H & R Block

Order from company on 11/27(perishable goods)Package arrived on 12/and was picked up from fed ex on same dayOpened package to find out that out of the items expired in days (12/8)Contacted the company, only not to get a response the first time and by the second time was told that it states on their website that if items are shipped not using priority mail that freshness cannot be guaranteedI ordered priority mail and still received short dated product! When I sent another email validating that I ordered priority mail and either wanted a refund or exchange, I never heard from them again
Product_Or_Service: Milchsnitten
Order_Number: XXXXX

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business and yes I have filed a lawsuit against said businessI learned in the preliminary hearing that Rick's auto is actually stating that I owe much more than he had previously told me in personHe is now claiming I owe $2,which is 50% of the cost of the vehicleI have paid already the full cost of our agreement and don't feel that the business is entitled to even one penny moreI was warned that he does this to a lot of people but I hadn't taken the warnings seriously until nowWhat he is doing is forcing me to pay way more than the vehicle is worth and if I don't pay, he keeps it just so that he can sell again to somebody else and the process continuesHe is ripping people off and getting away with itI will not feel that this issue will be resolved until I get what I paid for(which is my truck), or I get every dollar back that I vested into the truckIncluding all the money I had to spend in repairing the truck which includes alternator, fan clutch, transmission sensors, rotors , calipers, tires and break lines and so onHe just can't continue doing business this way with people, it's morally wrong!
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
05/24/*** *** *** ***
*** *** ** ***
*** *** *** ***
*** *** ***
*** ***
*** ** *** RE: Social Security Number: *** To Whom It May Concern: I have recently been informed that there is negative information reported by ***
*** *** *** in the file you maintain under my Social Security numberUponreviewing a copy of my credit report, I see an entry listing Bankruptcy on 02/24/2012. According to the FCRA that I have the right to request a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of disputed information. I am requesting the exact method of verification used considering Bankruptcy Rule 9037(a). Redacted Filings. Unless the court orders otherwise, in an electronic or paper filing made with the court that contains an individual's social-security number, taxpayer-identification number, or birth date, the name of an individual, other than the debtor, known to be and identified as a minor, or a financial-account number, a party or nonparty making the filing may include only:(1) the last four digits of the social-security number and taxpayer-identification number;(2) the year of the individual's birth;(3) the minor's initials; and(4) the last four digits of the financial-account number. Please note: You may not surmise that just because a name, partial address, partial account number, partial SS number, generation (Jr., Sr.), and or the 2nd or 3rd generation etcis accurate.Therefore, based upon Bankruptcy rule 9037a above, the information many not be verified based upon assumptions. Please remove the Bankruptcy listing from the records you hold under my file. *** *** * *** *** ***
*** *** ** ***
Regards,
*** ***

Shaffers is a top notch place to get a car .Jerry Shaffer (the owner) he is honest and caring but most of all he knows which vehicle fits the customer I give him,five starsI'm,

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, we would like to know your view on the matter.]
Regards,
*** ***

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2016/03/08) */
The online credit app that was filled out *** had a disclosure indicating his credit would be pulledI have attached a copy from his fileOn the bottom of this attachment is reads:
**ELECTRONIC PERMISSION TO CHECK CREDIT ON
FILE**
Unless this square is marked , I authorize dealer, and its lending institutions, and their affiliates to share and use information about me including information on my application (Reads longer as shown)
If that box is checked by the consumer we never receive any information about the consumerThe box is clearly unchecked
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2016/03/09) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I was not properly educated about open disclosure policies, also the federal fair credit act should only allow hard hit on credit reports for mulptible lenders when shopping for auto just like a home lenders doIt's very frustrating trying to recover from inquiries that happened in one day 04/25/I just want a better system that protects humankind from credit hard inquiries, it should count as one pull in one day, not or for one application, I hope the system gets repaired for the lessor credit worthy customers seeking a way to get to work

Not a good car lot at allI will explain below for you
I thought *** was a good guy until recentlyI will no longer do business with him whatsoeverRight after Christmas I gave *** down on a jeep with arrangements to pay bi weeklyI didn't have the vehicle for even a month and it went down so I called *** and he said what kind of money do you have on another vehicle? I explained to him that I just gave him all my money and didn't have anymore I could spare and he said well give me and we will fix the jeep so I gave him the money
Two weeks later he calls and says your vehicle is done but it has bad injectors you need to replace them other wise this will happen againI don't know or understand why he didn't fix the problem as I was under the understanding that's what I paid him forAgain I had to give him additional $to leave the lot with the car again
The next day I go to autozone to get parts and they go on with a list of what is all causing the

