","sans-serif";letter-spacing:.05pt">Co-parenting
services was rendered to client and completedhoweverthe complaint is
not about the 'completed' servicesThe complaint is about what was witnessed
during the sessions and the disagreement with what was documentedA referral
to another agency of choice would have been supported and welcomed after the
first session or twoClient had the right to discontinue services at any time
and resume with another agency if he did not agree with the report and/or was
not satisfied with the services renderedClient did not have any disagreements
about what was been taught during the sessionsevidenced by several
interactions in sessions, completed assignments (which was submitted to his
attorney) and receiving/accepting his certificate of completion on the last day
of service; client willingly paid for services after each session and without
any complaints until the unauthorized tape was heard later by another
person who was not involved in the sessionsIn this complaint, client again,
admitted to freely continuing sessions and recording them
I was contacted via
email on a couple of occasions and was directed not to respond due to the
nature of the written threats of hint complaining to various agencies in the
community and the local Newsif I didn't give him a refund and change
my report to the court before hearing around 10/23/14: client gave me a
deadline within the same week trying to get a new report by his next hearing
date; as admitted in this complaint (9/22-9/26)Just as the client had the
right to end services at any time if he was not pleasedI also reserved the
right not to continue to read the threats and maliciously motivated
lengthy emails (2-pgs) or meet with him and listen to
the unauthorized tapings of the sessions (which can he altered)
The
sessions were taped without my or the other participants' knowledge and
without verbal/written consent (why was it hidden): leading to
question the motive and purpose for continuing the service
The
opportunity to record the unauthorized taping of sessions appears to be the motive for
completing
and paying for the 'unsatisfactory' services; using it later may have been the
objective for presenting it in the family court battle to gain unjustifiable
favorThis is not the client's first incident with trying to influence a
report that he was not successful at manipulatingThis agency will not yield
to threats and intimidation to satisfy this documented pattern of controlling
behaviors
A refund would not
apply in this situation since the client completed and willingly paid for
completed services (co-parenting); the other participating party present in the
sessions did not have any complaintsI can send an addendum summary report of
the completed co-parenting topics or services to the attorneys, to again
support the completed co-parenting assignments and certificate of completionRespectfully submittedRegyna Y[redacted]M.AM.S .B.S
Dyvyne Interventyon Programs and Services, LLC
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 business has lowered itself once again, now with a poor
attempt to provide a coherent response that actually addresses the point of
concern from the complaint. Apparently the owner of the business is poorly
misinformed with the state of Indiana's audio recording laws. Indiana uses a
"one party consent" law. In that law, any conversation can be recorded
as long as one person is aware. I obviously knew the conversation was being
recorded, therefore it was an "authorized" recording. After meeting
twice, once on 6/10 and on 6/17, two reports were written that involved myself
that I learned the contents of and received copies of on 6/24. After being
appalled that the company committed perjury despite signing an affidavit which
stated the information provided in the reports was true under penalty of
perjury, I conferred with my attorney on what I should do. My attorney stated
that since I had agreed jointly to use this company before any sessions were
ever completed, I would have to get the other party to agree to use a different
co-parenting facilitator. If I refused to go to the co-parenting facilitator
agreed upon then I could be held in contempt. She advised me that the best
thing I could do to protect myself from any future false reporting, was to tape
record the sessions.
From that point on, the last remaining 5 sessions, I tape recorded.
I didn't really have any complaints after each session was completed (besides
some stereotypical comments that discriminated against men in general),
because I did not know that the company was going to continue to practice false
reporting and perjury. There wasn't any other reports that were submitted prior
to the remaining 5 sessions being completed, so I had no reason to believe that
the false reporting and perjury were going to continue. Had I known, I could
have had my attorney try to step in or I could have addressed it with the
company.
On July 28th, I learned the company had performed a conflict of interest and
had begun "mentoring services" of my daughter whom I have joint
legal and physical custody of, without my joint approval, despite stating on
recording on July 1st that the owner/employee would not be performing mentoring
services. Mentoring services were not court ordered. After presenting this
information to my attorney, I was advised this was a conflict of interest and
was advised if the employee shown up to my home again uninvited as she did on
July 28th demanding/insisting to take my child for a mentoring session, to not
release my child into her care. When I asked my attorney should I go to the
last two scheduled sessions, one of which was scheduled the very next day on
July 29th, my attorney didn't get back with me until after I completed the 7th
session, at which point she advised I just attend the last session scheduled
for 8/5 or she could file a conflict of interest and have her reports
thrown out of court, but in that case, we would have to start over and pay for
another set of co-parenting sessions. I felt stuck since I didn't have that
kind of money to start over and was court ordered to do the sessions. My
attorney advised to just keep recording the sessions in case the next set of
reports were false.
