Flash Point Communications

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.This company is beyond low-class and employs low class "individuals." I completed the test drive and earned an amazon gift cardIf they have no intentions of giving them out they have no right to advertise they doI would take them to court but they are thousands of miles awayI've never dealt with a company as "sm" as they areIf they were entitled to something and didn't receive it they'd be the first to complainThey think they can get away with it because I don't live near there but what comes around goes around Regards, [redacted] ***

Ms [redacted] ,We are in receipt of your letters regarding MS, ***' complaint,Ms [redacted] also filed a complaint with the Attorney General’s office, to which we responded to with pages of detailed background of communications between our employees and herself, the rules of the promotion and a summary which is similar to what is belowThe task took several hours of time to complete so I hope you’ll understand my reluctance to spend yet more time responding to your letter given that you do not allow personally identifiable information in the response which would cause more work to strip such information outof the response sent to the AG's officeIn the interest of brevity, I will summarize belowI have attempted tostrip out any personally identifying information.With regards to the consumer’s complaint about the Lincoln Wish List Test Drive promotion, there was “Limit one (1) Certificate, one (1) Dealer Code and one (1) Amazon.com Gift Card per person/household/IP address.” This was spelled out both on the abbreviated rules present at the bottom of every web page, the automated emails sent to the consumer, as well as the full rules for the programThis rule is in place to prevent fraud and abuse and for the program to be able to reach as thany consumers as possible with a set budget.Consumer’s daughter registered on the web site the promotion at 3:32PM PI empathize that consumer is unhappy with the outcome but based on my review of all of the information enclosed, I have concluded that our systems and? employees? acted properly both in denying the consumer’s test drive redemption as a duplicate, and that they have consistently communicated with her in a professional and polite manner even when faced with abuse from herI will also not be bullied by the consumer into giving her $she is not entitled to: i;We take great pride in legally and? ethically? administering the promotions we do for our clientsWhile we do try to erron the side of the consumer, in this case it was not appropriate or fair to our clients to do soI’ve personally spent half of the day researching and documenting our response to her complaint with the Attorney General, the cost of which exceeds the value of the reward in disputeIn the years we’ve run these exact types of promotions this is the first time I’ve had to do so.The consumer has already received a copy of our detailed response from the Attorney General's office so I do not intend to send a copy of this response to herAll of the information I’ve provided has been communicated previously and in her email on April 8" she stated “leave me the [redacted] alone.” and “ [redacted] off”I take that as an indication that she desires no further communication from us, despite her email on April to one of ourassociates and subsequent communications

Ms [redacted] ,We are in receipt of your letters regarding MS, ***' complaint,Ms [redacted] also filed a complaint with the Attorney General’s office, to which we responded to with pages of detailed background of communications between our employees and herself, the rules of the promotion and a summary which is similar to what is belowThe task took several hours of time to complete so I hope you’ll understand my reluctance to spend yet more time responding to your letter given that you do not allow personally identifiable information in the response which would cause more work to strip such information outof the response sent to the AG's officeIn the interest of brevity, I will summarize belowI have attempted tostrip out any personally identifying information.With regards to the consumer’s complaint about the Lincoln Wish List Test Drive promotion, there was “Limit one (1) Certificate, one (1) Dealer Code and one (1) Amazon.com Gift Card per person/household/IP address.” This was spelled out both on the abbreviated rules present at the bottom of every web page, the automated emails sent to the consumer, as well as the full rules for the programThis rule is in place to prevent fraud and abuse and for the program to be able to reach as thany consumers as possible with a set budget.Consumer’s daughter registered on the web site the promotion at 3:32PM PI empathize that consumer is unhappy with the outcome but based on my review of all of the information enclosed, I have concluded that our systems and employees acted properly both in denying the consumer’s test drive redemption as a duplicate, and that they have consistently communicated with her in a professional and polite manner even when faced with abuse from herI will also not be bullied by the consumer into giving her $she is not entitled to: i;We take great pride in legally and ethically administering the promotions we do for our clientsWhile we do try to erron the side of the consumer, in this case it was not appropriate or fair to our clients to do soI’ve personally spent half of the day researching and documenting our response to her complaint with the Attorney General, the cost of which exceeds the value of the reward in disputeIn the years we’ve run these exact types of promotions this is the first time I’ve had to do so.The consumer has already received a copy of our detailed response from the Attorney General's office so I do not intend to send a copy of this response to herAll of the information I’ve provided has been communicated previously and in her email on April 8" she stated “leave me the [redacted] alone.” and “ [redacted] off”I take that as an indication that she desires no further communication from us, despite her email on April to one of ourassociates and subsequent communications

