Global Tel* Link Corporation

April 11, 2014
Dear [redacted]This letter serves as a formal response to the complaint listed above.The customer contacted the Revdex.com because on November 8th 2013 a friend of **. [redacted]’s made to his commissary account and **. [redacted] says that the payment never...

posted to his account.We investigated this complaint and contacted **. [redacted] via US mail and informed him that the funds did in fact post to his account. The payment was for $20.00 minus a $3.00 transaction fee. Below is a copy of the transaction of the payment:[redacted]    11/8/20 11:09:59 Deposit $37.44 $17.00 $0.00 $54.44 [redacted]GTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questions please feel free to call.Sincerely yours,

September 24, 2014Dear [redacted]This letter serves as a formal response to the complaint listed above.The customer contacted the Revdex.com because she paid $25.00 to GTL to set up an account to talk to her grandson who is incarcerated in the [redacted] Correctional...

facility. GTL does not service this facility so she is requesting a refund in a reasonable amount of time.We investigated this complaint and contacted [redacted] via e-mail on September 24th and advised her that we have issued a credit back to her credit card that she used to establish the account in the amount of $25.00 and to please allow 7 to 10 business days for the credit to appear back on the card.
GTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questions please feel free to call.
Sincerely Yours, 
Kathi T

4/23/14Dear [redacted]I am in receipt of your 4/7/14 letter informing me that the Revdex.com is pursuing my claim regarding an OffenderConnect/GTL transfer of funds. On Tuesday, 4/15/14,1 received a letter from GTL which included printouts showings their computer records of the transaction in question. I am also in receipt of your 4/14/2014 letter, which includes GTL’s 4/11/2014 response letter. I certainly appreciate your efforts to assist me in this matter.At first glance, the documents from GTL appear to confirm their assertion that the $17.00 was added to my phone account instead of to my commissary account [as was intended by [redacted]], But, upon closer examination a number of questionable discrepancies leave me with lingering doubts. I am therefore requesting that your agency continue to pursue my claim based on the following points:Point I. When informed by GTL that the money in question had been added to my phone account I checked the receipt for the transaction and found no reference to which account (phone or commissary) monies received would be placed into. In fact, GTL - which is known to be the only approved vendor for inmate phone services within the Ohio Dept, of Rehab. & Corrections (ODRC) - is not mentioned at all on the receipt, giving the user no clue that the service being provided originates from a company whose initial contract with ODRC was to provide phone services for inmates in Ohio. The lack of such information fosters the deception that OffenderConnect will be vigilant about alerting users which account deposits are made to. Also, in GTL’s 04/08/2014 letter is included a computer printout identified by the handwritten “Receipt #” in the upper right-hand comer. On this page, in the “Account Comments (Add New)” section of the printout there is a check-mark that locates the transaction in question above that particular entry is an apparent verification of the entry that clearly, and in all caps, designates “INMATE PHONE ACCT” as the target account. However, in GTL’s 4/11/2014 letter GTL refers to [a deposit] made to my commissary account, demonstrating the company’s understanding of there being a difference between inmate’s phone and commissary accounts. This fact is also demonstrated on the second page of a statement of my inmate account here at LoCI for the months of November and December of 2013: the 12/06/2013 entry is an OffenderConnect deposit that went into my commissary account. I do not think it unreasonable to assume that in its contract with ODRC the distinction between the two accounts is established, pointing out the fact that monies deposited into a commissary account are transferable by the inmate into his/her phone account but that monies in a phone account are not transferable. In light of this one-way aspect of account functions, and the fact that all deposits are non-refundable, there should have been no discrepancy as to which account the money was posted to.Point II. Near the bottom of the first page of GTL’s response, after the bold printed “Why payment didn’t post on 11/08/2013?” there is a [probable] misprint that cites $13.00 as the payment amount after the transaction fee, instead of $17.00. Then the date and time, 11/8/2013 11:09:59 is listed for when the deposit took place; this contrasts against the time of 12:09 listed on the receipt. How could money be recorded before it is even received?Point III. On the same page, and in the same section as previously mentioned, there follows three listings for my personal phone account, one deposit and two calls. There is a strong possibility of an existing discrepancy with the two calls. The first cannot be confirmed because the call apparently was not answered. The second call can be confirmed and I am requesting you to inform GTL to produce the number I am reported to have called so that I may contact that individual to see if his/her phone bill reflects the call having been made on that date and time. Although this information does not seem directly relevant to the initial inquiry, it might be part of a larger pattern of inconsistencies in this matter. I very, very rarely make calls at that time, because that is the period immediately after a prison count has been “cleared” and when a general rush for the phones ensues. It is not impossible that I made a call at 9:31:37 PM on 11/9/2013. but it is very unlikely. I' would like to confirm it. 