Two remaining reports came out in August that were littered not only with lots
of perjury but with very biased personal opinions that were based on a lot on
hearsay and no proven facts.
At the end of August, I had a court hearing in which a judge made some
decisions based off of the false reports this business made. Due to the hearing
being set for only 30 mins, the judge didn't have time to listen to near 6
hours of tape recordings and made a temporary decision that has negatively
impacted mine and my daughter’s lives. After that, I took the reports to a
psychological expert whom is a doctor that specializes in parental alienation that
I asked to be involved in our case. The doctor asked if I could have the
recordings transcribed. After learning the substantial cost of transcriptions,
I emailed the sole employee of the business, since the repercussions of her false
reporting kept accruing.
My email, which I can provide a copy to you, had nothing in
it can be considered remotely "malicious" as the business claims.
There was no excuse for an alleged professional business to not send any kind
of reply or acknowledgment of any kind. I wasn't referred to any manager or
human resource department to handle my complaint as this is a one person
business and I only had one source of contact. The business claims in their
response to you that I threatened them. There were no threats in my email, I
directly told the business what I was seeking, why I felt I deserved for the
business to rectify their mistake, gave numerous, but not nearly all of the examples
of perjury from the reports to support my position, and I did not ask for a new
report to be written in a week's time. What I asked for, was some sort of
reply/acknowledgment, either a YES OR A NO by the end of that work week. I
stated if I couldn't get the situation resolved, I would be seeking assistance
from the Revdex.com, attorney general, or local news as it was an
injustice to have to spend money on a service that wasn't just to
"facilitate co-parenting sessions" but part of that service was to
provide non biased, truthful, accurate reports of those sessions. The latter
most certainly did not happen, that is why I feel entitled to some type of
monetary refund.
I did ask but certainly did not demand, that the company either withdraw the
false reports or for the first time write a truthful one. I even offered to
meet at a neutral location so that the employee didn't have to take my word for
what was said on the recordings and could listen to them their selves before
making any kind of decision. I received no kind of response by the end of the
week and sent a second email, which was one paragraph (not 2-3 pages as the company lies in their
response, I can provide that 2nd email as well) and asked for a response, in my
second email I didn't speak of contacting any outside agency, I simply asked
for a yes or no and if it was a "no" then a justified explanation of
why they would not refund my money or withdraw the perjury filled reports.
Furthermore, the business has now slandered me in their response to you based
off of no facts and only off of either hearsay or their personal opinion. The
business makes a claim in their response that “this is not the client's
first incident with trying to influence a report that he was not
successful at manipulating" The audacity of the slander is unsettling.
There is not one record or any proof of the employee's statement. If
the employee didn't just concoct this statement on their own, then
they were influenced by hearsay of an opposing party whom has no justification
or proof to make a claim like that. In all actuality, in my first meeting
with the employee of the business, when giving background history of the
opposing party, I had mentioned how the
opposing party had manipulated the reporting process to favor her in the
last court case that we had and actually have those reports to back up my
statements made to the employee of this business, yet the business twisted
the scenario to be the complete opposite and couldn't keep their facts
straight. On top of everything else, this business continues to concoct
personal beliefs and is trying to pass them off as facts, in paragraph one of
the business's reply to you, they state" client willingly paid for
services after each session and without any complaints until the unauthorized
tape was heard later by another person who was not involved in the sessions"
The business has no basis or any facts to make that statement, the business has
no basis to pass assumptions off as facts and there is no direct proof or
truth to that statement. The problem I had is not if somebody else
listened to the recordings. The problem, which the business is trying to bypass
and not address in their response, is that after the reports were written
and released which involved the 5 recorded sessions, the reports were
fictitious in many aspects and didn't coincide with what actually occurred in
the sessions which the recordings can provide. Lastly, the business st[redacted]
in their reply that they "will not yield to threats and intimidation to
satisfy this documented pattern of controlling behaviors." As provided,
you can see how the emails to the business are not threats and certainly not
intimidating but furthermore, the business has once again slandered myself
and concocted another unjustifiable lie stating there is a documented
pattern of controlling behavior. There is no basis for such a comment and there
is no documented papers or files that suggest such an outlandish statement.