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the 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
This company is beyond low-class and employs low class "individuals." I completed the test drive and earned an amazon gift cardIf they have no intentions of giving them out they have no right to advertise they doI would take them to court but they are thousands of miles awayI've never dealt with a company as "sm" as they areIf they were entitled to something and didn't receive it they'd be the first to complainThey think they can get away with it because I don't live near there but what comes around goes around.
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the 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
This company is beyond low-class and employs low class "individuals." I completed the test drive and earned an amazon gift cardIf they have no intentions of giving them out they have no right to advertise they doI would take them to court but they are thousands of miles awayI've never dealt with a company as "sm" as they areIf they were entitled to something and didn't receive it they'd be the first to complainThey think they can get away with it because I don't live near there but what comes around goes around.
Regards,
*** ***

Ms***,
5pt;">We are in receipt of your letters regarding MS, ***' complaint,
Ms*** also filed a complaint with the Attorney General’s office, to which we responded to with pages of detailed background of communications between our employees and herself, the rules of the promotion and a summary which is similar to what is belowThe task took several hours of time to complete so I hope you’ll understand my reluctance to spend yet more time responding to your letter given that you do not allow personally identifiable information in the response which would cause more work to strip such information out
of the response sent to the AG's officeIn the interest of brevity, I will summarize belowI have attempted to
strip out any personally identifying informationWith regards to the consumer’s complaint about the Lincoln Wish List Test Drive promotion, there was “Limit one (1) Certificate, one (1) Dealer Code and one (1) Amazon.com Gift Card per person/household/IP address.” This was spelled out both on the abbreviated rules present at the bottom of every web page, the automated emails sent to the consumer, as well as the full rules for the programThis rule is in place to prevent fraud and abuse and for the program to be able to reach as thany consumers as possible with a set budgetConsumer’s daughter registered on the web site the promotion at 3:32PM PI empathize that consumer is unhappy with the outcome but based on my review of all of the information enclosed, I have concluded that our systems and employees acted properly both in denying the consumer’s test drive redemption as a duplicate, and that they have consistently communicated with her in a professional and polite manner even when faced with abuse from herI will also not be bullied by the consumer into giving her $she is not entitled to: i;
We take great pride in legally and ethically administering the promotions we do for our clientsWhile we do try to erron the side of the consumer, in this case it was not appropriate or fair to our clients to do soI’ve personally spent half of the day researching and documenting our response to her complaint with the Attorney General, the cost of which exceeds the value of the reward in disputeIn the years we’ve run these exact types of promotions this is the first time I’ve had to do soThe consumer has already received a copy of our detailed response from the Attorney General's office so I do not intend to send a copy of this response to herAll of the information I’ve provided has been communicated previously and in her email on April 8" she stated “leave me the *** alone.” and “*** off”I take that as an indication that she desires no further communication from us, despite her email on April to one of our
associates and subsequent communications

