Genco Marketplace

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.  Please close this complaint as resolved.
Regards,
[redacted]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I request that this Revdex.com complaint remains open and available for the public to see. I would like to restate the facts here:
These were in fact tested by Genco. I documented each and every single HDTV. I took pictures, mostly had cracked screens. There was not one single usable HDTV. They all had cracked screen or some kind of issue. They were labeled with such and also have a label with GENC attached. Please refer to one of the pictures in the file attachment I am enclosing to this email.
 (*  The goods were sold as 'uninspected returns' and that is the case. While they may be inspected by the supplier of the goods, these are not inspected by GENCO Marketplace.)
Genco mis-represented the load by stating it was un-tested customer returns. They should have been labeled as salvaged. I can purchase Salvaged HDTVs all day long for $10 - $25 a TV. There is a big difference in price between salvaged and "untested customer returns". What I paid for is "untested customer returns" and want I got was all Salvaged HDTVs. Sure I may had purchased this load as-is but that doesn't give Genco the right to test them and give me all the broken ones. This load should had been stated and advertised as "Salvaged" and never once did it say that on the manifest or invoice It only stated that these were "un-tested customer returns". The point here is that I was sold untested customer returns where it should had been clearly marked, labeled and sold as salvaged. Which clearly shows it was mis-represented by Genco.
(* Because of the above, they are sold at a deep discount. With this order, they were sold at 10% because the condition of the goods was unknown to us. If these were inspected by
 GENCO Marketplace, this category would have sold at closer to 30%. This was clearly communicated to the buyer.)
There was no attempt made to work with me in regards to this matter. Genco wanted me to purchase 2 or 3 more loads as a partial credit. That is not even an attempt but an insult. They already ripped me off on the first deal, what makes you think I would do business with them again? Even before I threatened with legal action [redacted] was ignoring my phone calls and emails in regards to the pictures I sent him about the problem.
(* An attempt was made to work with this buyer on future orders to maintain the relationship. This was declined by the buyer and because the buyer threatened legal action, all  future communication from us was stopped.)
I had filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, PA attorney General's office.
I ask that the Revdex.com leaves this complaint open and available for the public to read as this has not resolved my complaint.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
This is what I received in email from Genco:
Thank you for sending the recall information as we spent significant time researching this and could not find this posted on the web without your assistance. Your complaint filed with the Revdex.com was twofold. Because the first order from April was resolved at the time with a credit toward a future order, we consider that order closed. Your dispute regarding the recalled mowers is valid and resolution appears to be coming from Sears, as well as from Genco Marketplace, per the notification letter you provided. Because we have received no complaints from others that received these mowers and understand the transmissions work, but need fixed, and that some of the batteries need replaced, we would like to offer you a credit of $5,000 toward your next order with [redacted]. As someone that has been in this industry for some time, you understand this is a ‘where-is, as-is’ business and this is a significant offer on our part to rectify this situation. Please review the offer and let me know if this is amenable to you. Thank you for your time and consideration.
This is my response to Genco's email:
I do not consider the first order closed as a $1000 discount on my next order does not even closely cover the $6000 discrepancy.  After reviewing former complaints on the Revdex.com site it is obvious that highly inaccurate manifests is a recurring issue.  I appreciate your response on the mowers as even in the "as is, where is" liquidation industry, this is a significant discrepancy on condition.  You have received at least one other complaint through the Revdex.com on 7/14 as documented on the Revdex.com site.  Oddly enough, that customer also received a $1000 discount on their purchase of these lawnmowers.  $5000 is a significant offer, but does not nearly cover both issues and why would I take a chance on a third load from you? Send me a load from [redacted] out of the Tennessee facility from the fulfillment side like I bought worth $10k - $15k and I will consider the matter closed and maybe even place more orders from you.
Regards,
[redacted]

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

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. 
Regards,
[redacted]

While we sell 'as-is, where-is' merchandise, based on the letter of recall notification provided by the complainant, we will be sending a resolution offer to them regarding the mowers that have been recalled. Because the other order in question was from April and a resolution was reached at the time on that order, this resolution offer will only be referring to the recalled mower order. Once resolution is agreed upon, we will provide another comment.

