HouseHunt, Inchas been in the business of generating consumer leads for Real Estate Agents for nearly years During this time our agents have closed thousands of transactions and generated millions of dollars of commissions, so we are more than a little taken aback from some of the criticism and allegations being made by this customer Our customer (a real estate agent) claims that in the three months (actually two) that he had been a client of HouseHunt’s he had not received one viable lead and that most of the leads were made up names, wrong numbers and fictitious email addresses which makes him surmise that we are just making up the names and numbers We take such attacks on our business practices very seriously Customers are told up front that we do not scrub our leads Our experience finds that on average over 70% of the leads are found to contain at least one valid point of contact (i.e., a phone number, an address or an e-mail) Additionally we discuss how NAR (National Association of Realtors) statistics show that the average internet consumer searching for property is usually six to nine months out before purchasing We certainly have had agents close escrows within the first three months, but that is not the norm We believe that our customer’s expectation that he would have closed a real estate transaction within his first two months with HouseHunt to be unrealistic We follow up on this point in our contract where we state in writing the following: “Agent understands that building a long-term business is a long-term commitment to providing consumers with valuable information, promoting successes and maintaining repetitive contact on a consistent basis Agent understands that immediate results may occur, however in most cases successes occur after a sufficient sized database is accumulated and the agent has maintained repetitive contact from six months to two years.” Unfortunately in this case our customer did not allow sufficient time for our system to work In response to our customer’s complaint, in addition to attempting to reach out to him on a number of occasions to discuss his issues, we took two additional steps First, we recently submitted a random sample of 10,of our most recent leads to an independent third party e-mail verification company, who determined that over 80% of the e-mails supplied by the consumers visiting our websites to be valid Secondly we attempted to contact all of the leads that our system had provided to our customer We were able to ascertain that the contact information was valid on over 75% of his leads Interestingly our customer claims that he had not received one viable lead, when in fact several of the consumers confirmed that they had in fact talked with our customer and a few indicated that they were interested working with our customer to help them find a new home Also just as interestingly, several of the consumers that we were able to contact, indicted that they never been contacted by our customer Our system helps identify potential clients for our customers, but they have to do their part in order to find success Our customer indicted that he tried to resolve the issue that some of the information supplied by the consumers did not appear to be valid with his sales representative, however he took our answer out of context We acknowledged that that is a known problem, not just with us, but with the industry as a whole, for which we have no fix Unfortunately there is no way that we or anyone for that matter can prevent consumers from submitting contact information We tell our customers that our program is based on the law of numbers; we generate a reasonable number of leads; a portion of those leads will prove to be valid; a portion of those will prove to be consumers who are willing to work with the real estate agent and that a portion of that number result in consumers who close real estate transactions, hopefully resulting in a reasonable return on the real estate agents investment in our program Our customer claims that he has tried resolving the issue with our company, however our Sales Floor Manager attempted to reach out and contact him on a number of occasions His written response was that “my dealings with your company are done I don’t know what else you want to tell me” To be honest, that does not sound like the response of an individual who is attempting to resolve matters We feel that we have provided what we have promised and do not feel any refund is warranted, however in the interest of attempting to work with our customer we have agreed to waive his last monthly invoice for his website services While that may not be the resolution that he desires, we feel that this is a reasonable offer on our part and are sorry that he had not respond to our Sales Floor Manager’s attempt to work with him
