Liquidity Services Inc

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: Liquidation.com has not resolved this matter in a way that is acceptable to me as a consumer. Their business practices, as proved by the numerous complaints on the internet, are shady. Other online auction marketplaces would never allow such misleading claims of MSRP by fraudulent sellers.  I reject Liquidation.com, their response, and business practices. I also will not be intimidated into dropping my dispute with [redacted].  
Regards,
[redacted]

May 8, 2014
[redacted]
Revdex.com
1411 K Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005-3404
RE: **. [redacted], ID# [redacted]
Dear **. [redacted],
Please accept this response to the complaint filed by **....

[redacted] with the Revdex.com. **. [redacted] described concerns he had as a buyer on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services, Inc. were in violation of a buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID [redacted]. **. [redacted] believes that our company is in breach of this contract because his dispute was denied.
**. [redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for lot of 150 children’s items, from [redacted] and others, in Shelf Pulls condition purchased via Liquidation.com. On January 29, he filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the merchandise he received was grossly misrepresented and not in the condition advertised by the seller in the auction listing. **. [redacted] said that he only received about 20 clothing items when he had expected 150 and that the remaining items were toys and children’s accessories. He said that the toys and accessories were unacceptable and that the clothing received even appeared to be Used or Return merchandise. He sent photos in support of his claim and requested a full refund.
Our disputes team reviewed **. [redacted]’s claim and concluded that the support he provided did not validate his claim that lot was grossly misrepresented and not in the proper condition. The auction manifest lists that there will be 50 clothing items and 100 accessories so the buyer should not have expected 150 clothing items.
Further, **. [redacted] filed a chargeback with [redacted] for the transaction on January 30, prior to our decision. Therefore, we could not continue the investigation. Chargebacks are specifically prohibited in our User Agreement because the buyer maintains possession of merchandise without paying for it. For this reason, **. [redacted]’s Liquidation.com user account was de-activated. 
We regret that **. [redacted] was dissatisfied with the auction services provided by Liquidation.com; however, we feel that this matter was handled in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the Liquidation.com marketplace.
Regards,
[redacted]
Corporate Paralegal
Liquidity Services, Inc.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:Mr. H[redacted] has stated that my warranty claim would need to have been initiated prior to end of the 90-day warranty period in order for them to honor it.  Had this stipulation been in the text of the warranty, I would find his response acceptable.  However, that is not in fact what the warranty says.  The warranty text provided with the product (attached) is quite clear on what should be covered: "In the event that
the Product exhibits a defect in workmanship within the Warranty period,
Liquidity Services, Inc. will facilitate the Warranty services
applicable to the Product." The warranty makes no statements about when
the Purchaser must contact Liquidity Services.I would like to point out that Mr. H[redacted]'s response did not indicate the source of this additional stipulation, which I have not been able to find anywhere in the warranty.  The business has also never contested the date of the defect.As my laptop exhibited a defect within the warranty period, and the warranty says this is covered, I would like Liquidity Services to fix the laptop.
Regards,
[redacted]

July 7, 2015
Dear [redacted],

size="3"> 
Please accept this response to the complaint filed by [redacted] with the Revdex.com. [redacted] described concerns she had as a bidder on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services were in violation of a buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID [redacted] believes that our company is in breach of this contract because her dispute was denied.
 
[redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for one lot of 72 baby swim shorts assorted colors on Liquidation.com. On June 23rd, she filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment she received was grossly misrepresented. [redacted] stated “these are not swim shorts, like I thought I was buying. The material they are made out of is very thin and poor quality, not any kind of swim short material. I could never sell these to anyone and most don’t even have tags inside. They are made out of the kind of cheap fabric little favor pouches etc. are made out of. I am highly disappointed.” [redacted] sent in a sample pair to support her claim.
 
Our disputes team reviewed [redacted]’ claim and concluded that the auction listing was accurate and the units she received matched the auction listing. The auction listing states “72 baby swim shorts assorted colors”. The picture posted on the auction page matched the items [redacted] received. Neither the auction listing nor the manifest specified material types or sizes. As such, her claim was denied.
 
We regret that [redacted] was dissatisfied with the auction services provided by Liquidation.com; however, we feel that this matter was handled in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the Liquidation.com marketplace.
 
Regards,
Amanda O[redacted]
Compliance Associate
Liquidity Services

August 27, 2014
[redacted]
Revdex.com
1411 K Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005-3404
RE: [redacted], ID# [redacted]
Dear [redacted],
Please accept this response to the complaint filed by [redacted]...

[redacted] with the Revdex.com. [redacted] described concerns she had as a warranty customer, stating that Liquidity Services, Inc. was in violation of buyer’s warranty agreement for her [redacted] computer. [redacted] believes that our company is in breach of this contract because she was unable to receive a properly working computer. 
[redacted] purchased a [redacted] computer in July 2013 with a 90-day warranty serviced by Liquidity Services. On October 7, 2013, she started a warranty claim because her computer was experiencing freezing problems. The unit was sent for repair and then returned for her on November 18, 2013. [redacted] then contacted our service personnel to notify them that the unit was still defective so it was returned for repair on December 27, 2013. At this point, a replacement was sent to [redacted] on January 9. However, the replacement was also defective so another replacement was provided on February 24. Unfortunately, this computer was also found to be defective by [redacted] so she was sent yet another replacement computer on March 4.