In response to complaint #[redacted]. The shipper Genco Marketplace can put the $199.00 back as a credit on my brothers credit card account. The only authority I have is the item he purchase was for me. He could also re- send the package to me as originally agreed with my brother and the owner of...

Genco Marketplace. However a credit back to my late brothers credit card is acceptable.

This complaint was filed without working through our normal customer service processes. Within an hour of emailing our support team, a response was sent to the complainant explaining our dispute resolution process and providing a link to start the submission. We sell 'as-is, where-is' final sale...

retail returns. These goods have been returned for a variety of reasons which means the products can be in a variety of conditions. We do not inspect the products and our pricing reflects that. In this case, the complainant is utilizing the Revdex.com as a resource to make claims to recover on any potential losses he may incur. We are very clear that this industry has risks. Some loads are better than others. It all balances out in the end with many of our customers making a very good living. Everything we stated in our email is as true as we understand it to be. No other customers have complained about this product and many have stated they were very happy with it and have ordered more. The complainant in this case stated something very similar to us in an email on Sept. 1 - "Okay I unloaded the truck , that was only for the first 10 pallets that were in the front, the stuff in the back ( the other 14 or so pallets)  looks excellent!" If there was a problem with part of the load, the complainant could have spoken with his rep and avoided this entire scenario. Based on his own words, we are having a hard time understanding the complaint registered. Given that 14 pallets look excellent, we will present a make good offer to the customer via email to work toward the closure of this complaint and will seek closure of this complaint once we have a resolution.

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], a resolution was never made with this company. We wired them the funds and after trying to contact them they ignored our request for a refund. I understand we may had purchased this shipment as-is but it was clearly misrepresented to us. They said were customer returns and it was in fact "SALVAGED" meaning they went through the manifest and gave us all the defective ones. I even have documented pictures where they labeled each bad HDTVs with broken screens. We had tried contacting them countlessly for months and they ignored our request.
I request that this complaint remains open.
Regards,
[redacted]

We would like to restate the facts and ask for the Revdex.com to close this case.
* We sell 'where-is, as-is' goods from top retailers and manufacturers.
*  The goods were sold as 'uninspected returns' and that is the case. While they may be inspected by the supplier of the goods, these are not inspected by GENCO Marketplace.
* Because of the above, they are sold at a deep discount. With this order, they were sold at 10% because the condition of the goods was unknown to us. If these were inspected by
GENCO Marketplace, this category would have sold at closer to 30%. This was clearly communicated to the buyer.
* An attempt was made to work with this buyer on future orders to maintain the relationship. This was declined by the buyer and because the buyer threatened legal action, all  future communication from us was stopped.
We feel strongly these facts will hold up in front of a legal body and seek an end to this conversation within the Revdex.com forum.
Thank you,
[redacted]
Director, B2B Customer Experience

GENCO Marketplace offers a dispute resolution process to hopefully avoid situations like this. Unfortunately in this case, the complainant filed their dispute after the allotted dispute window had closed, and then chose to file this Revdex.com complaint. The reason we have a great Revdex.com rating is because we...

do our best to work with the customers on issues, despite the fact we sell final sale, as-is where-is, merchandise. Additionally, we make no guarantees of quality and typically only work with customers on quantity issues.Having said that, we certainly do not want the complainant to be disgruntled and will work with her on this order. The team is crafting a response that will be provided to the complainant in hopes of resolution. While we cannot make good on speculative items such as anticipated return on investment and while we cannot verify losses based on complainant stating they destroyed goods, we can look at the cost of items purchased and take an action toward resolution on that. This action will be taken within the next 2 business days as we work through approvals. Once this matter is resolved with the complainant, we will notify the Revdex.com to confer with the complainant and close the dispute.

The customer was contacted on 12/09 and the billing issue in question was resolved. The Director of Sales worked with the customer to resolve the issue. While we reserve the right to increase prices based on market conditions and other factors, we have closed this order at the previously stated...

rates. We ask that this complaint be closed.