April 28, 2016? via email ([email protected])? Ms[redacted] Dispute Resolution Specialist Revdex.com Euclid, OH 44115-2408? Re: Consumer Complaint filed by [redacted] Complaint 11404431? Dear [redacted]:? Acxiom has received your April 22,
2016, correspondence regarding the complaint filed by Ms[redacted]Thank you for contacting us and for the opportunity to respond.? Ms[redacted] is seeking re-issuance of a settlement check pursuant to the [redacted] vAcxiom, et al., class action litigation that was successfully resolved last yearWhile not admitting any liability, the defendants in the case funded a settlement and engaged an independent, third party, claims administrator to disburse the settlement proceeds.? Upon receipt of Ms[redacted]' complaint, we contacted the Claims Administrator and he confirmed that a check #[redacted] in the amount of $was issued on October 16, 2015, and mailed to Ms[redacted] at her addressThe check was has not been cashed nor has it been returned as "undeliverable as addressed" or "forwarding order expired."? By its terms, the check became stale on December 15, 2015, although the Claims Administrator honored checks that were cashed before February 15, However, the Claims Administrator was not authorized to re-issue checks after February, 2016.? The Claims Administrator appears to have properly performed his obligations pursuant to the court approved settlement agreementMoreover, as I am sure you will agree, Acxiom has no legal obligation beyond originally funding the settlement agreementTherefore, the complaint is without meritNevertheless, I have asked Acxiom's accounting department to prepare a check in the amount of $to Ms[redacted]? I will mail it to her as soon as it is available, which should be next week.I trust this response satisfactorily resolves the matter? I respectfully request that the Revdex.com close this matter "Resolved; No Violation," or some similar designation? Of course, if you have any questions or need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me at jordan.a[redacted]@acxiom.com or (501)342-0356.Thank you again for contacting us.Sincerely,Jordan A[redacted]Attorney

I am unable to view the response from Rick. It's seems there may be an issue in the website at the moment. Please resend me his response or explain to me where I can locate it on this site

Business stated the customer use to work for him. He purchased a farm truck from them as-is.  The customer did purchase brake lines and they installed them for him.  He put $500 down and was making weekly payments until November.  Then the payments stopped.  At this point he...

wasn't employed by there either.  In January and February, Rick went and visited the customer about the payment.  Then he took the police with him.  The customer then sent $500 for full and final payment.  The business refused to accept the check because the customer owes them more than that.  The business reposed the truck and the customer filed a complaint the same day.  The customer has had the truck for almost a year now and has since filed suit against the business.

We feel our offer to split the bill is very fair, since the issue is related to interference from the customers fast pass. We have spent well over 5 hours to determine this in diagnosis that we did not charge the customer. Also, regarding the customers first visit with this issue we replaced 2 sensors because 2 failure codes were present (left and right rear) both return trips found only one failure code for the left rear. What that tells us is that the right rear sensor was indeed failing while the left rear is setting because of interference.

I am rejecting this response because: I paid to correct a problem that wasn't corrected. I'm not questioning the effort and resources put into the problem by Rosedale Chevrolet, only the end result. If it helps I'll give them an "A" for effort. I would be willing to donate the 50% refund Rosedale Chevrolet has offered me to the Thanks-A Bunch charity if Rosedale Chevrolet would donate the 50% they want to keep. If that is not agreeable I can go thru Chevrolet/GM and the States Attorney's office.

