Key Westconsin

First of all, Mr. [redacted] failed to inform you that he verbally assaulted two employees andmyself during this dispute.HE is the one who was rude and hostile causing one of theemployees and myself to just walk away. He would not allow any of us to even attempt toexplain how the loyalty...

card works - even though I'm certain he knew because he stated theowner was involved in the previous transaction when he used one and I know for a fact myhusband told him how it works, but gave it to him the first time to shut him up. The only reasonmy husband would have to have been involved is because Mr. [redacted]'s server would havebrought him in because of how he acted.We have sent out 8,000 of these cards and this is the only time we have had an issue. It is truethat the printer forgot to print on the card the order of the offers, but if Mr. [redacted] wasn't sounreasonable and illogical, he would be able to understand why it's called a loyalty card. Themore you come back- the better the deal you get. I'm sure he thought if he just threw anothertemper tantrum, he would get his way. We really don't need patrons coming in ordering waterand two entrees,expecting to get one half off each time .. After he left, we had two different patrons express how unreasonable and ''what an a[redacted] hewas." They were extremely uncomfortable with his behavior, as were we. Mr. [redacted] is notwelcome in our establishment ever again.As far as me being hostile goes, that is an outright lie because as he yelled over me, I walkedaway. You can ask anyone who knows me (personally or professionally) and they would tellyou whoever said that was crazy'[redacted]Key Westconsin

Receipt of the response from Key Westconsin is hereby acknowledged. A rebuttal to the ftrst paragraphwill appear later. For now, the contents of their loyalty card will be addressed.The front reads "Key Westconsin; Loyalty Card." The backside wording is as follows:"Free drink with purchase of entreeFree appetizer with purchase of entreeY2 off entree when you buy one."At the bottom appears the following statement: "Not valid with any offer or during breakfast. Only oneoffer per table per visit." (The choices are not numbered.)There is NOTHING on the card that mandates any sequence, thus the logical conclusion is thatcustomers may choose which offer to use. There is nothing to suggest otherwise. However, Ms [redacted](and another employe) presented how, in her mind, the card should work, and that is to use selection # 1ftrst, then #2 second; and ftnally #3. While that may have been her intention, there is nothing thatspecifies this, and I don't feel it is up to the customer to try to read someone's mind.She and another employe DID explain how they feel the card should work. They admitted that there isnothing on the card that specifies this, but we should be able to ftgure it out because it is a "loyaltycard." Again, she assumes we should guess their intentions.It is the layout and wording on the card that became the prime issue, and the fact we were denied ourchoice (Y2 off an entree). During this visit, 2 entrees were purchased. They refused to honor this choice,citing how they believe the card is supposed to work. Interestingly, Ms. [redacted] admitted that nothing tothis effect appears on the card. In her response to you, she admits that the "printer forgot to print on thecard the order of the offers." Combining her response with the contents of the card would lead to anobvious "case closed" conclusion.Regarding our first visit to this restaurant, we can say that it was pleasant. The server was attentive, andthe owner made his way to the different tables to inquire about our satisfaction, followed by somefriendly "small talk". The dinners were fine. At NO time was the card discussed with the owner, and heappeared at our table on his own during the dinner, not afterward. He had nothing to do with handlingof our payment. To suggest otherwise is fantasy and pure conjecture. At the end of our meal, wepresented the card plus a charge card, and the cost of one of the entrees was automatically reduced by50%, as advertised, with no problem or questioning at all. There was nothing unpleasant during thisvisit. Had there been a problem, we certainly would not have returned. There are are too manyrestaurants to consider instead of returning to one where a hassle or problems occurred. It doesn't makesense that we would want to return to a place for an unpleasant dinner.•As for not being welcome there again, I told Ms. [redacted] that we would NOT be returning because ofthe treatment received. It would be flattery on her part to believe we would even think of returning.Her use of the teml "verbally assaulted" is automatically incorrect by definition. "Assaulted" wouldmean violence - nothing rose to that level. At first I tTied to explain my position about the card. I alsopointed out t.hat our choice was honored during our (irst visit Her comment was "They did it wrong!!!"I don't believe that was the case, but even so. their problems should not become my problems. Alogical approach to discussing the wording on the card did not work well, as Ms [redacted] and anotheremploye repeatedly interrupted me and I asked them to hold off until I could finish my sentence. Thatdidn't happen however, and the interruptions continued. I had to speak louder to try to be heard. Theconversation could likely have been heard by 2 bar patrons; however, an acquaintance who was seatedabollt 5 feet away heard nothing, nor did my dining companion who was sining about 7 feet away.They overrode me and explained how, in their minds, how they wanted the card to work. Again r referto the above admissions ofMs [redacted] about the misprinted cards with omitted wording, and thewording on the existing cards.Ms. [redacted] was unusually concerned about the fact we ordered water as a beverage. She made a pointof mentioning this both in person, and in her response to you. This is what we usually drink - for thirstquenching properties, general health and hydration. I'm puzz1ed why this should be criticized butassume it relates to a high profit margin. Shouldn't the beverage of choice be up to the customers, andwithout employes making an issue about it?On a final note, our server appeared with the charge card slip, and apologized for the mistreatment wereceived. I don't feel she would have done this unless there was a good and sufficient reason to do so.SUBMJITED BY,[redacted]