We apologize for the delay in response to the customers "Dispute Resolution" filed with Genco Marketplace. We have spent significant time trying to corroborate the customers complaints regarding the mowers in question. At this point, we have found no evidence of recall and ask that the customer...

provide those details to the Customer Service team here at Genco Marketplace. Those details were not provided to the sales rep, nor were they included in the dispute filed. We cannot offer and reach resolution on as-is, where-is goods, without additional information such as mower brand and serial number. We look forward to the customer's response so we can get this resolved. The information can be emailed to[redacted]
Thank you,
[redacted]
Director, Customer Experience
Genco Marketplace
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
I have attached the Letter of Notification that was sent to all customers that purchased the mowers by the retailer.  This was told to the sales representative at Genco, [redacted].  They also did not even attempt to address the major discrepancy in value on the first load that was purchased from them.
Regards,
[redacted]

We have been very proactive with this customer and their concerns, responding within a few business hours from receipt of their complaint and working with the customer from that acknowledgement toward resolution. We offer a dispute resolution process to provide the best customer experience and avoid...

any Revdex.com involvement. Unfortunately in this case a complaint was filed before any move toward resolution could have been offered. We have been in contact with this customer and have taken all necessary measures to take care of their concerns. We believe this complaint will be resolved within the next few days, with the removal of the complaint now resting with the the issuer.Thank you,GENCO Buyer Experience Team

GENCO Marketplace has a very customer friendly resolution process. One that is unique and favorable to our customers, despite being in an as-is, where-is, final sale business. In this case, the complainant went through our resolution process and received everything he had asked for, despite clearly...

not understanding the liquidation business nor the terms and conditions of the sale. In the Terms and Conditions the customer agreed to it clearly states that all branded merchandise must be defaced for resale. This is to protect the retailer from having salvage, liquidated goods come back into their stores as returns. Particularly in the case of this retailer, as they have a lifetime return policy. Because of this return policy, their customer returns are in all states of quality, from barely used and in the original box, to having been used for years and returned in pieces. This is all factored into the pricing of the product, of which this customer paid only cents on the dollar for each item.  We cannot be held responsible for a customer not knowing what it is they are buying. We state in our terms which are agreed to by the customer that all sales are final and that we sell uninspected customer returns. For the customer to state salvage is different than returns is incorrect. Goods may have been inspected by the retailer and deemed not suitable for other channels of sale (salvage) and sold into their liquidation channels (us.). In addition, on our website we state "Tools, hardware, home repair and construction products from America's largest Midwest department store. This product constitutes uninspected returns. These products will likely need maintenance or repair of some degree as this store has a very liberal return policy. Please see manifest below for specific product included in this lot.  Liquidation goods are sold "as-is, where-is" as we do not guarantee the condition of the product. Because of this, you are able to buy these goods at a fraction of the retail cost.” Lastly, on all of our purchase agreements and prior to payment, our documentation states these are final sale, as-is, where-is, goods. Despite all of the above, we agreed to a resolution with the customer through our dispute process which refunded the customer a significant portion of his sale as a good faith effort to keep the customer. Where is the good faith on this customer’s part? He now is using the Revdex.com to try and get additional monies from us, despite having the product, attempting to sell the product and having agreed to our Terms of Sale. We strongly feel this complaint should be dismissed, the original agreed upon dispute resolution can be processed and then this customer can move on to other sources of product.

Review: On 06/09/2016 we received our purchase of $3400.00 of [redacted] power tools (advertised as customer returns) plus $400 in shipping. This was not an auction situation, it was a direct sale. After approximately 50 hours of labor inspecting and inventorying the tools, we found that all were labeled as SALVAGE and all the power tools and shop vacuums had a large X etched through the Brand name. Furthermore, we found that out of the 211 tools we paid for 22 were missing (10.4%) and only 36 tools were in working condition (17%). All but seven of these tools only worked because we took parts from non working tools to complete or repair them.

