempt form, which is dated June 16th and mailed

to me presumably as a way to pacify my concerns with a tax exemption for the

loss of property. My last email on June

17th was in accordance with Revdex.com guidelines to notify the business as

stated, “In good faith, I'm seeking your cooperation to resolve the matter of

your company,” “I'm seeking reimbursement of said lost item in the amount of

the consignor percentage of the retail price alloted to me persuant to the

consignor agreement. If this matter

should remain unresolved, I will seek formal dispute resolution assistance.” This email went without response, neither

email nor phone call, so I sought formal assistance through the Revdex.com. If CB had “promptly” responded to my concerns

and resolved this matter, I would not have sought further help from the

Revdex.com. This claim of “promptly” responding

is flat out false.

As an aside, the notion of “courteously” is debatable

because although I feel I have been wronged and CB mishandled this situation

from the outset, this is not about my feelings or **. [redacted]’s “personal perspective.” Rather, this is about facts and those

presented by CB are unsubstantiated.

In summary, to correct CB’s allegation, my claim is not only

about CB procedures and the lack thereof but about their unaccountability for

misplacing a handbag valued at $365 at the date of purchase. I pose this question back to CB, can you

guarantee, with 100% assurance, that employees haven’t taken an item set to be

donated, at all 4 locations since 2007?

Do you routinely check employee belongings before they leave your stores

as a method of oversight? Do you have courses

on ethics provided for your workforce?

Is it explicitly written in your employee manual the repercussions of

such action and theft? To that point, do

you have an employee manual? Unless you can verify, with 100% guarantee,

that every single item designated for donation has indeed been donated and has not

been subject to other potential actions within your stores, you cannot confirm that

my handbag was donated to [redacted]’s [redacted] on May 21st. And in so doing, it is CB’s responsibility to

properly compensate me for this loss of property.

I do agree with CB on one matter. This is unfortunate and deeply

troubling. I would have liked for CB to

take the initiative of resolving this matter with me personally rather than

ignoring my requests for help and resolve.

Revdex.com, please continue to work with CB on this matter so that they can

arrive at the proper conclusion that they are at fault and wrongdoing in my

loss of property.

Regards,