Point IV. On two separate pages, GTL forwards printouts of its data records. On the page with the OffenderConnect logo at the top, the “Amount Payable” is listed as “17.00” and the “Date/Time” correspond with the receipt secured at the OffenderConnect kiosk at LoCI; however, the following page, which has “Receipt #” handwritten near the top right-hand comer, has what appears to be a printscreen image of the file accessed to verify that money was received from [redacted], and repeatedly states the amount to be “$20.” This begs the question of why the transaction fee is still attached to the amount reported to have been added to my phone account. Why Is that? There are more questionable elements on the right half of this image. There is a checkmark in the “Account Comments (Add New)” section of the image. It is clearly used to call attention to the LoCI kiosk usage and the amount deposited, and the receipt number is highlighted. Here is where I will begin a delineation of the remaining questionable elements:A - To the left of the actual ‘comment5 about the transaction you will find the date and time 11/15/2013 8:19:36 PM which is one week and six+ hours after the actual transaction.1)    Why is this apparent verification dated as occurring a full week after the transaction?2)    Why is this apparent verification exercised twice within a two-minute span as indicated by the line below it, dated and timed 11/15/2013 8:17:08 PM?
3)    Why would not a date and time corresponding to the present inquiry be evident, indicating the most recent accessing of that file?B - In the comment section of the line indicated by the check mark, the date is recorded as “8/11/2013” and the amount as “$20” just as in the line below it. Either this is the incorrect date or a dating protocol specific to such OffenderCormect/GTL record-keeping. If this is a dating protocol used for the comment section, why do the two lines above the line in question reflect the date 11/8/13 instead of the incorrect date, “8/11/2013”?
C - The two lines above the check-marked line in question also appear to be more verifications of the 11/8/2013 transaction; but these two items are eleven days after the transaction and six seconds apart (11/19/2013 7:25:42 AM and 11/19/2013 7:25:48 AM): why?And why is it that only on those lines - the eleven-day late verification - is It noted that the targeted account is the “INMATE PHONE ACCT”? Furthermore, why is the full amount of $20.00 continually listed instead of the actual $17.00 allegedly deposited into that account according to the OffenderConnect receipt on the left side of the printscreen image?D - Two and three lines below (respectively) the check-marked line in question are entries with dates and times reading 11/15/2013 3:38:24 PM and 11/1/2013 2:33:56 PM, with both entries being for the amounts of “25.00”; [redacted] has personally verified to me that, on a monthly basis, she makes such bi-weekly deposits into the phone account of an inmate here, and that the dates for the phone account deposits she made in November 2013 correspond almost precisely with the above recited dates. However, these entries do not specify “inmate phone acct” as the target account: why not? This also highlights a discrepancy regarding the dates and times that entries are made and verified, because the alleged posting of the money in question into my phone account is not recorded or verified until dates and times far removed from the date of the actual transaction. Business protocols are legally mandated to conform to some consistent method, for auditing and other purposes; the varying manners used to record transaction information, as displayed by the printouts afforded by GTL, do not comply with such consistency. Why is this?[redacted], it is possible that everything that GTL alleges is true. But, I feel that the Inconsistencies and apparent discrepancies within the letters and printouts GTL has forwarded [as an accounting of what happened to that $17.00] warrant further Investigation. An independent audit of OffenderConnect/GTL’s accounting methods in this matter may be necessary, since they have already and repeatedly Illustrated Inconsistencies in their own reporting.
I have enclosed a copy of the letters and printouts sent to me by GTL as well as a copy of my inmate account statement for the months of November and December of 2013. I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience on this matter.Thanking you, in advance, for your time and consideration, I am ...
Sincerely,

July 21, 2014Dear Ms. HorneThis letter serves as a formal response to the complaint listed above.The customer contacted the Revdex.com because she requested a refund over 2 months ago and she has yet to receive the refund.We investigated this complaint and...

determined that [redacted] made a $25.00 payment on May 28th and requested a refund on May 29th. Unfortunately the refund was never processed. We have contacted [redacted] via e-mail and advised her that a credit in the amount of $25.00 has been issued back to credit card ending in 3755. We have waived the $5.00 refund processing fee. In addition we informed [redacted] to please allow 7 to 10 business days for the credit to appear back on her card.GTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questions please feel free to call.Sincerely yours,

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
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]

June 20, 2014
Dear [redacted]This letter serves as a formal response to the complaint listed above.The customer contacted the Revdex.com because she was informed by GTL that if she would like to continue to receive calls from an inmate in The [redacted] Correctional...