We contacted Genco immediately and tried to resolve this through their dispute resolution process, In Gencos follow up email they stated the condition of the products " there will be a mix of items in excellent, good and fixable conditions". We did not receive the excellent and good condition products just the fixable ones. This is SALVAGE not customer returns. Their offer was limited to the reimbursement for the missing items only and this was what they called their good faith effort. In order to get the reimbursement for the product they shorted us, they required that we sign a 4 page full and final release and confidentiality agreement of claims relating to these disputes. I viewed this as very unacceptable due the gross misrepresentation of the products received. All of the products are available for inspection.Desired Settlement: Refund for the 83% of the cost paid for product. $2819.21

Business

Response:

GENCO Marketplace has a very customer friendly resolution process. One that is unique and favorable to our customers, despite being in an as-is, where-is, final sale business. In this case, the complainant went through our resolution process and received everything he had asked for, despite clearly not understanding the liquidation business nor the terms and conditions of the sale. In the Terms and Conditions the customer agreed to it clearly states that all branded merchandise must be defaced for resale. This is to protect the retailer from having salvage, liquidated goods come back into their stores as returns. Particularly in the case of this retailer, as they have a lifetime return policy. Because of this return policy, their customer returns are in all states of quality, from barely used and in the original box, to having been used for years and returned in pieces. This is all factored into the pricing of the product, of which this customer paid only cents on the dollar for each item. We cannot be held responsible for a customer not knowing what it is they are buying. We state in our terms which are agreed to by the customer that all sales are final and that we sell uninspected customer returns. For the customer to state salvage is different than returns is incorrect. Goods may have been inspected by the retailer and deemed not suitable for other channels of sale (salvage) and sold into their liquidation channels (us.). In addition, on our website we state "Tools, hardware, home repair and construction products from America's largest Midwest department store. This product constitutes uninspected returns. These products will likely need maintenance or repair of some degree as this store has a very liberal return policy. Please see manifest below for specific product included in this lot. Liquidation goods are sold "as-is, where-is" as we do not guarantee the condition of the product. Because of this, you are able to buy these goods at a fraction of the retail cost.” Lastly, on all of our purchase agreements and prior to payment, our documentation states these are final sale, as-is, where-is, goods. Despite all of the above, we agreed to a resolution with the customer through our dispute process which refunded the customer a significant portion of his sale as a good faith effort to keep the customer. Where is the good faith on this customer’s part? He now is using the Revdex.com to try and get additional monies from us, despite having the product, attempting to sell the product and having agreed to our Terms of Sale. We strongly feel this complaint should be dismissed, the original agreed upon dispute resolution can be processed and then this customer can move on to other sources of product.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

Review: On June 17, 2013 I received a blast email from Genco stating they had 4 trailers of tv's priced to sell at 10% of market value. I inquired from the salesman. [redacted] about the condition he assured me while they are listed as "unmanifested returns" they are strictly products that the buyers had remorse after they purchased the item. On June 18 I sent a wire transfer of 20,000 to Genco in exchange for two trailers of tv's. On June 28, 2013 I received the two trailers of tv's double stacked in a trailer. Every tv that I had purchased was broken beyond repair, while they were listed as unmanifested almost every tv had pieces of paper that said Genco. placed prominently on the cracks on the screen or attached with papers such as broken or cracked screen.while I was shipped damaged goods, they also shipped it negligently, the tv's were not allowed to be double stacked. in warehousing labor alone I ran up new costs of over 8000 dollars. I have every tv still in my possesion in a traier that I rented. they have refused to refund me my money rather they offer me credit if I ship the t vs back to them and they believe that I was slighted only then will I receive creditDesired Settlement: to receive 20,000$ for tv's and 6500 for my warehousing costs

Business

Response:

We have evaluated Mr. [redacted] complaint and have difficulty validating his concerns. First, it is important to note that Mr. [redacted] original complaint was in June, 2013. In the 8 months since then leading up to this Revdex.com complaint, we received no communication from Mr. [redacted] to work together to resolve his concerns. Second, the GENCO Marketplace Sales team is very aware of the condition of returned TVs and the very low 10% price level is to reflect that even unmanifested TV returns are typically in rough condition. It is not common practice for Sales to refer to returned TV’s as “buyer’s remorse products” given the condition of this category. It is unfortunate that Mr. [redacted] did not maintain communication about this issue and chose to store the products into 2014. Under current Genco Marketplace guidelines, 2013 claim offers must be used by year-end and we have passed that timeframe. Compounded by the length of time since we learned of this concern, it is not possible to validate this claim or provide financial assistance with this order.

