Ecoflow Living Ltd.

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/08/14) */ Contact Name and Title: [redacted] Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX Contact Email: [redacted] @bills.com We did not spoof the complainant's emailWe don't have the ability, nor the desire to hack into someone's email to send an advertisement From the link the complainant included it appears that he was looking at an advertorial at One Smart Penny which he reached from Cox, likely from this web address: http://www.wsbtv.com/ This kind of advertisement is placed by Cox and it is called a Native AdCox could verify for the complainant how they use Native Ads and whether they integrate them into emails or only show them as sponsored ads as on the link aboveIf he is dissatisfied with how he was served an ad, his issue is with Cox, not with us We, as the advertiser, have no control over how Cox displays the ads, but we are assured by the advertising network that this kind of ad is clearly and conspicuously marked as an advertisement or sponsored link I emailed the complainant more than once, attempting to hear first-hand exactly what he saw, but he has not responded to me Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/08/29) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Thank you for taking the time to look into ing specifically for much of anything for myself other than to be left alone by this company and for the Revdex.com to sanction them, if you do that sort of thing, to ensure that they do not spoof anyone elseThe email account that they spoofed was less than 6-months-old and I did not engage in any type of activity that would have lead me to any of the websites that [redacted] eludes to in, both his response to the Revdex.com and in the correspondence with me "What?", you might ask, "Correspondence with you? But the man clearly states that the complainant has not responded to me." (I emailed the complainant more than once, attempting to hear first-hand exactly what he saw, but he has not responded to me.) One thing I have learned in life is that if an individual lies about the little things, they more than likely will lie about the big thingsI have attached the correspondence that I had with [redacted] and he is being far less than truthful with respect to me not responding to himYou can also, clearly see from the original "spoof" email that I was not "looking at an advertorial" on another website but instead simply clicked on the link to his company's website that was clearly the entire text of the "spoof" emailIn addition the spoof add has listed as owner/author on the bottom, his own company, address and email I find his response not only pure rubbish but fraudulent in nature, by attempting to place blame on other websitesIn his correspondence to me, he admits that his company purchased the ad that both the spoof link leads to as well as the ad that he mentions in his response to the Revdex.com(The link below was a paid ad on Cox-Win Atlanta which we bought through Taboola) In other words, he admits that his company owns and/or purchased that ad! Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 10, 2015/09/03) */ We have taken every step we can to explain that we did not spoof the complainant's email We regret that we can't convince the complainant

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/10/09) */
Contact Name and Title: *** ***
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: ***@bills.com
The complainant's contact information was left at our website, without her permissionThis lead to two lenders in our lending network contacting
her, to review options for refinancingIt is understandable that this would cause confusion and concern, even though no loan application was taken by anyone
As soon as we were aware that she did not make the inquiry, we notified the lenders to not contact her again and added her contact information to our own Do Not Contact list
I just had a very pleasant conversation with the complainant in which I answered all her questions

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2015/09/02) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted]
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@bills.com
It is not clear to me how the complainant feels he was misled. I reached out to him via phone and email, more than once, but did not hear back...

from him with further details.
We have a clear disclosure on the page at our site that asks for a phone number. It reads, in part, "We take your privacy seriously. You are providing express consent to share your information with up to five Bills.com Network Lenders, and for Bills.com, parties calling on behalf of Bills.com, or an authorized third party on their behalf to call you (including through automated means; e.g. autodialing, text and pre-recorded messaging) via telephone, mobile device (including SMS and MMS) and/or email, even if your telephone number is currently listed on any internal, corporate, state, federal or national Do-Not-Call (DNC) list."
As soon as we received a request that calls stop, we reached out to the lenders with whom we shared the complainant's phone number, requesting that they stop calling.
Additionally, my associate spoke with the complainant's wife, explaining the steps we took.
We make it easy to contact us. Our phone number is on every page at The Easy Loan Site. I am responsible for the calls that came in and no call is ignored.
Regarding the issue of not seeing rates, I checked with our engineering and product team and they assured me that a "loan options" page would have displayed offers from two lenders in our network. They did stress that it is possible for a user to exit the system before they display and not see them.
I am still available to speak to the complainant about any issues I did not address to his satisfaction.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 8, 2015/09/03) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/14) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted]
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@bills.com
We did not spoof the complainant's email. We don't have the ability, nor the desire to hack into someone's email to send an advertisement....


From the link the complainant included it appears that he was looking at an advertorial at One Smart Penny which he reached from Cox, likely from this web address: http://www.wsbtv.com/
This kind of advertisement is placed by Cox and it is called a Native Ad. Cox could verify for the complainant how they use Native Ads and whether they integrate them into emails or only show them as sponsored ads as on the link above. If he is dissatisfied with how he was served an ad, his issue is with Cox, not with us.
We, as the advertiser, have no control over how Cox displays the ads, but we are assured by the advertising network that this kind of ad is clearly and conspicuously marked as an advertisement or sponsored link.
I emailed the complainant more than once, attempting to hear first-hand exactly what he saw, but he has not responded to me.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/08/29) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Thank you for taking the time to look into ing specifically for much of anything for myself other than to be left alone by this company and for the Revdex.com to sanction them, if you do that sort of thing, to ensure that they do not spoof anyone else. The email account that they spoofed was less than 6-months-old and I did not engage in any type of activity that would have lead me to any of the websites that [redacted] eludes to in, both his response to the Revdex.com and in the correspondence with me.

"What?", you might ask, "Correspondence with you? But the man clearly states that the complainant has not responded to me." (I emailed the complainant more than once, attempting to hear first-hand exactly what he saw, but he has not responded to me.) One thing I have learned in life is that if an individual lies about the little things, they more than likely will lie about the big things. I have attached the correspondence that I had with [redacted] and he is being far less than truthful with respect to me not responding to him. You can also, clearly see from the original "spoof" email that I was not "looking at an advertorial" on another website but instead simply clicked on the link to his company's website that was clearly the entire text of the "spoof" email. In addition the spoof add has listed as owner/author on the bottom, his own company, address and email.

I find his response not only pure rubbish but fraudulent in nature, by attempting to place blame on other websites. In his correspondence to me, he admits that his company purchased the ad that both the spoof link leads to as well as the ad that he mentions in his response to the Revdex.com. (The link below was a paid ad on Cox-WSB-TV in Atlanta which we bought through Taboola. ) In other words, he admits that his company owns and/or purchased that ad!
Final Business Response /* (4000, 10, 2015/09/03) */
We have taken every step we can to explain that we did not spoof the complainant's email.
We regret that we can't convince the complainant.