Our customer entered into a Website Agreement with the Company Our primary service was to provide our customer, a real estate agent, consumer leads generated by web sites built and managed by us At no time did the problem that the customer experience ever impact our ability to capture and provide those leads The problem as described by the Customer only affected a limited number of the e-mails sent to consumers from our Total Internet Marketing (TIM) program on behalf of our customerThe problem was caused by technical changes made in the DMARC Internet Protocols by some Internet Service Providers (ISP’s) that blocked some e-mails sent from certain other ISP’s Again, these changes only affected a limited number of e-mails sent through the TIM system Once we were made aware of the issue, we worked with the ISP’s involved to correct the issue and in the mean time we worked with the customer to create alternative “work-around” solutions until the problem was resolved In the Technical Service Agreement signed by the customer, he acknowledged that the TIM system was an “additional free feature” available with his HouseHunt membership, and in the Terms and Conditions of the Website Agreement signed by the customer, he acknowledged that HouseHunt shall not be liable for any interruptions or problems caused by the ISP’s and that HouseHunt shall not be liable for any loss, claim or other damage resulting from or related to any interruption of services, where such interruption resulted from any technical, difficulties The customer requested two full month’s credit for a technical issue that affected a limited number of e-mails, caused by changes in the DMARC Protocols made by couple of third party ISP’s that affected only a small portion of the features provided by the TIM program which we provided to the customer a no cost We considered the customer’s request as excessive in light of the fact the main thrust of our service; capturing and generating consumer leads, was never compromised However as a gesture of goodwill towards our customer, we did waive his final month’s liability under his contract, which in fact saved him $ Therefore we feel that we have reasonably responded to the customers concerns and provided him reasonable compensation for the issue he encountered We feel that his request for an additional $to compensate him for a technical issue, caused by a third party’s action which we had no control over, for a small part of a feature that we provided at no additional cost to be excessive and felt we must decline his request
We had attempted to reach out to this customer on a number of occasions, however he has failed to respond Based on our previous conversations with this customer, we have to believe that while our customer may be a successful traditional real estate agent, we do not think that he understands the nature of internet lead generation nor the internet consumer Our customer claims that we failed to uphold our end of the deal in providing a flow of quality leads When it comes to the internet consumer, they are often reluctant to give out personal information, especially their telephone numbers in order to protect their privacy That is why we tell our perspective customers that our leads are not scrubbed, and as a result we do not eliminate leads that may contain or missing data fields We tell our customers that on average 30% of the leads will be very good, 30% very bad and as for the remaining 40%, contact information can usually be located In this customer’s particular case, we researched the leads that we provided to him We found of those lead to be considered good (29%), to be either bad or questionable (29%) and to be good (42%) with a little research using publicly available tools such as “White Pages”, “Intelius” and “Facebook” So the leads received by our customer certainly fell within our parametersAs we previously mentioned an independent research company determined that based on a sample of 10,of our most recent leads that they found over 80% of the e-mail addresses provided by the consumers to contain valid e-mail addresses In his prior complaint, our customer indicated that he never “received one viable lead” In our research we have discovered that several of his leads have continued to respond to his “list matching” e-mails that our system had continued to send to his potential customers Based on notes in our customer’s own in-house marketing system, which we call TIM and based on some phone calls to some of those leads that we had provided our customer, we have noted the following: Customer has shown properties to [redacted] *.In our phone call with [redacted] *, she claims that she never got a phone call from our Customer.We were able to talk to [redacted] on the phone.Customer’s notes indicate that he has been in contact with [redacted] *.In our phone call with [redacted] *, she claims that she never got a phone call from our Customer, further she is looking to buy within the next six months.Spoke with [redacted] , she has been contacted by our Customer and is very happy with him, however, she just found out that they are pregnant again, so will be looking to buy in a year or so So based on these phone calls and notes in our system entered into by our customer, we have to ask if he is being truthful in his claim that he never “received one viable lead” Unfortunately, we have to conclude that our customer is being less than honest in his complaint Our program works on the basis that over the course of a six months to two year commitment, our customers should have a reasonable number of opportunities to convert into closed transactions in order receive a reasonable return on their investment We see at least three leads above, [redacted] *, [redacted] and [redacted] *, all of whom could be potential closings alone Finally we want to address our customers claim that he attempted a conference call with a guy named [redacted] in accounting We have no [redacted] in accounting, but we were able to determine that they (our customer and his mortgage lending partner) spoke with [redacted] in accounting The phone conversation was recorded, so we pulled and listened to the call In our opinion [redacted] did not keep trying to “over talk” him as the customer claims, but attempted to make arrangements for payment for services with the customer, which is something that you would expect of someone in