Consumer

Response:

We appreciate your evaluation and response. However it seems there are material differences as to what occurred and as to the communications that have been exchanged. The original complaint was filed in June of 2013, however I am enclosing in attachments the emails that demonstrate continual correspondence past the date that Genco claims there was no more contact. Second, the option of financial compensation is only my request for lack of alternative options. I first requested that Genco fulfills its part of the contract and send the items not in "rough condition" but rather a condition that meets at least minimal standards of quality not one in which every single tv was broken and that was inspected prior to being shipped. The claim about lack of communication is categorically false and as mentioned the emails are enclosed. I also have a phone log through which communication can also serve for evidentiary purposes.

I am also enclosing several clips to demonstrate what Genco is truly about. It is an operation that preys on small business owners with minimal capital in selling products that are do not meet even the most minimal standards.

Review: I had purchased 119 HDTVs from Genco in which they advertised as "untested customer returns from [redacted].com". I even checked with my sales rep ([redacted]) before purchasing and he assured me that these were in fact untested customer returns from [redacted]. I wired them the funds in the amount of $8468.31 plus shipping. When I received my shipment it was labeled by Genco with Broken Screens. There was not a single working HDTV on the list. This manifest should have been sold as salvaged as the price difference between untested customer returns and salvaged is very substantial. I called [redacted] and after ignoring my emails and phone calls he asked me to send him pictures. I sent him several pictures and he offered a partial 1/3 store credit for future purchase split between 3 loads. I no longer want to do business with Genco because they had deceived me. I have taken detailed pictures of each and every single HDTV on the manifest. There is not a single working one. They all have some kind of issue.Desired Settlement: A refund for what I paid. I am not willing to accept any store credit for future purchase. I simply would like a refund. Otherwise I will be forced to proceed with legal action.

Business

Response:

The order referenced by the complainant was placed with our organization over 15 months ago. We question why the Revdex.com complaint is only now being filed. At the time of the order, as the complainant states, they were offered a resolution. No communication was had with complainant after the resolution was offered and no attempt was made to return those goods to us. We are left to assume the goods were sold for a profit and no other response from us is needed.

We sell ‘where is, as is’ goods and make no claims to quality. Our pricing reflects that. These goods were purchase at ten cents on the dollar, which reflects the quality of the goods. Regarding the complainants comments on the condition of the products, we sell uninspected goods we receive from major retailers. If they inspect the goods or have a 3rd party inspect the goods prior to our receiving them, they may add documentation on the box regarding condition, but we do not inspect the goods ourselves and sell those goods priced as such.

We cannot offer a refund for goods received over 15 months ago and ask the Revdex.com to close this complaint.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], a resolution was never made with this company. We wired them the funds and after trying to contact them they ignored our request for a refund. I understand we may had purchased this shipment as-is but it was clearly misrepresented to us. They said were customer returns and it was in fact "SALVAGED" meaning they went through the manifest and gave us all the defective ones. I even have documented pictures where they labeled each bad HDTVs with broken screens. We had tried contacting them countlessly for months and they ignored our request.

I request that this complaint remains open.

Regards,

Consumer

Response:

attached to this message are PDF file attachments of my emails I sent to [redacted] over at Genco Marketplace. I had also called him several times and left him several messages as well. He does not answer my phone calls or return my voicemails. He only answered the phone when I call with a blocked number or from a different telephone number. I informed him of what happened and he told me to email him with pictures and so I did.

I request that this complaint remains open.

Business

Response:

We have attached an email received from the complainant making an offer to buy other products several weeks after the order in question and during the period he mentions below that we were not in contact with him. We made several attempts to work with the customer via phone on future orders, however once the complainant sent us an email stating he would seek legal options, our company policy is to end all communications with that customer at that time. Which is what happened and why no further communication with the complainant occurred after the email attached.

As stated previously, it was overly communicated by the sales associate with the complainant that these goods were ‘uninspected returns’ by GENCO Marketplace. These goods were likely inspected by the retailer, thus any notes, tags or other information provided on the boxes, were provided by them. Because these were uninspected by us, we sold them at an appropriate rate which equaled a fraction of the retail cost (10%). At that rate, we are unsure what the complainant’s expectations were, but we were very clear with him that these goods are sold ‘as-is, where-is’ and were uninspected returns (by GENCO Marketplace). There was no misrepresentation by GENCO Marketplace as stated by complainant, the customer knew exactly what they were purchasing, and because of that, we ask that this matter be closed.