[redacted], your [redacted] agent referred you to us because we are a certified mitigation firm with a long and good standing reputation for excellent service and workmanship in our community.  I understand that your insurance carrier is taking the position that this is two separate claims and are...

not covering the damage that you requested we remediate and repair in your rental house bathroom due to a leaking shower head that caused mold damage to your drywall, behind the shower, flooring and sub floor.  Their position is that the damage from the leaking roof vent and the damage from the leaking shower head are two claims and you only made a claim for the roof vent leak. During this entire process you gave your approval and were aware of all the damage and repairs that we were making at your request.  Our project manager even met you at the tile supply store several times to help you with picking out the tile that you wanted to upgrade the bathroom floor with.  At the time it was our understanding that the insurance company was only going to pay for replacing the linoleum but you wanted to upgrade to ceramic tile and you would be responsible for paying the difference in the upgrade.  You had many conversations with our staff during this process and you at no time said to us that this was not going to be covered by your insurance, in fact, that the adjuster that you met with saw the mold damage in the bathroom, had photos of the damage and approved the work.  I understand that the adjuster you dealt with is no longer with the insurance carrier and the technician we had on the remediation portion of the job is no longer with our company so, unfortunately, there are no photos from either one of them. Your statement that the insurance company requested nformation from us numerous times and we did not respond or comply with any documentation that they requested (besides the before photos that our tech had who is no longer with us) is completely untrue.  In fact, just the opposite; if you will recall our technicians and office staff worked with you diligently.  In person, when you came to our place of business in tears, not only were we sympathetic to your needs and requests, giving you a disk with what photos we did have, and doing our best to accommodate you, we traded many phone calls and emails because the insurance carrier was not replying to either one of us!  You filed your complaint with the Delaware Department of Insurance because the insurance carrier was not responding to you and denying the coverage you were seeking.  Not because we didn't do our job or went beyond the scope of work you requested.  We took on this job with the good faith agreement that we would be paid for our work.  We even changed our normal protocol on getting a credit card payment guarantee from you because you said you didn't have a credit card.  The original amount approved by your insurance company of $1,569.83 was for the mitigation of your claim for the damage caused by the roof vent leak.  The balance of the amount due to us is for the repairs made in the bathroom due to the mold problem you had in there and asked us to remediate and repair.  You stated to me many times that you could not have the tenant living in those conditions due to the mold and your liability.  To date you have received payment from your insurance company and we have not received one cent from you for anything!  This situation has been going on for months and we tried our best to work with you and your insurance carrier to help you get payment from them.  Our contract was with you, not your insurance carrier.  Any business has the right and expectation to be paid for the materials and work performed for your benefit.  We have not benefited at all, you have.  Of course we would turn your account over to our collection attorneys for payment and you should be responsible for those fees as well.

We have made all the necessary repairs, our body shop manager, fixed operations director, service manager and myself fail to see any outstanding issues.

Great job cleaning up my screw up and very fair price.

Response received via e-mail to Revdex.com, 1/17/17: In response to Revdex.com Complaint ID# [redacted] came to Rosedale Chevrolet on November 17th 2015 originally looking at a New Silverado 4x4.  After considering the Silverado, he asked his sales person Shane about a Camaro...

we had that had some custom paint work and other accessories added.  His salesperson specifically asked “are you sure?  It is not a year-round vehicle in Minnesota.  Mr. [redacted] stated that he had a work truck through his employer and it would be parked in his garage most of the time.”  Mr. [redacted] and Rosedale Chev agreed on the financial terms and consummated the deal that day and Mr. [redacted] took delivery of his new Camaro  11/17/2015.  Over the next 90 days Mr. [redacted] brought his Camaro in to have some paint that was chipping off repaired by [redacted]’s Customs who is the Vendor that did the custom paint work.  [redacted]’s repaired that paint both times and Rosedale Chevrolet had a clear 3M Hood shield applied at the dealerships expense.  [redacted]’s stated to me after the last fix that they felt the vehicle was somewhat abused and may not fix it if there’s another incident.  In regards to the Tires, Tires are warranted by the Tire Manufacturer, not the dealership.  Any excessive wear and tear is the owners’ responsibility.   The battery issue is similar to the tire issue.  General Motors does not even warranty batteries that are in brand new cars on our lot over 30 days.  All winter long we are replacing batteries in brand new vehicles that the Manufacturer won’t cover.  Both tire and battery issues here are related to a typical winter in Minnesota.  We feel that we have gone above the norm with the 3M Hood shield paid by us a $400+ value.  We cannot repair or replace tires or batteries that the Manufacturer doesn’t even cover for us.Mike [redacted]RosedaleChevroletSales Manager###-###-####

I am rejecting this response because:Still was not up to condition my truck was before I visited your business.