the accounting department to be doing On a number of occasions [redacted] suggested that the best resource the customer had with respect to his issues over the lead quality would be to talk to his dedicated customer service representativeThis suggestion was reject by the customer It was interesting that during the call, it was our customer’s mortgage lending partner inquired wondering if there was more that they could be doing to work with these leads, but he kept getting interrupted by our customer who just kept repeating that if he does not get his money back, he was going to file a complaint with the Revdex.com Based on our analysis of the call, we believe ***’s call with the customer to be totally professional and appropriate Because our system did not work the way that he thought it should work for him, he lashed out and called us “crooks” and “Enron of the Internet Lead Generation” industry We think you just need to look at the successful track records of hundreds of our clients including [redacted] Northern California who earned over $million in commissions last year from leads we generated for him, or [redacted] in Southern California who earned commissions on sales of over $million of real estate transactions in the month of November, from leads we generated for her, you will find his claims without merit We further find his allegations and name calling to be totally unprofessional on his part We feel that we have provided our customer what we have promised and we still do not feel any refund is warranted However in the interest of attempting to work with our customer we continue to offer to waive his last monthly invoice for his website services While that may not be the resolution that he desires, we feel that this is a reasonable attempt to work with this customer on our part and are sorry that he would not respond to our attempts to work with him
HouseHunt, Inchas been in the business of generating consumer leads for Real Estate Agents for nearly years yes;"> During this time our agents have closed thousands of transactions and generated millions of dollars of commissions, so we are more than a little taken aback from some of the criticism and allegations being made by this customer Our customer (a real estate agent) claims that in the three months (actually two) that he had been a client of HouseHunt’s he had not received one viable lead and that most of the leads were made up names, wrong numbers and fictitious email addresses which makes him surmise that we are just making up the names and numbers We take such attacks on our business practices very seriously Customers are told up front that we do not scrub our leads Our experience finds that on average over 70% of the leads are found to contain at least one valid point of contact (i.e., a phone number, an address or an e-mail) Additionally we discuss how NAR (National Association of Realtors) statistics show that the average internet consumer searching for property is usually six to nine months out before purchasing We certainly have had agents close escrows within the first three months, but that is not the norm We believe that our customer’s expectation that he would have closed a real estate transaction within his first two months with HouseHunt to be unrealistic We follow up on this point in our contract where we state in writing the following: “Agent understands that building a long-term business is a long-term commitment to providing consumers with valuable information, promoting successes and maintaining repetitive contact on a consistent basis Agent understands that immediate results may occur, however in most cases successes occur after a sufficient sized database is accumulated and the agent has maintained repetitive contact from six months to two years.” Unfortunately in this case our customer did not allow sufficient time for our system to work In response to our customer’s complaint, in addition to attempting to reach out to him on a number of occasions to discuss his issues, we took two additional steps First, we recently submitted a random sample of 10,of our most recent leads to an independent third party e-mail verification company, who determined that over 80% of the e-mails supplied by the consumers visiting our websites to be valid Secondly we attempted to contact all of the leads that our system had provided to our customer We were able to ascertain that the contact information was valid on over 75% of his leads Interestingly our customer claims that he had not received one viable lead, when in fact several of the consumers confirmed that they had in fact talked with our customer and a few indicated that they were interested working with our customer to help them find a new home Also just as interestingly, several of the consumers that we were able to contact, indicted that they never been contacted by our customer Our system helps identify potential clients for our customers, but they have to do their part in order to find success Our customer indicted that he tried to resolve the issue that some of the information supplied by the consumers did not appear to be valid with his sales representative, however he took our answer out of context We acknowledged that that is a known problem, not just with us, but with the industry as a whole, for which we have no fix Unfortunately there is no way that we or anyone for that matter can prevent consumers from submitting contact information We tell our customers that our program is based on the law of numbers; we generate a reasonable number of leads; a portion of those leads will prove to be valid; a