To Whom it May Concern:In response to the complaint by *** *** regarding hats and refunds:When attendees enter the park wearing an article of clothing that is prohibited they are given the opportunity to remove said item and enter the park. *** was wearing a stocking or
skull hat which is listed on the rules as prohibited (see image 1). She was asked to remove the hat but refused. It was at this point she was denied access to the park. Our head of security stated that *** got irate and verbally insulting to security. At no time did a security guard tell her she could get a refund. Our policy is NO REFUNDS (see image 3). I have attached three photographs of signage that is clearly displayed in the entrance way of the I-X Indoor Amusement Park. Sincerely, *** **Executive Assistant
In response to the previous statement given by [redacted]
(executive assistant of the International Exposition Center). The company’s
argument that attendees are given an opportunity to remove said prohibited
articles of clothing after entering the park is an untrue statement because I
never entered the park. In fact, I was stopped after my tickets were scanned
and redirected by the ticket scanner and security officer in question to follow
him to the customer service counter for a refund. Furthermore, after a thorough
review of the company’s website nowhere does it outline a “no refund” policy
nor does it prohibit wearing hats as such or any other forms of headdress
attire. Such inconsistencies between the company’s website and the company’s at
door policies are predatory, inconsistent, and misleading to the consumer.
It is unreasonable to anyone desiring to partake in an
event held at the IX Center or any other public institution to be ambushed with
unexpected enforcement of at door policies. Such unethical impromptu business
practices are discriminatory and do not allow perspective consumers the opportunity
to fully evaluate whether or not they desire to conduct business on such terms.
There also appears to be inconsistencies between the company’s at door policies
and the staff personnel because if the ticket scanner and the security guards
were aware of the said refund policy why was I offered a refund for the
purchase price of my tickets and why were my tickets scanned prior to the
implementation of such policies? I could have opted to contribute my tickets to
other attendees.
In response to [redacted]’s statement that “At no time did a
security guard tell her that she could get a refund. Our policy is NO REFUND
(see image 3)”. How can [redacted] confirm that I was never offered a refund when
she was not present during the conversation? I would also like to know if she
took time to review camera surveillance before making her statement. If so, she
would observe me following the security guard to the customer service counter;
the security guard making a request at the customer service counter; and then
him turning around communicating with my traveling party (including myself)
that the request was denied. Surveillance would also show that a conversation
then ensued between the security guard and my traveling party in which I
requested to speak with senior management and I was then escorted to the
adjacent customer service counter where we spoke with the security guard’s
supervisor.
Dissatisfied with the repetitive language of both
security guards I then requested contact information for Senior Management and
Corporate Office. My request was then denied and I was told by the senior
security officer that he was done talking to me. He then prompted the other
security guard to escort me off the premises and it was at that time that I was
told if I wasn’t buying tickets I had to leave. Yes, a verbal disagreement did
transpire between the security officer and myself; and yes I was visibly upset
by the lack of professionalism displayed; however, never did I become verbally
or physically aggressive while on the premises of the IX Center. Again,
surveillance video along with witness statements will corroborate this fact.
[redacted]May 7
[redacted]
[redacted] Regarding complaint #[redacted] we consider this matter closed. There really is nothing more to say in this matter. Thank you. [redacted]Executive AssistantI-X Center Corporation[redacted]216/[redacted]
To Whom it May Concern:In response to the complaint by *** *** regarding hats and refunds:When attendees enter the park wearing an article of clothing that is prohibited they are given the opportunity to remove said item and enter the park. *** was wearing a stocking or
skull hat which is listed on the rules as prohibited (see image 1). She was asked to remove the hat but refused. It was at this point she was denied access to the park. Our head of security stated that *** got irate and verbally insulting to security. At no time did a security guard tell her she could get a refund. Our policy is NO REFUNDS (see image 3). I have attached three photographs of signage that is clearly displayed in the entrance way of the I-X Indoor Amusement Park. Sincerely, *** **Executive Assistant
To whom it may concern,
In response to the previous statement given by [redacted]
(executive assistant of the International Exposition Center). The company’s
argument that attendees are given an opportunity to remove said prohibited
articles of clothing after entering the park is an untrue statement because I
never entered the park. In fact, I was stopped after my tickets were scanned
and redirected by the ticket scanner and security officer in question to follow
him to the customer service counter for a refund. Furthermore, after a thorough
review of the company’s website nowhere does it outline a “no refund” policy
nor does it prohibit wearing hats as such or any other forms of headdress
attire. Such inconsistencies between the company’s website and the company’s at
door policies are predatory, inconsistent, and misleading to the consumer.
It is unreasonable to anyone desiring to partake in an
event held at the IX Center or any other public institution to be ambushed with
unexpected enforcement of at door policies. Such unethical impromptu business
practices are discriminatory and do not allow perspective consumers the opportunity
to fully evaluate whether or not they desire to conduct business on such terms.
There also appears to be inconsistencies between the company’s at door policies
and the staff personnel because if the ticket scanner and the security guards
were aware of the said refund policy why was I offered a refund for the
purchase price of my tickets and why were my tickets scanned prior to the
implementation of such policies? I could have opted to contribute my tickets to
other attendees.
In response to [redacted]’s statement that “At no time did a
security guard tell her that she could get a refund. Our policy is NO REFUND
(see image 3)”. How can [redacted] confirm that I was never offered a refund when
she was not present during the conversation? I would also like to know if she
took time to review camera surveillance before making her statement. If so, she
would observe me following the security guard to the customer service counter;
the security guard making a request at the customer service counter; and then
him turning around communicating with my traveling party (including myself)
that the request was denied. Surveillance would also show that a conversation
then ensued between the security guard and my traveling party in which I
requested to speak with senior management and I was then escorted to the
adjacent customer service counter where we spoke with the security guard’s
supervisor.
Dissatisfied with the repetitive language of both
security guards I then requested contact information for Senior Management and
Corporate Office. My request was then denied and I was told by the senior
security officer that he was done talking to me. He then prompted the other
security guard to escort me off the premises and it was at that time that I was
told if I wasn’t buying tickets I had to leave. Yes, a verbal disagreement did
transpire between the security officer and myself; and yes I was visibly upset
by the lack of professionalism displayed; however, never did I become verbally
or physically aggressive while on the premises of the IX Center. Again,
surveillance video along with witness statements will corroborate this fact.
[redacted]May 7
[redacted]
[redacted] Regarding complaint #[redacted] we consider this matter closed. There really is nothing more to say in this matter. Thank you. [redacted]Executive AssistantI-X Center Corporation[redacted]216/[redacted]