FP Mailing Solutions

Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: From: [redacted] [mailto:gs [redacted] @ [redacted] law.com] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2:PMTo: [redacted] < [redacted] [redacted] @chicago.Revdex.com.org>Subject: complaint # [redacted] Dear Sir Or Madam, I received an email stating “Revdex.com has received the complaint that you submitted on 6/20/against FP Mailing SolutionsFor your records, this complaint was assigned ID [redacted] in our systemBefore Revdex.com can proceed with the conciliation process, we need some clarification from you on the following issuesCan you please verify if this complaint has been addressed to you properly by the business?” I could not respond on the Revdex.com site and was told to use the above email address The complaint has not been addressed properly by the business, FP Mailing Solutions In response to my initial complaint, FP Mailing Solutions responded as follows: “We will check into the information provided and contact the business directly to reach a resolution.” However, FP Mailing Solutions failed to contact me to discuss any resolutions Based on the failure of FP Mailing Solutions to contact me as they claimed they would do, I responded that their response was rejected It has been almost a month since FP Mailing Solutions said it would contact me to resolve, with no attempt by FP Mailing Solutions to contact me It is hoped the above provides the clarification your requested If not, please feel free to give me a call Thanks Best Regards, /s/ [redacted] S [redacted] , Esquire [redacted] *** [redacted] Facsimile: [redacted] Email: gs [redacted] @ [redacted] law.com [redacted]

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 I resolved the problem with George [redacted] help so the monthly fee will remain the same for the next months and the contract will automatically cancel per George [redacted] agreementSincerely, Gary [redacted]

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/05/30) */ FP had offered a number of times to exchange the postage meter for the business, and this would be at no cost to the business - the shipment of the new meter and a return label would have been sent to return the current meterThe business refused both the exchange as well as to troubleshoot the issue with the postage meterA refusal to work through an issue and being given new equipment does not negate their contractThe meter had worked until the USPS had changed the software requirement which required a download through an Ethernet line similar to downloading postageThe business would have needed to complete this download in order to continue to operate the postage meter as required by the Terms and Conditions of their contract by the USPSFP is willing to return the equipment and issue a credit for the unused time with the meter to get the business running again Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2014/06/03) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) After numerous times in calling customer service, we did not get a resolution as to why we were having the issues with the machine in the first placeWe follow all of the instructions in which customer service rep told us to do over the phoneWe would explain the issue that we were having every time we calledWe got the same instructions over and over againWe feel that no one took the time to try to figure out why we having the issues in the first placeIn the lease agreement should be a clause to state if any issues or problems no fault of anyone to allow a company to get out of the lease of the equipmentWe did not want to continue doing business with the company due to the negative experience that we received Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 17, 2014/07/21) */ There is no distinction to the business as to whether a meter is new or refurbished as stated in the contract; FP, as the manufacturer, is the owner of the equipment and no individual business would be able to own the meter / PSD as it has the ability to print US CurrencyShould there have been fault due to the performance of the equipment this situation would be of a different matter, however the business was required to perform certain functions and provide the correct connection in order for the meter to operateMoreover the business had refused an exchange, part of the service that is provided at no cost to the business, that would have allowed for further assessment and ability to troubleshoot the presumed errorDespite this, FP has still offered a reduced settlement amount for the business' contracted period Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 11, 2014/06/18) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) This response is not acceptableWe did everyting the customer service told us to doNothing work at allWe follow every instruction that was given to usThe company keeps on replying with the same answers over again