In response to Mr. [redacted]’s Complaint with the Revdex.com Case# [redacted] First we would like to agree with Mr. [redacted], and apologizes, that he has NOT received his $100 check for repair of his New Colorado for the blemish on the tailgate he discovered after the long drive back to...

his base in Illinois. The next day Mr. [redacted] called us with the discovery of the unfortunate blemish. The check for $100 was sent out and subsequently sent back marked ”Returned to Sender”. ( We do have copies of the returned envelopes available for inspection upon request.) We have called Mr. [redacted] each time this has happened. He confirms the address and we resend only to get the same result. The last time we sent this was in January of this year. The check was returned with the same “Return to Sender” stamp from the US post office. Our office staff has left a message on Mr. [redacted]’s voice mail, without response.Mr. [redacted] did mention in past conversations that getting mail on the Naval base is difficult, but not impossible. We suspect that the Naval Base Mr. [redacted] is stationed at may have some answers to mail delivery procedure that we are not following and unknown to us.         The $198 registration fee, mentioned in the complaint, was sent along with the Illinois state sales tax monies, for the amount requested by the Ill. Treasury Department. The total amount is written on the title application. We do have a signed off, canceled, check showing the state of Ill. Treasury Department cashed the full amount. The $198 registration fee, along with the sales tax and applicable fees in question, were paid by Rosedale Chevrolet to the State of Illinois, prior to Mr. [redacted] giving the $198 payment to the DMV for that same amount. We shared this information with Mr. [redacted] and we also confirmed the amount with the state. (We have not been given any information as it relates to any “miscalculations of taxes and fees.) The state also told us that Mr. [redacted] must apply for the refund for the said over payments to the DMV. We passed this information to Mr. [redacted] via phone . Mr. [redacted] can reach out to the Illinois Treasury Department to get a copy of the monies received. If he has these records and they very from those we have on file, we will readdress. Proposed resolution: To avoid the whole “Return to Sender” fiasco,  I suggest it may be better if we apply a credit  of $100 to a credit card that Mr. [redacted] provides us. As for the $198 that Mr. [redacted] tendered to the local DMV. I can provide the one person at the treasury that finally gave us the information we provide to Mr. [redacted] back in 2016. He can obtain a copy of the paid taxes and fees on the title application. We are not able to get those records sense we are not the owners of the vehicle. We can also provide a “canceled” check showing payment for the full amount listed on the title application.  We have worked with Mr. [redacted] in the past and we will continue to in the future to resolve these issues. Best regards, David [redacted] GSM Rosedale Chevrolet  I can always be reached at ###-###-####

I am rejecting this response because:
 I was never told about the tires and the car not being year round. That is a flat out lie. Yes I did talk about the Silverado and switched to the Camero. A little honesty would have been good. As far as abuse. The car had paint chipping on it the day I pulled it off the lot. And was in to be repaired within 2 weeks of owning the vehicle. Then did they abuse the care while it was in their possession as well. The car only has 10000 miles. It's washed more than its driven. Why then if they are claiming abuse was I told if this issue happens again bring it back in by my sales person and not told when I picked it up after they so generously repaired it that it would never be covered again due to abuse. Again back to the tires why was I allowed to test drive the vehicle in sub zero temperatures if it voids the warranty to drive under 40 degrees?

Our Service department has worked with General Motors Engineering to determine that aftermarket equipment in the customers vehicle (most notably the fast pass for the carpool lane on the freeway) is causing interference with the tire monitor system. Our Service Manager has sat down and discussed the...

entire issue with the customer and has offered to refund half of the $408.00 to the customer. The reason why I think this is a fair offer is because the issue is extremely intermittent having originally come in on May 2nd then again on June 20th then finally on July 12th. During these 3 trips we spent the time diagnosing the issue and following the failure codes that ultimately were linked to the parts that we installed. Essentially the offer to refund half the charge was made to offset the price of the parts that did not rectify the issue however often parts replacement is a crucial part of diagnosis. which in many situations the diagnostic trouble tree requires part replacement as part of the diagnostic process. in this case our diagnosis lead us to intermittent failing tire monitors that needed to be replaced in order to confirm failure. In closing I believe that our time spent determining the issue is warranted the amount we have charged the customer.