Ms***,We are in receipt of your letters regarding MS, ***' complaint,Ms*** also filed a complaint with the Attorney General’s office, to which we responded to with pages of detailed background of communications between our employees and herself, the rules of the promotion and a
summary which is similar to what is belowThe task took several hours of time to complete so I hope you’ll understand my reluctance to spend yet more time responding to your letter given that you do not allow personally identifiable information in the response which would cause more work to strip such information outof the response sent to the AG's officeIn the interest of brevity, I will summarize belowI have attempted tostrip out any personally identifying information.With regards to the consumer’s complaint about the Lincoln Wish List Test Drive promotion, there was “Limit one (1) Certificate, one (1) Dealer Code and one (1) Amazon.com Gift Card per person/household/IP address.” This was spelled out both on the abbreviated rules present at the bottom of every web page, the automated emails sent to the consumer, as well as the full rules for the programThis rule is in place to prevent fraud and abuse and for the program to be able to reach as thany consumers as possible with a set budget.Consumer’s daughter registered on the web site the promotion at 3:32PM PI empathize that consumer is unhappy with the outcome but based on my review of all of the information enclosed, I have concluded that our systems and? employees? acted properly both in denying the consumer’s test drive redemption as a duplicate, and that they have consistently communicated with her in a professional and polite manner even when faced with abuse from herI will also not be bullied by the consumer into giving her $she is not entitled to: i;We take great pride in legally and? ethically? administering the promotions we do for our clientsWhile we do try to erron the side of the consumer, in this case it was not appropriate or fair to our clients to do soI’ve personally spent half of the day researching and documenting our response to her complaint with the Attorney General, the cost of which exceeds the value of the reward in disputeIn the years we’ve run these exact types of promotions this is the first time I’ve had to do so.The consumer has already received a copy of our detailed response from the Attorney General's office so I do not intend to send a copy of this response to herAll of the information I’ve provided has been communicated previously and in her email on April 8" she stated “leave me the *** alone.” and “*** off”I take that as an indication that she desires no further communication from us, despite her email on April to one of ourassociates and subsequent communications

Ms. [redacted],We are in receipt of your letters regarding MS, [redacted]' complaint,Ms. [redacted] also filed a complaint with the Attorney General’s office, to which we responded to with 25 pages of detailed background of communications between our employees and herself, the rules of the promotion and a...

summary which is similar to what is below. The task took several hours of time to complete so I hope you’ll understand my reluctance to spend yet more time responding to your letter given that you do not allow personally identifiable information in the response which would cause more work to strip such information outof the response sent to the AG's office. In the interest of brevity, I will summarize below. I have attempted tostrip out any personally identifying information.With regards to the consumer’s complaint about the Lincoln Wish List Test Drive promotion, there was “Limit one (1) Certificate, one (1) Dealer Code and one (1) Amazon.com Gift Card per person/household/IP address.” This was spelled out both on the abbreviated rules present at the bottom of every web page, the automated emails sent to the consumer, as well as the full rules for the program. This rule is in place to prevent fraud and abuse and for the program to be able to reach as thany consumers as possible with a set budget.Consumer’s daughter registered on the web site the promotion at 3:32PM PI empathize that consumer is unhappy with the outcome but based on my review of all of the information enclosed, I have concluded that our systems and employees acted properly both in denying the consumer’s test drive redemption as a duplicate, and that they have consistently communicated with her in a professional and polite manner even when faced with abuse from her. I will also not be bullied by the consumer into giving her $75 she is not entitled to. : i;We take great pride in legally and ethically administering the promotions we do for our clients. While we do try to erron the side of the consumer, in this case it was not appropriate or fair to our clients to do so. I’ve personally spent half of the day researching and documenting our response to her complaint with the Attorney General, the cost of which exceeds the value of the reward in dispute. In the years we’ve run these exact types of promotions this is the first time I’ve had to do so.The consumer has already received a copy of our detailed response from the Attorney General's office so I do not intend to send a copy of this response to her. All of the information I’ve provided has been communicated previously and in her email on April 8" she stated “leave me the [redacted] alone.” and “[redacted] off”. I take that as an indication that she desires no further communication from us, despite her email on April 12 to one of ourassociates and subsequent communications.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.This company is beyond low-class and employs low class "individuals." I completed the test drive and earned an amazon gift card. If they have no intentions of giving them out they have no right to advertise they do. I would take them to court but they are thousands of miles away. I've never dealt with a company as "sm" as they are. If they were entitled to something and didn't receive it they'd be the first to complain. They think they can get away with it because I don't live near there but what comes around goes around. 
Regards,
[redacted]