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/10/17) */ Even today our Customer Care Manager spoke to [redacted] who had confirmed that she was pushing the buttons correctly however she had refused to physically go to the meter to walk through the stepsWhen our Customer Care Manager had then said that she would process an exchange for the equipment, something that is no charge to the business, [redacted] had refused [redacted] had indicated that she did not have the confidence in the accurate weight being calculated in a 9xpiece due to the proximity of the scale to the base of the meter - FP has tens of thousands of businesses utilizing this meter none of which experience this issueHowever, the business was offered the option of different equipment both today by our Customer Service Manager as well as two other representatives, the correspondence with one is attached FP requests that the business troubleshoot while at the meter or accept the exchange as that is at no cost to themIf the meter type is a concern to them, another option has been made available and the offer still standsHowever, should the business elect to return the equipment they will be held to the terms and conditions of their contract Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2014/10/21) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I think it's quite telling that FP finds it necessary to force a business to become a customer instead of doing business in a manner that would attract customersTheir competition offers a free test period [redacted] days)for a business to determine if the equipment is appropriate to its needsBut FP offered no such test period On Sept 11th sales rep [redacted] contacted me saying that the T-that I was using had been replaced by the MyMail Max and I needed to exchange machines as soon as possibleThe new machine would cost the same as the old oneAfter struggling with the machine for several weeks, I called her back to say that I wasn't happy with the machine and wanted to return itShe told me that there would be an early termination fee and transferred me to [redacted] Ms [redacted] told me that it was my mistake in accepting the MyMail machine because the proper replacement for the T-was the PBwhich, of course, would cost more, and the termination fee would be the full cost of the yr contractWhich sales rep am I supposed to believe or is this bait & switch? Ms [redacted] later followed up with the email that FP has attached to their responseIt gave the same push the buttons instructions that I had already received over the phone from the other customer service reps, and now suggested that I switch to a different machine When [redacted] called on Oct 17th I did not walk to the machine to push the buttons for the fourth time because I had already stood at the machine and pushed the buttons prior times with separate customer service repsEach one telling me that there couldn't possibly be something wrong with the machine [redacted] finally admitted that it didn't sound as if the machine was working properlyBut my only recourse was to get another machine because I was locked into a contractI told her that replacing a defective MyMail machine with a working MyMail machine was still not a solution for my businessWhen we weighed 9xand 10xenvelopes they drooped over the sides of the scale onto the top of the machine, and I was not sure that I was getting an accurate weight My experience with this machine and the various agents has been so unpleasant that I would rather not deal with this company in the futureI would like to return the machine and pay just for the time that I've struggled with it, which is now in its second month Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 9, 2014/10/24) */ An alternative meter was offered due to the reluctance of the business to troubleshoot the meter and their uncertainty that their mail pieces were being weighed properly - so it is based on the preference of the business that was indicatedThere is a cost difference between the equipment that the business has and the equipment that was proposed, and the difference is $per monthShould the business want to move forward with the change in equipment type, the monthly price would remain at what was offered however to cover the increase in monthly cost as well as time spent by the business, FP will credit the business three months free rentalA return label will be sent with the new meter so the current meter can be returned at no cost to the businessThe new meter and term would supersede the current one in place Should the business elect to not change their equipment type FP will exchange the current meter, which is done at no cost to the businessAgain, a return label will be sent with the new meter so the current meter can be returned at no cost to the businessAs this is a meter that calculates US Postage, the rate will certainly calculate the weight properly when used correctlyFurthermore, FP will credit the past month's invoice as a courtesy to the business

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/07/23) */ We are working directly with the business to both find a resolution, and ensure their needs are met

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/05/29) */ The ink order had been processed and was delivered to the office of the business on May 22, Before the order had been processed, as a courtesy the business had been contacted in regard to upgrading their current meter, before any additional funds had been spent for supplies toward the current meterThe meters are regulated by the USPS because they hold postage funds; subsequently this is the reason that the contract for the meter had been automatically renewedMoreover, this would be the reason that a new agreement would need to be signed in order to change the current meter At this time, the business has the ink that had been placed, and when interested in changing their current meter, may contact us Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (2000, 7, 2015/06/03) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) We had received three ink ribbon, and it should last till the end of the contract of the current meter and we will cancel the contract Thanks!

We have reached out to and resolved the matter directly with the business

The matter was resolved directly with the business

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/07/17) */ The day prior to the business filing the complaint, FP's AR Department had called and spoke with Bonnie regarding the account and balance owed being $0.00. A follow up call was made today, July 17, 2014 to both Bonnie and Jerome to... inquire as to the issue at hand and to confirm that they know the balance owed is $0.00 to which FP's Representative was met with coarse language. It is uncertain as to why this report / complaint was filed when the desired resolution of the business had already been achieved when speaking directly to our office prior to its filing. FP can take no action on the account as this was not a business that is a FP customer, now or at the time of the complaint.

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/07/24) */ This matter has been resolved directly with the business

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/09/04) */ The matter is being resolved directly with the business

We recently purchased a new FP unit and have been completely satisfied The system is much quieiter and easier to use than my *** *** Additionally I am not getting all of the fees I used to with *** *** I am most pleased with the product, deliery and training I was provided I noticed some concerns on cancellation, the agreement terms are on their website and clearly states the day cancellation I am very pleased to have chosen FP

Subscribed to a Postage Meter with this company I explained to them the system I had with Pitney Bowes and asked for their machine in equal or better quality They sent me a very poor quality product, its very load, very difficult to use and set up Not user friendly I called for customer service and they would not simply cancel my subscription based on my not being satisfied with the product, they insisted this was my fault and they would charge me a full years subscription priceThey offered to upgrade to a unit twice the current monthly rate Very dis-satisfied

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/07/13) */
The issue has been resolved directly with the business

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/09/22) */
The matter is being resolved directly with the business
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2015/09/24) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
George contacted the agencyIt was
requested that the agency be released from the contractGeorge stated that a new meter will be sent and the other one returned to them postage freeHe personally will be called to set up the meter and if there are problems, he will directly take care of them, not going through the customer service lineHe was going to research the support person who was rude to our IT personI informed him that we will be doing another mass mailing in about a monthIf this meter does not perform and there are breakdowns, it has already been stated that if necessary, the agency will buy out of the contract

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/07/30) */
The matter has been resolved directly with the business

We had been experiencing intermittent phone issues, as was the region we are locatedThe business had been contacted and the matter addressed

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/08/10) */
FP is in the process of resolving the matter directly with the business
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2015/08/11) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
FP has offered to void the
bill for the year of service that was charged after service was discontinued

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 11698976, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
Sincerely,
Angela ***

We will check into the information provided and contact the business directly to reach a resolution