Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.There has been no resolution offered by the business to acceptThere really only seems to be an insult to my intelligence, noted by "consumer ignorance" and/or insinuation of some deception on my part in that I didn't report the problem immediately to the business. This is a circular reasoning argumentHe has written (I can provide copies of correspondence if needed) to me that there was nothing he was willing to do regarding this situation, as he considers the problem to be a damage issue due to my ignorance and not a defect in the manufacturingSo, by stating that if I had contacted him earlier, he would have done something different is blatantly untrue. He is known (and I can provide online references) to provide poor customer service in the area of warranty issues, and noted by two Ripoff reports and several published reviewshttp://www.ripoffreport.com***, http://www.ripoffreport.com***, http://www.reviewstalk.com/*** ***/ . While these reviews are obviously unsatisfied customers and reviewers, they do demonstrate that I am not the only one to have experienced issues with this store. The store owner complains that this is the first time he has had to deal with the Revdex.com, but I did it through this channel rather than publicly posting my complaint as I feel that this is a better medium as it does not post our argument to the whole internet, and allows him to resolve the issue without any damage to his credibility should he desire to find a resolution with meThe owner states that somehow I am to blame for this issue. First off, he states he has been in business for yearsCoincidentally, I have been using these products for the same amount of timeI am not new to this, and my experience is that every unit that connects to the battery, the vaporizer, has some small amount of leakageHe assumes, based on our conversations, that there was some massive leakage going onI never stated this, and I would put the amount of leakage at less than 0.1ml per day, which is average for these types of unitsI have owned several clearomizers, cartomizers, and bottom coil tank units, and all have a very small amount of fluid that proceeds from the post on the vaporizerThis is noted on multiple forums, approximately drop per dayI am thorough to clean this off, but it still occursFurthermore, I have used multiple previous mod's and never had this difficulty with them, including the previous version of Smok Tech MOD, which I bought from him approximately year agoThat MOD still functions well, has no buildup of vapor in any location when used with the same vaporizer as the one I used on the BEC Pro. The BEC Pro unit was differentIt did not function well at any time, and started having problems from the first useI did not contact him immediately, not because I was trying to wait to the end of the warranty(which would have been no benefit to me), but rather I thought the issue was water vapor that was probably left in the unit from manufacture, not eliquid in the unitI try very hard to work out issues on my own without going through a return process if I can, as it saves the owners money. I actually thought that this might be for the unit, as it seemed to be water vapor and I am in a very humid environment in south Georgia, and might be due to conditions that would resolveIt produced vapor correctly at the time, so I did not see any need to start a process like this (and he would not have accepted a return at any rate at that time)Regardless of whether my diagnosis was correct or the timing of when I contacted him, I did contact him in the warranty period, when the unit ceased to function, and as I have noted. This unit is poorly manufactured, and while that is not the business's fault, they do warranty the unitI followed all direction included with the mod to absolute perfectionIf this unit has an extreme sensitivity to eliquid being on the pin or post, it should have been notedNothing was stated to this regard in the product description, and the only warranty information available on the site was this "day warranty from date of purchase" on the product purchase page: http://www.hoosierecig.com/BEC-Pro-50W-Bluetooth-APV-from-Smok-Tech_p_1056.htmlN...⇄ was mentioned at all about the sensitivity to the unit or tendency to allow leakage into the unit, nor that "damage" was when fluid entered the unit, and what was and was not covered by the warrantyI disagree fully with him, and his "industry experts" when they say that this is not an issueI can also provide numerous web pages and results showing that all vaporizers have a small amount of leakage, and that a unit should have some kind of protection to not allow this leakage into the electronic components. My complaint against him is now twofold. He has repeatedly been verbally insulting, and has consistently twisted my words from our communication (I am no longer communicating with him, having failed to resolve this person to business) into some argument to insinuate that I am so kind of an itHe has not used this wording directly, but it is implied in every communicationHe seems unable to grasp that by usage by an experienced user his product could possibly failI would have been open to several options at the time of return, including having the item repaired, purchasing another item at a reduced price, or even treating me like he ever cared to do business againHe offered no help for me, and the communications from him have shown no desire for customer serviceFrom his website, it states "We take great pride in
our company, and our commitment to providing quality hardware and