I will respond one last time to Mr. [redacted]'s rebuttal, but I will not go over the same issue - we obviously will not come to an agreement on how the logical sequence is selection #1, #2 and then #3.
I will address his last last paragraph where he states the server apologized for for the "mistreatment" he received. I asked the server about this and she was very upset, calling this a "total lie". She said she apologized that he was unhappy and he was so angry she was hoping her apology would mitigate his anger. She also said he "whipped out" his original loyalty card - with only the one offer punched - and attempted to tear it in half, stating "this is what I think of your loyalty card." I would submit that an honest and upstanding person would have at least used all of the offers on the original card first before trying to use the final offer again on a second card. This is not loyalty - this is cheating and trying to take advantage.
I am also pretty certain that Mr. [redacted] does not have his people straight. I was not the person who spoke to him in the bar area, I had gone to his table in an attempt to have a reasonable conversation, but he became belligerent within seconds and I walked away from him.  We don't want this behavior in our restaurant.
Even though not one other person from the 8,000 cards we gave out had an issue with how a loyalty card works, we will be certain that everything is completely spelled out on any future offers.
[redacted]
Key Westconsin

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 10669159, 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.]  /THE LATEST RESPONSE STILL HAS NOT ADDRESSED THE ACTUAL ISSUE. The focus should be on the cards this business has distributed. They claim there have been no other complaints after giving out 8000 of these cards. I doubt if the number of people who visited the restaurant because of the cards was anywhere near 8000. This leaves the realistic possibility that others will be interpreting the card the same way that both of us did.  The responses from the business reveal the owner's knowledge of problems with the cards. As previously stated, they admitted that the cards were misprinted, and that they will completely spell out their requirements in future offers. This amounts to an admission about the defects. That there are misprinted cards is not our fault, nor should it have become our problem.  As one can see, there is nothing to specify a mandatory sequence. The choices are not numbered, nor is there any wording to indicate what they had on their minds. A conflict arises in the fact that during our previous visit, we were given our choice with no hesitation, or comments. We felt we should have been (and expected to be) treated the same way during the second visit. (FYI: My lady friend and I were each given a card, which is the reason we had two of them.) What strikes me as unusual is the fact that a selection of one of the other options would have been more costly for them. For example, one of their appetizers is priced at $12.95. With sales tax of 5.1%, that would total $13.61, and that would have been acceptable to them.  There are others priced at $6.95. With sales tax of 5.1% that total would be $7.30 -- just a little over a dollar difference from what I am claiming. I'm not sure about their alcoholic beverage prices, but I believe a common mixed drink would be about $5.00 - $6.00, and higher for something more special. Again, this would have been satisfactory to them. I'm having a difficult time imagining how and why a business would handle a transaction in this manner for such a small amount. Ensuring customer satisfaction is a more solid way to build "loyalty", with or without any cards or promotions.  It was not my intention to present a second-by-second accounting of what went on. That is not the issue and I think that this aspect has been covered.  To comment further would just be a matter of "he said--she said". The bottom line is whether or not they will issue a refund in the amount claimed. Without said refund, I cannot state the matter has been satisfactorily resolved. SUBMITTED BY:[redacted]The bottom line to indicate that this has been resolved to my satisfaction is to receive the amount claimed. I ask for no more; no less.
Regards,
[redacted]