facility she will have to set up an Advance pay account. [redacted] would like to go back to having the calls billed to her [redacted].We investigated this complaint and contacted [redacted] and explained to her that GTL did block her phone. On January 11, 2014 our records reflect No collect calls allowed. The No Collect Call block was done by her [redacted]. The block has been removed and we have changed the account back to [redacted] billed. In addition we have issued a refund in the amount of 69.14 which was the remaining balance on her Advance Pay account. [redacted] is aware that if she exceeds GTLs 30/30 day call limit she will need to set up an Advance Pay account.GTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questions please feel free to call.[redacted] Agency ComplaintsOffice [redacted]

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
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. 
  ---------- Forwarded message ----------
F[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted] the problem seems to have been fixed. I have received several "good" phone calls in the last week or so.   Thank you.  Sincerely,  [redacted]   complaint number [redacted]
 
Regards,
[redacted]

August 27, 2015This letter serves as a formal response to the complaint listed above.
The Consumer contacted the Revdex.com because he purchased 2 - $25 [redacted] gift cards to add money to his GTL telephone account so he would be able to talk to an inmate in the [redacted]...

[redacted] Jail. The funds were never applied to his account.We investigated this complaint and contacted [redacted] via telephone and informed him that one of the $25 payments posted to account number [redacted] when it should have been applied to account number [redacted]. As a onetime courtesy we transferred the $25 to the correct account.
With regards to the other $25 payment; this payment was applied to the inmates Debit account. The $25 payment will remain on the inmates debit card and she can use this money at her own discretion.
GTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questions please feel free to contact me directly.
Sincerely yours,Kathi TAgency Complaints

August 5, 2015
This complaint was closed by the Revdex.com as unresolved. Please review the resolution below and consider closing it as closed as resolved.
The Consumer contacted the Revdex.com because the chargeback in the amount of $54.75 never appeared back on her credit card.
When a consumer requests that a payment be reversed on their credit card, their bank sends us the chargeback for the amount that was originally paid. Our records show that the chargeback did occur. however the $54.75 never was credited back to [redacted]p's account. When we contacted [redacted]'s bank they indicated that they had no record of the chargeback. There was obviously some type of system error with this transaction; therefore we have issued a credit in the amount of $54.75 to [redacted]'s AdvancePay account.
We contacted [redacted] via telephone and advised her of this resolution.
GTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questions please feel free to contact me directly.
Sincerely yours,Kathi T.Agency Complaints

May 8, 2014
Dear [redacted]This letter is in response to the rejection response from **. [redacted] stated that a payment made by [redacted] on November 8th 2013 never posted to his commissary account. I have attached a printout from our OffenderConnect website that is a receipt showing that the payment was applied to **. [redacted]’s Pin Debit account, not his commissary account. In addition I am providing you with a copy of **. [redacted]’s Pin Debit reconciliation report from November 1st 2013 through November 30th 2013. All transaction dates and times are in EST timeGTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questions please feel free to call.
Sincerely yours ,

Tried to put in the area that my son was in jail, and system wouldn't allow it. The system keep asking for the same information. The information was stored but keep saying to add it? Now I'm so worried about my information isn't secure.

we are still in the process of locating all of the customers money in order for the refund to be processed.

July 11, 2014
Dear [redacted]This letter serves as a formal response to the complaint listed above.The customer contacted the Revdex.com because she is requesting that the $6.95 credit card processing fee she was charged be refunded and her account balance on her...

old phone number be transferred to her new number.We investigated this complaint and contacted **. [redacted] and informed her that she was never charged the $6.95 processing fee and we have sent her a copy of her transaction history to verify that she was not charged the fee. In addition we have informed her that we have transferred her account balance in the amount of $8.73 to her new phone number. **. [redacted] advised us that she was satisfied with this resolution.GTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questions please feel free to call.

November 10, 2014Dear [redacted]This letter serves as a formal response to the complaint listed above.The customer contacted the Revdex.com because she made to payments to her GTL telephone account and the payments never posted to her account.
We...

investigated this complaint and left a voice message for [redacted] advising that the 2 missing payments have been located and have been applied to her account. Further advised if she had any additional issues to please call us back.GTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questions please feel free to call.
Sincerely Yours,Kathi TAgency Complaints

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
I did speak with GTL about this resolution. The money has been refunded. My words to the GTL representative was that the amount of money in dispute was not the issue, rather the complete lack of professionalism regarding their error. I tried numerous calls and emails and was treated extremely rudely. I was told that there was no error by GTL. It wasn't until the Revdex.com was notified that something was done. I explained to the representative that considering 20% of the money paid to GTL went to fees, I would have expected better and more receptive customer service. 
Regards,
[redacted]

February 23, 2015
Dear [redacted],
This letter serves as a formal response to the complaint listed above.
The customer contacted the Revdex.com because she paid $48.95 to set up an account to be able to talk to her husband who is incarcerated in the [redacted]...