customer service"I do not consider this quality customer serviceI do recognize that the owner considers this damage, and I disagree. This whole issue is like buying a new car, driving in the rain, and having the ceiling leak water into car, ruining the interiorYou take the car to the dealer for warranty, and he says "The car didn't malfunction, this is damage caused by water, which voids your warranty since it is damageAnd besides, everyone knows you don't drive in the rainRain and interior don't mix" I feel that this is the same response I have gotten from the business owner.In conclusion, I am not a satisfied customerThis technology is new and there is very little accepted "norm"Most of the argument between the owner and myself with only include his assurances that I did not use my unit right, bolstered by his supposed "expert knowledge", and me stating that I did use it correctly, bolstered by my years of experience using these kinds of products. I do not believe a resolution will be possible with this owner, as he has refused to refund or replace the unitI will not accept his poor customer service as any kind of proper response
*** ***
As I have also told the customer this was a case of misuse that led to damage and therefore does not fall under the category of a manufacturing defect
0.25pt 0.1in 0pt 0.05in;">The customer continued to use a tank that was leaking e-liquid onto, and inevitably into the device and onto the circuit board and display screen, the customer admits that he knew that this was happening, but he continued to use the leaky tank on this device anyhow, knowing that the e-liquid was getting insideHe stated that this began happening after the first use of the device in question, yet he did not contact us to resolve the issue then, but waited till the device ceased functioning altogetherHe also states that it failed three weeks after receiving it, but he did not contact us until another four weeks, past that three weeks, had passedThis customer believes that the devices connector is supposed to be sealed, but this is not the case with this particular deviceAlso, we do not state that the connection is sealed on our product description of this item, this was his assumptionIf he was under the assumption that the device's connector was sealed then why would he continue to use it, and not contact us sooner, knowing that e-liquid was getting inside? We have been in business for four years now and to my knowledge we have never had any other complaints submitted to the Revdex.com in that timeWe do honor our warranty terms if there is a defect within the warranty period, and we always have done so, it's just good business sense to do soThis seems to me to be a case of either consumer ignorance of the fact that electronics and liquids do not play well together, or he knowingly continued to use it while his tank leaked onto it thinking he could just fall back on the warranty when it finally failedThanks for your consideration,
Regards
Brent M***
Owner: Hoosier E-Cig Inc
Revdex.com:
tHe has not used this wording directly, but it is implied in every communicationHe seems unable to grasp that by usage by an experienced user his product could possibly failI would have been open to several options at the time of return, including having the item repaired, purchasing another item at a reduced price, or even treating me like he ever cared to do business againHe offered no help for me, and the communications from him have shown no desire for customer serviceFrom his website, it states "We take great pride in
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.There has been no resolution offered by the business to acceptThere really only seems to be an insult to my intelligence, noted by "consumer ignorance" and/or insinuation of some deception on my part in that I didn't report the problem immediately to the business. This is a circular reasoning argumentHe has written (I can provide copies of correspondence if needed) to me that there was nothing he was willing to do regarding this situation, as he considers the problem to be a damage issue due to my ignorance and not a defect in the manufacturingSo, by stating that if I had contacted him earlier, he would have done something different is blatantly untrue. He is known (and I can provide online references) to provide poor customer service in the area of warranty issues, and noted by two Ripoff reports and several published reviewshttp://www.ripoffreport.com***, http://www.ripoffreport.com***, http://www.reviewstalk.com/*** ***/ . While these reviews are obviously unsatisfied customers and reviewers, they do demonstrate that I am not the only one to have experienced issues with this store. The store owner complains that this is the first time he has had to deal with the Revdex.com, but I did it through this channel rather than publicly posting my complaint as I feel that this is a better medium as it does not post our argument to the whole internet, and allows him to resolve the issue without any damage to his credibility should he desire to find a resolution with meThe owner states that somehow I am to blame for this issue. First off, he states he has been in business for yearsCoincidentally, I have been using these products for the same amount of timeI am not new to this, and my experience is that every unit that connects to the battery, the vaporizer, has some small amount of leakageHe assumes, based on our conversations, that there was some massive leakage going onI never stated this, and I would put the amount of leakage at less than 0.1ml per day, which is average for these types of unitsI have owned several clearomizers, cartomizers, and bottom coil tank units, and all have a very small amount of fluid that proceeds from the post on the vaporizerThis is noted on multiple forums, approximately drop per dayI am thorough to clean this off, but it still occursFurthermore, I