KSM Bookkeeping Services

To Whom It May Concern;Per the response by Mrs [redacted] , various e-mails, and letter to Mrs [redacted] , all items have been addressed.KSM BKS was hired to provide a service and in detail (page engagement letter) explained what the service was limited to and what was included (in detail)If Mrs [redacted] expected to receive a bacopy of QuickBooks, that should have been requested during the first year of business and during the contract periodThe contract was reviewed and signed by both parties, furthermore, was not the first year MRC was in business, and not the first contract reviewed by MRCThere is a difference between what someone thinks one is owed and what one is obligated to provideMs [redacted] believes she is owed something, but the contract she knowingly and willingly signed doesn't state what she believes she is owedThis is why as a business owner is required to review a contract, and as a business owner, KSM BKS is responsible to uphold the contract.Furthermore, Mrs [redacted] stated that "At our meetings, I received hard copy print outs, expecting to get electronic file after, which was never received." This isn't accurate, PDF documents (digital format) of reconciliations and other reports were uploadedFailing to download files isn't the responsibility of KSM BKSAlso, if MRC didn't receive those items and believed they were owed, why renew a contract? That information isn't stated in the slew of e-mails and documents provided by Ms [redacted] .Ms [redacted] praises the work of KSM BKS in some of the e-mails, but in others we failed to provide service; many of the correspondence were sent in a matter of a few weeksKSM BKS would not have been praised for work from a company's owner if we didn't deliver what was requested.Please note that many of the e-mails provided were redacted, altered, and not submitted in the chronological orderFurthermore, MRC, Inc., Ms [redacted] knowing and willingly placed e-mails and gave those e-mail which to the Revdex.com.KSM BKS provided a service and if MRC believed this service wasn't provided, that would have been stated far before April Furthermore, KSM BKS requested documents from Ms [redacted] to complete the services KSM BKS was contract to do in 2016, but received excuses and eradicate e-mails resulting in lost time and unwillingness to move forwardMs [redacted] was fired as a client from KSM BKS in another business agreement due to similar behavior.KSM BKS is requesting to this case to be closed and removed from Revdex.com database.Regards,KSM Bookkeeping Services

To Whom It May Concern;Per the response by Mrs. [redacted], various e-mails, and letter to Mrs. [redacted], all items have been addressed.KSM BKS was hired to provide a service and in detail (4 page engagement letter) explained what the service was limited to and what was included (in detail). If Mrs....

[redacted] expected to receive a back-up copy of QuickBooks, that should have been requested during the first year of business and during the contract period. The contract was reviewed and signed by both parties, furthermore, 2015 was not the first year MRC was in business, and not the first contract reviewed by MRC. There is a difference between what someone thinks one is owed and what one is obligated to provide. Ms. [redacted] believes she is owed something, but the contract she knowingly and willingly signed doesn't state what she believes she is owed. This is why as a business owner is required to review a contract, and as a business owner, KSM BKS is responsible to uphold the contract.Furthermore, Mrs. [redacted] stated that "At our meetings, I received hard copy print outs, expecting to get electronic file after, which was never received." This isn't accurate, PDF documents (digital format) of reconciliations and other reports were uploaded. Failing to download files isn't the responsibility of KSM BKS. Also, if MRC didn't receive those items and believed they were owed, why renew a contract? That information isn't stated in the slew of e-mails and documents provided by Ms. [redacted].Ms. [redacted] praises the work of KSM BKS in some of the e-mails, but in others we failed to provide service; many of the correspondence were sent in a matter of a few weeks. KSM BKS would not have been praised for work from a company's owner if we didn't deliver what was requested.Please note that many of the e-mails provided were redacted, altered, and not submitted in the chronological order. Furthermore, MRC, Inc., Ms. [redacted] knowing and willingly placed e-mails and gave those e-mail which to the Revdex.com.KSM BKS provided a service and if MRC believed this service wasn't provided, that would have been stated far before April 2016. Furthermore, KSM BKS requested documents from Ms. [redacted] to complete the services KSM BKS was contract to do in 2016, but received excuses and eradicate e-mails resulting in lost time and unwillingness to move forward. Ms. [redacted] was fired as a client from KSM BKS in another business agreement due to similar behavior.KSM BKS is requesting to this case to be closed and removed from Revdex.com database.Regards,KSM Bookkeeping Services

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:I understand KSM BS's interpretation of the contract differs from the interpretation of [redacted] Consulting, PLLC.I am requesting a civil resolution where [redacted] Consulting, PLLC provides KSM BS a fair compensation in exchange for the electronic documents in question.I believe this request is a professional resolution to the difference in the interpretation from both parties, in regard only to the issue of complaint [redacted].
Regards,
[redacted]