Regards,
[redacted]
","sans-serif";letter-spacing:.05pt">Co-parenting
services was rendered to client and completedhoweverthe complaint is
not about the 'completed' servicesThe complaint is about what was witnessed
during the sessions and the disagreement with what was documentedA referral
to another agency of choice would have been supported and welcomed after the
first session or twoClient had the right to discontinue services at any time
and resume with another agency if he did not agree with the report and/or was
not satisfied with the services renderedClient did not have any disagreements
about what was been taught during the sessionsevidenced by several
interactions in sessions, completed assignments (which was submitted to his
attorney) and receiving/accepting his certificate of completion on the last day
of service; client willingly paid for services after each session and without
any complaints until the unauthorized tape was heard later by another
person who was not involved in the sessionsIn this complaint, client again,
admitted to freely continuing sessions and recording them
I was contacted via
email on a couple of occasions and was directed not to respond due to the
nature of the written threats of hint complaining to various agencies in the
community and the local Newsif I didn't give him a refund and change
my report to the court before hearing around 10/23/14: client gave me a
deadline within the same week trying to get a new report by his next hearing
date; as admitted in this complaint (9/22-9/26)Just as the client had the
right to end services at any time if he was not pleasedI also reserved the
right not to continue to read the threats and maliciously motivated
lengthy emails (2-pgs) or meet with him and listen to
the unauthorized tapings of the sessions (which can he altered)
The
sessions were taped without my or the other participants' knowledge and
without verbal/written consent (why was it hidden): leading to
question the motive and purpose for continuing the service
The
opportunity to record the unauthorized taping of sessions appears to be the motive for
completing
and paying for the 'unsatisfactory' services; using it later may have been the
objective for presenting it in the family court battle to gain unjustifiable
favorThis is not the client's first incident with trying to influence a
report that he was not successful at manipulatingThis agency will not yield
to threats and intimidation to satisfy this documented pattern of controlling
behaviors
A refund would not
apply in this situation since the client completed and willingly paid for
completed services (co-parenting); the other participating party present in the
sessions did not have any complaintsI can send an addendum summary report of
the completed co-parenting topics or services to the attorneys, to again
support the completed co-parenting assignments and certificate of completionRespectfully submittedRegyna Y[redacted]M.AM.S .B.S
Dyvyne Interventyon Programs and Services, LLC
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 business has lowered itself once again, now with a poor
attempt to provide a coherent response that actually addresses the point of
concern from the complaint. Apparently the owner of the business is poorly
misinformed with the state of Indiana's audio recording laws. Indiana uses a
"one party consent" law. In that law, any conversation can be recorded
as long as one person is aware. I obviously knew the conversation was being
recorded, therefore it was an "authorized" recording. After meeting
twice, once on 6/10 and on 6/17, two reports were written that involved myself
that I learned the contents of and received copies of on 6/24. After being
appalled that the company committed perjury despite signing an affidavit which
stated the information provided in the reports was true under penalty of
perjury, I conferred with my attorney on what I should do. My attorney stated
that since I had agreed jointly to use this company before any sessions were
ever completed, I would have to get the other party to agree to use a different
co-parenting facilitator. If I refused to go to the co-parenting facilitator
agreed upon then I could be held in contempt. She advised me that the best
thing I could do to protect myself from any future false reporting, was to tape
record the sessions.
From that point on, the last remaining 5 sessions, I tape recorded.
I didn't really have any complaints after each session was completed (besides
some stereotypical comments that discriminated against men in general),
because I did not know that the company was going to continue to practice false
reporting and perjury. There wasn't any other reports that were submitted prior
to the remaining 5 sessions being completed, so I had no reason to believe that
the false reporting and perjury were going to continue. Had I known, I could
have had my attorney try to step in or I could have addressed it with the
company.
On July 28th, I learned the company had performed a conflict of interest and
had begun "mentoring services" of my daughter whom I have joint
legal and physical custody of, without my joint approval, despite stating on
recording on July 1st that the owner/employee would not be performing mentoring
services. Mentoring services were not court ordered. After presenting this
information to my attorney, I was advised this was a conflict of interest and
was advised if the employee shown up to my home again uninvited as she did on
July 28th demanding/insisting to take my child for a mentoring session, to not
release my child into her care. When I asked my attorney should I go to the
last two scheduled sessions, one of which was scheduled the very next day on
July 29th, my attorney didn't get back with me until after I completed the 7th
session, at which point she advised I just attend the last session scheduled
for 8/5 or she could file a conflict of interest and have her reports
thrown out of court, but in that case, we would have to start over and pay for
another set of co-parenting sessions. I felt stuck since I didn't have that
kind of money to start over and was court ordered to do the sessions. My
attorney advised to just keep recording the sessions in case the next set of
reports were false.