portion of those will prove to be consumers who are willing to work with the real estate agent and that a portion of that number result in consumers who close real estate transactions, hopefully resulting in a reasonable return on the real estate agents investment in our program Our customer claims that he has tried resolving the issue with our company, however our Sales Floor Manager attempted to reach out and contact him on a number of occasions His written response was that “my dealings with your company are done I don’t know what else you want to tell me” To be honest, that does not sound like the response of an individual who is attempting to resolve matters We feel that we have provided what we have promised and do not feel any refund is warranted, however in the interest of attempting to work with our customer we have agreed to waive his last monthly invoice for his website services While that may not be the resolution that he desires, we feel that this is a reasonable offer on our part and are sorry that he had not respond to our Sales Floor Manager’s attempt to work with him
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.The vendor failed miserably to uphold their end of the deal in providing a flow of quality leads After repeated attempts to allow them an opportunity to correct their wrongs, they never lived up to their claims or promises They just kept billing me and providing dead end and fake or falsely manufactured leads, ones that didn't exist After over or miserable months of no results, fake leads fake numbers and fake email addresses, I just asked for my money back and for us to part ways This is when they tried to crucify me The mortgage company that I partnered with also wanted out We attempted a conference call with a guy named [redacted] who identified himself as an accountant The guy kept over talking me I told him I was going to the Revdex.com with thisAll I wanted was some leads that that I could even have a shot at working with I wish my clients gave me as many chances if I didn't meet their needs In my world, house hunt, if I don't produce, my clients can find another agents I work 7Days a week to ensure my clients have the best possible service and experience because I make my business all about them, not myself Do you understand that concept? FYI I told my broker about my experiences with you She said you have this reputation in the industryHouse hunt please take a good long look in the mirror and if you can not provide a viable service to real estate agents and professionals such as myself, please don't take advantage of others as you have done me Give me my damn money back you crooksI hope this complaint serves to protect others from this company and their practices They are the Enron of Internet lead generation Regards, [redacted]
HouseHunt, Inchas been in the business of generating consumer leads for Real Estate Agents for nearly years During this time our agents have closed thousands of transactions and generated millions of dollars of commissions, so we are more than a little taken aback from some of the criticism and allegations being made by this customer Our customer (a real estate agent) claims that in the three months (actually two) that he had been a client of HouseHunt’s he had not received one viable lead and that most of the leads were made up names, wrong numbers and fictitious email addresses which makes him surmise that we are just making up the names and numbers We take such attacks on our business practices very seriously Customers are told up front that we do not scrub our leads Our experience finds that on average over 70% of the leads are found to contain at least one valid point of contact (i.e., a phone number, an address or an e-mail) Additionally we discuss how NAR (National Association of Realtors) statistics show that the average internet consumer searching for property is usually six to nine months out before purchasing We certainly have had agents close escrows within the first three months, but that is not the norm We believe that our customer’s expectation that he would have closed a real estate transaction within his first two months with HouseHunt to be unrealistic We follow up on this point in our contract where we state in writing the following: “Agent understands that building a long-term business is a long-term commitment to providing consumers with valuable information, promoting successes and maintaining repetitive contact on a consistent basis Agent understands that immediate results may occur, however in most cases successes occur after a sufficient sized database is accumulated and the agent has maintained repetitive contact from six months to two years.” Unfortunately in this case our customer did not allow sufficient time for our system to work In response to our customer’s complaint, in addition to attempting to reach out to him on a number of occasions to discuss his issues, we took two additional steps First, we recently submitted a random sample of 10,of our most recent leads to an independent third party e-mail verification company, who determined that over 80% of the e-mails supplied by the consumers visiting our websites to be valid Secondly we attempted to contact all of the leads that our system had provided to our customer We were able to ascertain that the contact information was valid on over 75% of his leads Interestingly our customer claims that he had not received one viable lead, when in fact several of the consumers confirmed that they had in fact talked with our customer and a few indicated that they were interested working with our