Honeyville, Inc.

After receiving notification from the Revdex.com of this complaint, I have thoroughly investigated the matter and would like to respond to Mr. [redacted]’ two key complaints: 1) that Honeyville had taken his money and refused to contact him and 2) that Honeyville had misplaced product reviews, which mislead him...

while he was deciding what product to order.Concern about refusal to contact:Mr. [redacted] contacted Honeyville’s customer service department for the first time during the afternoon of July 18, 2016 and an associate responded to his initial request the following morning (see attachment “Revdex.com Complaint 11669172 - 1st Customer Service Contact”). During the communication that followed, Mr. [redacted] was informed that a pre-paid return label would be sent to him via email to allow him to return the product he purchased but decided he didn’t want. He was also notified that once we received his return, we would ship the item he was exchanging it for.On August 18, 2016 Mr. [redacted] wrote to us again explaining that he had shipped the product the previous week and inquired about the status of his replacement product. An associate responded later that day, indicating that the replacement would ship out with order the following day (see attachment “Revdex.com Complaint 11669172 – 2nd Customer Service Contact”). The order did ship via UPS on August 19, 2016 and was delivered to the requested address on August 24, 2016 (see attachment “Revdex.com Complaint 11669172 - Replacement product delivery confirmation”).On August 22, 2016, Mr. [redacted] contacted Honeyville asking why his complaint hadn’t been responded to. The associate responded (a bit confused) since he had been in contact with Mr. [redacted] repeatedly over the previous weeks (see attachment “Revdex.com Complaint 11669172 – 3rd Customer Service Contact”). Concern about reviews being placed on the wrong productMr. [redacted] indicated that Honeyville had “placed the REVIEWS on the wrong product some how advertising that it was a specific food eaten in Africa”. There are currently two reviews from customers who have purchased this product (both indicating it is similar to a food eaten in Africa) and one of them ([redacted]) included her full name when she left the review, allowing me to find her order. I confirmed that she ordered the White Corn Flour (see attachment “Revdex.com Complaint 11669172 - Product Review Order Validation) and so her review of the White Corn Flour is properly placed, contradictory to Mr. [redacted] statement. The 2nd reviewer’s purchase could not be validated due to lack of information provided when the review was submitted. Since [redacted] did purchase the product and use it, her opinion that it is just like a food from Kenya is as valid as Mr. [redacted]’s opinion that it is not. It is Honeyville’s policy to not edit customer reviews to maintain the integrity of the product review process. Because the review and the product for which it was written are correctly linked, I intend to leave this review as it stands. I do believe that my Customer Service Team did all that it could to respond to Mr. [redacted]’ concerns and ensure he was taken care of. The indication that Honeyville had taken his money, his product, and then refused to contact him is simply untrue.You will notice that the attachment showing that the reviewer had purchased the product she reviewed is not included in this response. The submission system only allows for 4 attachments. I am happy to provide the 5th document if it is needed. Thank you, Brenden H[redacted]Director of EcommerceHoneyville, Inc. [redacted]909.243.1001