Eniva Corporation

The customer, whom we value and respect highly, has been communicated with in person via phone, and the issue has been resolved in the following manner: A credit for the full amount of his dispute ($129.19) was issued to his card on March 13, It should show to his account on the next credit posting cycle of his credit card company/bank$was the amount charged to him, not $159.10; we are unaware of any other expense to the customer that would have caused the disputed amount to be $ As a gesture of goodwill and appreciation of his regular purchases over the last years, he was also given $in store credit issued to his Eniva account on March 13, Further, we told the customer he could keep the products he received, at no cost to himWe did not require that he send them backThe customer was satisfied with the above actionsIn response to several items stated by the customer in his written complaint, we would like to clarify the following: a Our customer records for this person go back to 2002, and the customer has been purchasing products from Eniva regularlyb On January 21, 2018, our electronic records show the customer enrolled in our Repeat Delivery Program, which is a Courtesy program thousands of our customers use which allows them to have a monthly recurring order shipped to their home automatically, with no shipping charges applied The order on January shipped to his home as part of the Repeat Delivery program, and was shipped for free So the following month, per the Repeat Delivery Program, that recurring order shipped on February 21, 2018, and was delivered to his home, again with free shipping Our assumption is that the customer may have signed up for the Repeat Delivery program in order to receive the Free Shipping discount, but perhaps misunderstood how the Repeat Delivery Program works, since he believes he did not initiate the February orderWe have since disabled this person’s Repeat Delivery accountc The reason the customer was told an RMA (Return Materials Authorization) would be required is because we are regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration, and all product that re-enters our facility must be pre-authorized with an RMA, per regulationsd We do no know why the customer believed he would be required to pay for any return shippingThe customer would not have been asked to pay to ship the products back to Eniva, as RMAs are always issued with Eniva paying the return postage in a situation such as thise Our records indicate it was not a two week lag during which the customer was waiting for a responseThe complaint states the customer talked to our company on February 25, however that is a Sunday and our customer service center is not open SundaysOur computerized complaint system and log (again required by the FDA) shows the first incoming complaint on Feb 28; a request to investigate the complaint was immediately issued by the customer care agent, and on March ( four business days later), Eniva did email the customer regarding the matter, with a proposed suggestion for resolution The customer acknowledged he had received the email, but chose not to respondf We are very appreciative of the customer’s past business, and did have what we felt was a cordial personal exchange over the phone regarding this matterThe customer accepted our apology for any inconvenience regarding the matter, and was satisfied with the refund, store credit, and keeping the product in question, at no charge The customer commented that he likes the VIBE product, in particularWe look forward to serving him and his family in the future!

The customer, whom we value and respect highly, has been communicated with in person via phone, and the issue has been resolved in the following manner: 1.       A credit for the full amount of his dispute ($129.19) was issued to his card on March 13, 2018. It should...

show to his account on the next credit posting cycle of his credit card company/bank. $129.19 was the amount charged to him, not $159.10; we are unaware of any other expense to the customer that would have caused the disputed amount to be $159.10. 2.       As a gesture of goodwill and appreciation of his regular purchases over the last years,  he was also given $50 in store credit issued to his Eniva account on March 13, 2018. 3.       Further, we told the customer he could keep the products he received, at no cost to him. We did not require that he send them back. The customer was satisfied with the above actions. In response to several items stated by the customer in his written complaint, we would like to clarify the following: a.       Our customer records for this person go back to 2002, and the customer has been purchasing products from Eniva regularly. b.      On January 21, 2018, our electronic records show the customer enrolled in our Repeat Delivery Program, which is a Courtesy program thousands of our customers use which allows them to have a monthly recurring order shipped to their  home automatically, with no shipping charges applied.  The order on January 21 shipped to his home as part of the Repeat Delivery program, and was shipped for free.  So the following month, per the Repeat Delivery Program,  that recurring order shipped on February 21, 2018, and was delivered to his home, again with free shipping.  Our assumption is that the customer may have signed up for the Repeat Delivery program in order to receive the Free Shipping discount, but perhaps misunderstood how the Repeat Delivery Program works, since he believes he did not initiate the February order. We have since disabled this person’s Repeat Delivery account. c.       The reason the customer was told an RMA (Return Materials Authorization) would be required  is because we are regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration, and all product that re-enters our facility  must be pre-authorized with an RMA, per regulations. d.      We do no know why the customer believed he would be required to pay for any return shipping. The customer would not have been asked to pay to ship the products back to Eniva, as RMAs are always issued with Eniva paying the return postage in a situation such as this. e.      Our records indicate it was not a two week lag during which the customer was waiting for a response. The complaint states the customer talked to our company  on February 25, however that is a Sunday and our customer service center is not open Sundays. Our computerized complaint system and log (again required by the FDA)  shows the first incoming complaint  on Feb 28; a request to investigate the complaint was immediately issued by the customer care agent, and on March 6 ( four business days later), Eniva did email the customer regarding the matter, with a proposed suggestion for resolution.  The customer acknowledged he had received the email, but chose not to respond. f.        We are very appreciative of the customer’s past business, and did have what we felt was a cordial personal exchange over the phone regarding this matter. The customer accepted our apology for any inconvenience regarding  the matter, and was satisfied with the refund, store credit, and keeping the product in question, at no charge.  The customer commented that he likes the VIBE product, in particular. We look forward to serving him and his family in the future!