Detention Center.We investigated this complaint and contacted [redacted] and advised her that it appears that she filed her complaint with the wrong company. She thought that she was setting up an account with GTL but in reality she set up her account with “[redacted]". GTL is not affiliated with this company in any way. We have received many complaints from people stating that they thought that [redacted] was affiliated with GTL. [redacted] informed us that she would be filing a complaint against [redacted] and would advise the Revdex.com that the complaint filed against GTL was done in error.
GTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questions please feel free to call.
Sincerely Yours,
Kathi TAgency Complaints

February 10, 2015
Dear [redacted]This letter serves as a formal response to the complaint listed above.The customer contacted the Revdex.com because his telephone company that he has ([redacted]) will not allow him to receive collect calls from an inmate. He was informed by...

GTL that if he would like to accept calls from the inmate he will have to set up an AdvancePay account. [redacted] states that he was never told there would be fees charged to set up and AdvancePay account With GTLWe investigated this complaint and contacted [redacted] via e-mail and explained to him that according to our records, [redacted] set up his AdvancePay account via GTL's AdvancePay portal. By choosing this method he did not talk to a live customer service representative; however he was prompted the necessary steps to establish an AdvancePay account. On January 20th [redacted] called and requested that his account be closed and the remaining balance on the account refunded. The balance on this account at the time the refund request was made was $19.00. We processed the refund which included the $5.00 refund processing fee. The total amount of the refund was $14.00.On February 4th we issued a courtesy credit back to [redacted]'s account in the amount of $5.00 which represents the refund processing fee.GTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questions please feel free to call.Sincerely yours,Kathi TAgency Complaints

April 23, 2015
Dear [redacted]This letter serves as a formal response to the complaint listed above.
The customer contacted the Revdex.com because she was given incorrect information about being able to add money to an inmate's pin debit account. She called into...

GTL's customer service department to request a refund and was told that it would take 4 to 6 weeks to process her refund.We investigated this complaint and contacted [redacted] via telephone on April 22nd and informed her that her refund has been processed in the amount of $29.75. [redacted] said she was very pleased with this resolution.
GTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questionsplease feel free to call.
Sincerely Yours,Kathi TAgency Complaints

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:As I have repeatedly explained to the person representing the business, my problem is that I CAN NOT ACCEPT CALLS. Their system requires you to press 0 to accept a call. About half of the time, this does not work. The person trying to contact me has given up because they think I am rejecting their calls. Their system DOES NOT WORK. I have over $100 on my two accounts there that is useless BECAUSE THEIR SYSTEM DOES NOT WORK. I would like a refund of all remaining funds on both numbers or I am joining the other customers in getting the class action lawsuit going. EVERYONE WHO USES THIS SYSTEM HAS THIS PROBLEM, THIS PROBLEM HAS BEEN ONGOING FOR YEARS. She said their tech support will "investigate it" they have clearly known this is an issue for a long, long time but they know they don't have to fix it and can just keep taking people's money. GIVE ME BACK THE REST OF MY MONEY OR I WILL JOIN THE OTHERS WHO ARE SEEKING OUT LEGAL REPRESENTATION TO TAKE DOWN YOUR CROOKED ORGANIZATION. 
Regards,
[redacted]

This letter serves as a formal response to the complaint listed above.
The Consumer contacted the Revdex.com because she thinks she being overcharged for the calls that she accepts from an inmate in a correctional facility that GTL is the service provider for. Ms. [redacted] would...

like to talk to a live customer service representative, not a recorded message.We investigated this complaint and contacted Ms. [redacted] via telephone and explained to her that the rate she is charged to accept the inmate's calls is correct and the current balance on her account is $2.95. In addition we offered to e-mail her copies of her call/transaction records and the rate sheet. Ms. [redacted] declined our offer because she said that she had talk to another GTL CSR and they were going to send the records to her via US mail and she would just wait to get them in the mail.
As a one time courtesy we have credited Ms. [redacted]'s account in the amount of $8.00. This will allow her to accept 1 full 15 minute call from the inmate.
GTL anticipates that this will close this complaint and should you have any additional questions please feel free to contact me directly.
Sincerely yours,
Kathi T[redacted] Agency Complaints