Consumer

Response:

I ask that this complaint remains open. I had emailed [redacted] asking about products to see if he would get back to me and he sure does when he wants to make a sale but Genco ignores your emails and response to any sales related issue. Even before I told Genco I will be forced to move forward with legal actions I had not received any response. [redacted] asked me to send him pictures of the products. I emailed him pictures and did not receive a response back. I had never once returned an email from Genco addressing my concerns in regards to this matter.

The point is that the merchandise had already been tested as bad and should had never been sold as "uninspected customer returns". It should had been sold as "SALVAGED". There is a big price difference between salvaged and "untested customer returns". The price I paid Genco was for "Uninspected customer returns" and that's what was reflected on the sales invoice. That's what was advertised, [redacted] even said that these were uninspected customer returns." What I expected from Uninspected customer returns is a percentage to be working. What I got was ALL damaged with broken screens. Not a single working HDTV.

I ask that this complaint remains open as it has not been resolved.

Business

Response:

We would like to restate the facts and ask for the Revdex.com to close this case.

* We sell 'where-is, as-is' goods from top retailers and manufacturers.

* The goods were sold as 'uninspected returns' and that is the case. While they may be inspected by the supplier of the goods, these are not inspected by GENCO Marketplace.

* Because of the above, they are sold at a deep discount. With this order, they were sold at 10% because the condition of the goods was unknown to us. If these were inspected by

GENCO Marketplace, this category would have sold at closer to 30%. This was clearly communicated to the buyer.

* An attempt was made to work with this buyer on future orders to maintain the relationship. This was declined by the buyer and because the buyer threatened legal action, all future communication from us was stopped.

We feel strongly these facts will hold up in front of a legal body and seek an end to this conversation within the Revdex.com forum.

Thank you,

Director, B2B Customer Experience

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

I request that this Revdex.com complaint remains open and available for the public to see. I would like to restate the facts here:

These were in fact tested by Genco. I documented each and every single HDTV. I took pictures, mostly had cracked screens. There was not one single usable HDTV. They all had cracked screen or some kind of issue. They were labeled with such and also have a label with GENC attached. Please refer to one of the pictures in the file attachment I am enclosing to this email.

(* The goods were sold as 'uninspected returns' and that is the case. While they may be inspected by the supplier of the goods, these are not inspected by GENCO Marketplace.)

Genco mis-represented the load by stating it was un-tested customer returns. They should have been labeled as salvaged. I can purchase Salvaged HDTVs all day long for $10 - $25 a TV. There is a big difference in price between salvaged and "untested customer returns". What I paid for is "untested customer returns" and want I got was all Salvaged HDTVs. Sure I may had purchased this load as-is but that doesn't give Genco the right to test them and give me all the broken ones. This load should had been stated and advertised as "Salvaged" and never once did it say that on the manifest or invoice It only stated that these were "un-tested customer returns". The point here is that I was sold untested customer returns where it should had been clearly marked, labeled and sold as salvaged. Which clearly shows it was mis-represented by Genco.

(* Because of the above, they are sold at a deep discount. With this order, they were sold at 10% because the condition of the goods was unknown to us. If these were inspected by

GENCO Marketplace, this category would have sold at closer to 30%. This was clearly communicated to the buyer.)

There was no attempt made to work with me in regards to this matter. Genco wanted me to purchase 2 or 3 more loads as a partial credit. That is not even an attempt but an insult. They already ripped me off on the first deal, what makes you think I would do business with them again? Even before I threatened with legal action [redacted] was ignoring my phone calls and emails in regards to the pictures I sent him about the problem.

(* An attempt was made to work with this buyer on future orders to maintain the relationship. This was declined by the buyer and because the buyer threatened legal action, all future communication from us was stopped.)

I had filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, PA attorney General's office.

I ask that the Revdex.com leaves this complaint open and available for the public to read as this has not resolved my complaint.

Regards,

Review: On 1/22/2016, GENCO advertised a lot of "uninspected returns" for auction. I won the auction. When the product arrived, the equipment was piled into a box, was broken and was labelled as "salvage."Desired Settlement: Total refund at this point would be the only justifiable outcome.