customer to help them find a new home Also just as interestingly, several of the consumers that we were able to contact, indicted that they never been contacted by our customer Our system helps identify potential clients for our customers, but they have to do their part in order to find success Our customer indicted that he tried to resolve the issue that some of the information supplied by the consumers did not appear to be valid with his sales representative, however he took our answer out of context We acknowledged that that is a known problem, not just with us, but with the industry as a whole, for which we have no fix Unfortunately there is no way that we or anyone for that matter can prevent consumers from submitting contact information We tell our customers that our program is based on the law of numbers; we generate a reasonable number of leads; a portion of those leads will prove to be valid; a portion of those will prove to be consumers who are willing to work with the real estate agent and that a portion of that number result in consumers who close real estate transactions, hopefully resulting in a reasonable return on the real estate agents investment in our program Our customer claims that he has tried resolving the issue with our company, however our Sales Floor Manager attempted to reach out and contact him on a number of occasions His written response was that “my dealings with your company are done I don’t know what else you want to tell me” To be honest, that does not sound like the response of an individual who is attempting to resolve matters We feel that we have provided what we have promised and do not feel any refund is warranted, however in the interest of attempting to work with our customer we have agreed to waive his last monthly invoice for his website services While that may not be the resolution that he desires, we feel that this is a reasonable offer on our part and are sorry that he had not respond to our Sales Floor Manager’s attempt to work with him
Our customer entered into a Website Agreement with the Company Our primary service was to provide our customer, a real estate agent, consumer leads generated by web sites built and managed by us At no time did the problem that the customer experience ever impact our ability to capture and provide those leads The problem as described by the Customer only affected a limited number of the e-mails sent to consumers from our Total Internet Marketing (TIM) program on behalf of our customerThe problem was caused by technical changes made in the DMARC Internet Protocols by some Internet Service Providers (ISP’s) that blocked some e-mails sent from certain other ISP’s Again, these changes only affected a limited number of e-mails sent through the TIM system Once we were made aware of the issue, we worked with the ISP’s involved to correct the issue and in the mean time we worked with the customer to create alternative “work-around” solutions until the problem was resolved In the Technical Service Agreement signed by the customer, he acknowledged that the TIM system was an “additional free feature” available with his HouseHunt membership, and in the Terms and Conditions of the Website Agreement signed by the customer, he acknowledged that HouseHunt shall not be liable for any interruptions or problems caused by the ISP’s and that HouseHunt shall not be liable for any loss, claim or other damage resulting from or related to any interruption of services, where such interruption resulted from any technical, difficulties The customer requested two full month’s credit for a technical issue that affected a limited number of e-mails, caused by changes in the DMARC Protocols made by couple of third party ISP’s that affected only a small portion of the features provided by the TIM program which we provided to the customer a no cost We considered the customer’s request as excessive in light of the fact the main thrust of our service; capturing and generating consumer leads, was never compromised However as a gesture of goodwill towards our customer, we did waive his final month’s liability under his contract, which in fact saved him $ Therefore we feel that we have reasonably responded to the customers concerns and provided him reasonable compensation for the issue he encountered We feel that his request for an additional $to compensate him for a technical issue, caused by a third party’s action which we had no control over, for a small part of a feature that we provided at no additional cost to be excessive and felt we must decline his request
We had attempted to reach out to this customer on a number of occasions, however he has failed to respond Based on our previous conversations with this customer, we have to believe that while our customer may be a successful traditional real estate agent, we do not think that he understands the nature of internet lead generation nor the internet consumer Our customer claims that we failed to uphold our end of the deal in providing a flow of quality leads When it comes to the internet consumer, they are often reluctant to give out personal information, especially their telephone numbers in order to protect their privacy That is why we tell our perspective customers that our leads are not scrubbed, and as a result we do not eliminate leads that may contain or missing data fields We tell our customers that on average 30% of the leads will be very good, 30% very bad and as for the remaining 40%, contact information can usually be located In this customer’s particular case, we researched the leads that we provided to him We found of