Two remaining reports came out in August that were littered not only with lots
of perjury but with very biased personal opinions that were based on a lot on
hearsay and no proven facts.
At the end of August, I had a court hearing in which a judge made some
decisions based off of the false reports this business made. Due to the hearing
being set for only 30 mins, the judge didn't have time to listen to near 6
hours of tape recordings and made a temporary decision that has negatively
impacted mine and my daughter’s lives. After that, I took the reports to a
psychological expert whom is a doctor that specializes in parental alienation that
I asked to be involved in our case. The doctor asked if I could have the
recordings transcribed. After learning the substantial cost of transcriptions,
I emailed the sole employee of the business, since the repercussions of her false
reporting kept accruing.
My email, which I can provide a copy to you, had nothing in
it can be considered remotely "malicious" as the business claims.
There was no excuse for an alleged professional business to not send any kind
of reply or acknowledgment of any kind. I wasn't referred to any manager or
human resource department to handle my complaint as this is a one person
business and I only had one source of contact. The business claims in their
response to you that I threatened them. There were no threats in my email, I
directly told the business what I was seeking, why I felt I deserved for the
business to rectify their mistake, gave numerous, but not nearly all of the examples
of perjury from the reports to support my position, and I did not ask for a new
report to be written in a week's time. What I asked for, was some sort of
reply/acknowledgment, either a YES OR A NO by the end of that work week. I
stated if I couldn't get the situation resolved, I would be seeking assistance
from the Revdex.com, attorney general, or local news as it was an
injustice to have to spend money on a service that wasn't just to
"facilitate co-parenting sessions" but part of that service was to
provide non biased, truthful, accurate reports of those sessions. The latter
most certainly did not happen, that is why I feel entitled to some type of
monetary refund.
I did ask but certainly did not demand, that the company either withdraw the
false reports or for the first time write a truthful one. I even offered to
meet at a neutral location so that the employee didn't have to take my word for
what was said on the recordings and could listen to them their selves before
making any kind of decision. I received no kind of response by the end of the
week and sent a second email, which was one paragraph (not 2-3 pages as the company lies in their
response, I can provide that 2nd email as well) and asked for a response, in my
second email I didn't speak of contacting any outside agency, I simply asked
for a yes or no and if it was a "no" then a justified explanation of
why they would not refund my money or withdraw the perjury filled reports.
Furthermore, the business has now slandered me in their response to you based
off of no facts and only off of either hearsay or their personal opinion. The
business makes a claim in their response that “this is not the client's
first incident with trying to influence a report that he was not
successful at manipulating" The audacity of the slander is unsettling.
There is not one record or any proof of the employee's statement. If
the employee didn't just concoct this statement on their own, then
they were influenced by hearsay of an opposing party whom has no justification
or proof to make a claim like that. In all actuality, in my first meeting
with the employee of the business, when giving background history of the
opposing party, I had mentioned how the
opposing party had manipulated the reporting process to favor her in the
last court case that we had and actually have those reports to back up my
statements made to the employee of this business, yet the business twisted
the scenario to be the complete opposite and couldn't keep their facts
straight. On top of everything else, this business continues to concoct
personal beliefs and is trying to pass them off as facts, in paragraph one of
the business's reply to you, they state" client willingly paid for
services after each session and without any complaints until the unauthorized
tape was heard later by another person who was not involved in the sessions"
The business has no basis or any facts to make that statement, the business has
no basis to pass assumptions off as facts and there is no direct proof or
truth to that statement. The problem I had is not if somebody else
listened to the recordings. The problem, which the business is trying to bypass
and not address in their response, is that after the reports were written
and released which involved the 5 recorded sessions, the reports were
fictitious in many aspects and didn't coincide with what actually occurred in
the sessions which the recordings can provide. Lastly, the business st[redacted]
in their reply that they "will not yield to threats and intimidation to
satisfy this documented pattern of controlling behaviors." As provided,
you can see how the emails to the business are not threats and certainly not
intimidating but furthermore, the business has once again slandered myself
and concocted another unjustifiable lie stating there is a documented
pattern of controlling behavior. There is no basis for such a comment and there
is no documented papers or files that suggest such an outlandish statement.
Regards,
[redacted]