have used multiple previous mod's and never had this difficulty with them, including the previous version of Smok Tech MOD, which I bought from him approximately year agoThat MOD still functions well, has no buildup of vapor in any location when used with the same vaporizer as the one I used on the BEC Pro. The BEC Pro unit was differentIt did not function well at any time, and started having problems from the first useI did not contact him immediately, not because I was trying to wait to the end of the warranty(which would have been no benefit to me), but rather I thought the issue was water vapor that was probably left in the unit from manufacture, not eliquid in the unitI try very hard to work out issues on my own without going through a return process if I can, as it saves the owners money. I actually thought that this might be for the unit, as it seemed to be water vapor and I am in a very humid environment in south Georgia, and might be due to conditions that would resolveIt produced vapor correctly at the time, so I did not see any need to start a process like this (and he would not have accepted a return at any rate at that time)Regardless of whether my diagnosis was correct or the timing of when I contacted him, I did contact him in the warranty period, when the unit ceased to function, and as I have noted. This unit is poorly manufactured, and while that is not the business's fault, they do warranty the unitI followed all direction included with the mod to absolute perfectionIf this unit has an extreme sensitivity to eliquid being on the pin or post, it should have been notedNothing was stated to this regard in the product description, and the only warranty information available on the site was this "day warranty from date of purchase" on the product purchase page: http://www.hoosierecig.com/BEC-Pro-50W-Bluetooth-APV-from-Smok-Tech_p_1056.htmlN...⇄ was mentioned at all about the sensitivity to the unit or tendency to allow leakage into the unit, nor that "damage" was when fluid entered the unit, and what was and was not covered by the warrantyI disagree fully with him, and his "industry experts" when they say that this is not an issueI can also provide numerous web pages and results showing that all vaporizers have a small amount of leakage, and that a unit should have some kind of protection to not allow this leakage into the electronic components. My complaint against him is now twofold. He has repeatedly been verbally insulting, and has consistently twisted my words from our communication (I am no longer communicating with him, having failed to resolve this person to business) into some argument to insinuate that I am so kind of an i
our company, and our commitment to providing quality hardware and
customer service"I do not consider this quality customer serviceI do recognize that the owner considers this damage, and I disagree. This whole issue is like buying a new car, driving in the rain, and having the ceiling leak water into car, ruining the interiorYou take the car to the dealer for warranty, and he says "The car didn't malfunction, this is damage caused by water, which voids your warranty since it is damageAnd besides, everyone knows you don't drive in the rainRain and interior don't mix" I feel that this is the same response I have gotten from the business owner.In conclusion, I am not a satisfied customerThis technology is new and there is very little accepted "norm"Most of the argument between the owner and myself with only include his assurances that I did not use my unit right, bolstered by his supposed "expert knowledge", and me stating that I did use it correctly, bolstered by my years of experience using these kinds of products. I do not believe a resolution will be possible with this owner, as he has refused to refund or replace the unitI will not accept his poor customer service as any kind of proper response
*** ***
As I have also told the customer this was a case of misuse that led to damage and therefore does not fall under the category of a manufacturing defect
0.25pt 0.1in 0pt 0.05in;">The customer continued to use a tank that was leaking e-liquid onto, and inevitably into the device and onto the circuit board and display screen, the customer admits that he knew that this was happening, but he continued to use the leaky tank on this device anyhow, knowing that the e-liquid was getting insideHe stated that this began happening after the first use of the device in question, yet he did not contact us to resolve the issue then, but waited till the device ceased functioning altogetherHe also states that it failed three weeks after receiving it, but he did not contact us until another four weeks, past that three weeks, had passedThis customer believes that the devices connector is supposed to be sealed, but this is not the case with this particular deviceAlso, we do not state that the connection is sealed on our product description of this item, this was his assumptionIf he was under the assumption that the device's connector was sealed then why would he continue to use it, and not contact us sooner, knowing that e-liquid was getting inside? We have been in business for four years now and to my knowledge we have never had any other complaints submitted to the Revdex.com in that timeWe do honor our warranty terms if there is a defect within the warranty period, and we always have done so, it's just good business sense to do soThis seems to me to be a case of either consumer ignorance of the fact that electronics and liquids do not play well together, or he knowingly continued to use it while his tank leaked onto it thinking he could just fall back on the warranty when it finally failedThanks for your consideration,
Regards
Brent M***
Owner: Hoosier E-Cig Inc