those lead to be considered good (29%), to be either bad or questionable (29%) and to be good (42%) with a little research using publicly available tools such as “White Pages”, “Intelius” and “Facebook” So the leads received by our customer certainly fell within our parametersAs we previously mentioned an independent research company determined that based on a sample of 10,of our most recent leads that they found over 80% of the e-mail addresses provided by the consumers to contain valid e-mail addresses In his prior complaint, our customer indicated that he never “received one viable lead” In our research we have discovered that several of his leads have continued to respond to his “list matching” e-mails that our system had continued to send to his potential customers Based on notes in our customer’s own in-house marketing system, which we call TIM and based on some phone calls to some of those leads that we had provided our customer, we have noted the following: Customer has shown properties to [redacted] *.In our phone call with [redacted] *, she claims that she never got a phone call from our Customer.We were able to talk to [redacted] on the phone.Customer’s notes indicate that he has been in contact with [redacted] *.In our phone call with [redacted] *, she claims that she never got a phone call from our Customer, further she is looking to buy within the next six months.Spoke with [redacted] , she has been contacted by our Customer and is very happy with him, however, she just found out that they are pregnant again, so will be looking to buy in a year or so So based on these phone calls and notes in our system entered into by our customer, we have to ask if he is being truthful in his claim that he never “received one viable lead” Unfortunately, we have to conclude that our customer is being less than honest in his complaint Our program works on the basis that over the course of a six months to two year commitment, our customers should have a reasonable number of opportunities to convert into closed transactions in order receive a reasonable return on their investment We see at least three leads above, [redacted] *, [redacted] and [redacted] *, all of whom could be potential closings alone Finally we want to address our customers claim that he attempted a conference call with a guy named [redacted] in accounting We have no [redacted] in accounting, but we were able to determine that they (our customer and his mortgage lending partner) spoke with [redacted] in accounting The phone conversation was recorded, so we pulled and listened to the call In our opinion [redacted] did not keep trying to “over talk” him as the customer claims, but attempted to make arrangements for payment for services with the customer, which is something that you would expect of someone in the accounting department to be doing On a number of occasions [redacted] suggested that the best resource the customer had with respect to his issues over the lead quality would be to talk to his dedicated customer service representativeThis suggestion was reject by the customer It was interesting that during the call, it was our customer’s mortgage lending partner inquired wondering if there was more that they could be doing to work with these leads, but he kept getting interrupted by our customer who just kept repeating that if he does not get his money back, he was going to file a complaint with the Revdex.com Based on our analysis of the call, we believe ***’s call with the customer to be totally professional and appropriate Because our system did not work the way that he thought it should work for him, he lashed out and called us “crooks” and “Enron of the Internet Lead Generation” industry We think you just need to look at the successful track records of hundreds of our clients including [redacted] Northern California who earned over $million in commissions last year from leads we generated for him, or [redacted] in Southern California who earned commissions on sales of over $million of real estate transactions in the month of November, from leads we generated for her, you will find his claims without merit We further find his allegations and name calling to be totally unprofessional on his part We feel that we have provided our customer what we have promised and we still do not feel any refund is warranted However in the interest of attempting to work with our customer we continue to offer to waive his last monthly invoice for his website services While that may not be the resolution that he desires, we feel that this is a reasonable attempt to work with this customer on our part and are sorry that he would not respond to our attempts to work with him
HouseHunt, Inchas been in the business of generating consumer leads for Real Estate Agents for nearly years yes;"> During this time our agents have closed thousands of transactions and generated millions of dollars of commissions, so we are more than a little taken aback from some of the criticism and allegations being made by this customer Our customer (a real estate agent) claims that in the three months (actually two) that he had been a client of HouseHunt’s he had not received one viable lead and that most of the leads were made up names, wrong numbers and fictitious email addresses which makes him surmise that we are just making up the names and numbers We take such attacks on our business practices very seriously Customers are told up front that we do not scrub our leads Our experience finds that on average over 70% of the leads are found to contain at least one valid point of contact (i.e., a phone number, an