Business

Response:

GENCO Marketplace provides a dispute resolution process to avoid complaints and situations like this. While we acknowledged the customers reasoning for the complaint, there were several factors which prevented us in refunding the customer as requested. 1. The customer agreed to our terms and conditions which states you are buying as-is, where-is, final sale goods. 2. In this same document which was agreed to by the customer, it states, THE SERVICES, GOODS AND THE WEBSITE, INCLUDING ALL PROPERTY LISTED FOR SALE, CONTENT, FUNCTIONS, MATERIALS, SERVICES AND INFORMATION MADE AVAILABLE ON OR ACCESSED THROUGH THE SERVICES OR THE WEBSITE, ARE PROVIDED ON AN "AS IS," "WHERE IS," "AS AVAILABLE" BASIS "WITH ALL FAULTS" AND WITHOUT REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. BUYER AGREES THAT THERE ARE NO WRITTEN WARRANTIES OR ANY WARRANTIES THAT EXTEND BEYOND THE FACE OF THIS DOCUMENT. GMP and the Supplier undertake no responsibility for the quality of the goods and assume no responsibility that the goods will be fit for the purpose for which you are buying these goods. BUYER acknowledges that no representations have been made by the Supplier or GMP, or relied upon by BUYER, in connection with the quality, quantity or capacity of the merchandise. BUYER acknowledges and understands that purchase of PRODUCT constitutes the wholesale purchase of clearance merchandise and that some or all of the PRODUCT may not be in usable condition. The BUYER further understands that the merchandise may vary from the general description and that the general description is for convenience only. BUYER agrees that the general description is NOT a representation or acknowledgement of the actual goods. 3. Per the customer's initial dispute complaint filed with us, he stated that "30% of the items we broken or inoperative. I understand that these are "uninspected returns." However, the condition of the items were salvage." Yet, the customer wants a full refund. 4. The definition of salvage versus uninspected returns to most folks within our industry is the same. While the goods we sell may or may not have been inspected by the retailer or one of their refurbishment partners, it is uninspected by us and sold as uninspected. We offer no warranty as to condition as that condition is unknown to us. 5. The customer, before holding on to the goods to be inspected or returned to us, sold the items. The request of compensation is based on the customers inability to sell the goods at a profit. This is something we have no control over and have no way of confirming the shortage as represented by the customer outside of a few photos provided by the customer. Certainly not in a way that would justify a full refund for items already sold by the complainant. Despite all of the above, we attempted to work with the customer and provide a credit on a future order of $400 or 30% of what was paid to us to 'make good' on his experience and continue building and growing the relationship. The customer refused, wanting a full refund which we could not approve given the items above. In order to end the relationship amicably, we attempted to offer a refund of $200. This was also refused. We were told to keep our refund offer as the customer would no longer be working with us. Shortly after that communication, a request was sent to handle this matter through arbitration. That process is still ongoing. Once the arbitration request is made, we no longer have the ability to work toward resolution as that is done through arbitration. After that request was made by the complainant and we removed ourselves from the process awaiting response from the arbitrator, the customer filed negative reviews of our business and this Revdex.com complaint. We cannot offer a full refund on goods that were purchased as-is, final sale AND sold before being inspected or returned to us. We no longer have ownership of the goods and as such cannot compensate for those goods on top of what the customer made from selling these items. We can also not proceed with any additional resolution attempt without the requested arbitration process occurring or further guidance from our legal team on this matter.

Business

Response:

The business would like to move on past this dispute. If the complainant will accept the $400 credit back to their credit card as mentioned above, we will move forward with making that happen so this case can be closed. The complainant will be required to accept this credit as closure to this complaint.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. Please note that there is an open dispute with [redacted] credit card. Genco will have to respond to the dispute by indicating that we have reached an agreement - allow the charge to come back onto the account and then credit me for $400. I want to note that I still don't agree with how GENCO handled this auction. I feel that they willfully misrepresented salvage items as non-inspected returns and followed-up with my complaint by being argumentative and brash. I sincerely, hope that GENCO corrects their auction procedures to protect future customers. I would also like to thank the Revdex.com for stepping in here and mediating, when GENCO refused to.

Regards,