address or an e-mail) Additionally we discuss how NAR (National Association of Realtors) statistics show that the average internet consumer searching for property is usually six to nine months out before purchasing We certainly have had agents close escrows within the first three months, but that is not the norm We believe that our customer’s expectation that he would have closed a real estate transaction within his first two months with HouseHunt to be unrealistic We follow up on this point in our contract where we state in writing the following: “Agent understands that building a long-term business is a long-term commitment to providing consumers with valuable information, promoting successes and maintaining repetitive contact on a consistent basis Agent understands that immediate results may occur, however in most cases successes occur after a sufficient sized database is accumulated and the agent has maintained repetitive contact from six months to two years.” Unfortunately in this case our customer did not allow sufficient time for our system to work In response to our customer’s complaint, in addition to attempting to reach out to him on a number of occasions to discuss his issues, we took two additional steps First, we recently submitted a random sample of 10,of our most recent leads to an independent third party e-mail verification company, who determined that over 80% of the e-mails supplied by the consumers visiting our websites to be valid Secondly we attempted to contact all of the leads that our system had provided to our customer We were able to ascertain that the contact information was valid on over 75% of his leads Interestingly our customer claims that he had not received one viable lead, when in fact several of the consumers confirmed that they had in fact talked with our customer and a few indicated that they were interested working with our customer to help them find a new home Also just as interestingly, several of the consumers that we were able to contact, indicted that they never been contacted by our customer Our system helps identify potential clients for our customers, but they have to do their part in order to find success Our customer indicted that he tried to resolve the issue that some of the information supplied by the consumers did not appear to be valid with his sales representative, however he took our answer out of context We acknowledged that that is a known problem, not just with us, but with the industry as a whole, for which we have no fix Unfortunately there is no way that we or anyone for that matter can prevent consumers from submitting contact information We tell our customers that our program is based on the law of numbers; we generate a reasonable number of leads; a portion of those leads will prove to be valid; a portion of those will prove to be consumers who are willing to work with the real estate agent and that a portion of that number result in consumers who close real estate transactions, hopefully resulting in a reasonable return on the real estate agents investment in our program Our customer claims that he has tried resolving the issue with our company, however our Sales Floor Manager attempted to reach out and contact him on a number of occasions His written response was that “my dealings with your company are done I don’t know what else you want to tell me” To be honest, that does not sound like the response of an individual who is attempting to resolve matters We feel that we have provided what we have promised and do not feel any refund is warranted, however in the interest of attempting to work with our customer we have agreed to waive his last monthly invoice for his website services While that may not be the resolution that he desires, we feel that this is a reasonable offer on our part and are sorry that he had not respond to our Sales Floor Manager’s attempt to work with him
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.The vendor failed miserably to uphold their end of the deal in providing a flow of quality leads After repeated attempts to allow them an opportunity to correct their wrongs, they never lived up to their claims or promises They just kept billing me and providing dead end and fake or falsely manufactured leads, ones that didn't exist After over or miserable months of no results, fake leads fake numbers and fake email addresses, I just asked for my money back and for us to part ways This is when they tried to crucify me The mortgage company that I partnered with also wanted out We attempted a conference call with a guy named [redacted] who identified himself as an accountant The guy kept over talking me I told him I was going to the Revdex.com with thisAll I wanted was some leads that that I could even have a shot at working with I wish my clients gave me as many chances if I didn't meet their needs In my world, house hunt, if I don't produce, my clients can find another agents I work 7Days a week to ensure my clients have the best possible service and experience because I make my business all about them, not myself Do you understand that concept? FYI I told my broker about my experiences with you She said you have this reputation in the industryHouse hunt please take a good long look in the mirror and if you can not provide a viable service to real estate agents and professionals such as myself, please don't take advantage of others as you have done me Give me my damn money back you crooksI hope this complaint serves to protect others from this company and their practices They are the Enron of Internet lead generation Regards, [redacted]