According to the transaction detail, we received no further communication from [redacted] after the March 4 replacement so the matter was considered resolved. In her complaint, she said that she had been refunded her purchase price through a second warranty. [redacted] now requests that Liquidity Services pay to her the $60.00 that she paid for the second warranty. Unfortunately, we cannot refund money that was not paid to us, by company policy.
We regret that [redacted] had a poor experience with the warranty services provided by Liquidity Services. Our company handles the customer service portion of the warranty contract while another business partner handles the repair and replacement servicing portion of the warranty contract. We will follow up with our business partner to seek an improved resolution.
Regards,
Cary *. H[redacted]
Corporate Paralegal
Liquidity Services, Inc.

January 24, 2016
Dear [redacted],
Please accept this response to the complaint filed by [redacted] with the Revdex.com. [redacted] described concerns he had as a bidder on our website, stating that Liquidity Services highly exaggerates the auction descriptions....

[redacted] states that he has encountered several advertising issues and he is unable to communicate with the seller directly.Per a thorough review of [redacted]’s transaction disputes, our management team has commented that there are no outstanding refund amounts owed to [redacted] at this time. Also, the management team has confirmed that each dispute was handled in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the Liquidation.com marketplace.Most of [redacted]’s transaction disputes were closed with a full or partial refund back to [redacted]. The other disputes consisted of shipping claims where the item was delivered to [redacted] or covered by the warranty service.As Liquidity Services sells items on behalf of third parties, Liquidity Services customer relations team handles all customer inquiries and disputes. When a dispute is filed with the customer relations dispute team, the seller is provided with the buyer’s dispute precisely as it is submitted to Liquidity Services, the seller is then asked to provide their response/feedback immediately. The Liquidity Services customer relations dispute team responds to the buyer with the seller’s response as to act as an intermediary between the seller and the buyer.We regret that [redacted] was dissatisfied with the auction services provided by Liquidation.com; however, we feel that this matter was handled in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the Liquidation.com marketplace. We would be glad to look in to a specific transaction at [redacted]’s request if he so desires. We appreciate the opportunity to address any further concerns and your our cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciatedRegards,
Amanda O[redacted]
Compliance Associate
Liquidity Services

Dear [redacted],
Please accept this response in regards to the complaint submitted by [redacted], ID [redacted].
RE: [redacted], ID# [redacted]Dear [redacted],Please accept this response to the complaint filed by [redacted] with the Revdex.com....

[redacted] described concerns she had as a bidder on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services was in violation of a buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID [redacted]. [redacted] believes that our company is in breach of this contract because her dispute was denied.[redacted] bid on an auction for one lot of video games for [redacted], [redacted] One & More (returns) items on Liquidation.com. On January 11th she filed a claim with our disputes department and stated the items were not in the condition listed and were grossly misrepresented. She also stated “13 of these games which is more than half of the lot are opened and I cannot get them to work”. [redacted] requested a partial refund.
Our disputes team reviewed [redacted] claim and denied her claim based on the condition being listed as returns and the verbiage contained in this lot “these items are sold as is where is. No manufacturer warranty is expressed or implied.” However, this dispute was escalated to management and it was decided that all items were powered on and tested before being sold. As such, management has agreed to a partial refund.
On January 29th, our disputes team informed [redacted] that a partial refund in the amount of $288.92 would be issued back to her. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused, as a routine practice our Liquidation.com team will be editing further auction listings so that there are no differing statements.
We regret that [redacted] was dissatisfied with the auction services provided by Liquidation.com; however, we feel that this matter was handled accordingly.
Regards,
Amanda O[redacted]
Compliance Associate Liquidity Services
Thank You,
Amanda O[redacted]
Compliance Associate
Liquidity Services

Don't ever buy " return" product from them. because they will throw Junk item ( broken item should just list item condition is Salvage , you will easy see they can only throw in trash like : Expensive air headphones they add pictures of U[redacted] H[redacted] ( value items : $80- $100) But one side of headphones was broken off, you only throw them away (almost of value items) - don't need test you will see when item delivered. If you open Dispute they will denied.
Which kind of business let seller cheat like that?
Anyone can tell me how to open a complaint against them ?

January 24, 2016Dear [redacted],Please accept this response to the complaint filed by [redacted] with the Revdex.com. [redacted] described concerns he had as a bidder on our website, stating that Liquidity Services highly exaggerates the auction descriptions. [redacted] states...

that he has encountered several advertising issues and he is unable to communicate with the seller directly.Per a thorough review of [redacted]’s transaction disputes, our management team has commented that there are no outstanding refund amounts owed to [redacted] at this time. Also, the management team has confirmed that each dispute was handled in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the Liquidation.com marketplace.Most of [redacted]’s transaction disputes were closed with a full or partial refund back to [redacted]. The other disputes consisted of shipping claims where the item was delivered to [redacted] or covered by the warranty service.As Liquidity Services sells items on behalf of third parties, Liquidity Services customer relations team handles all customer inquiries and disputes. When a dispute is filed with the customer relations dispute team, the seller is provided with the buyer’s dispute precisely as it is submitted to Liquidity Services, the seller is then asked to provide their response/feedback immediately. The Liquidity Services customer relations dispute team responds to the buyer with the seller’s response as to act as an intermediary between the seller and the buyer.We regret that [redacted] was dissatisfied with the auction services provided by Liquidation.com; however, we feel that this matter was handled in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the Liquidation.com marketplace. We would be glad to look in to a specific transaction at [redacted]’s request if he so desires. We appreciate the opportunity to address any further concerns and your our cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciatedRegards,Amanda O[redacted]Compliance AssociateLiquidity Services

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:From: [redacted] <[redacted].com>Date: Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:02 AMSubject: Re: You have a new message from the Revdex.com of Metro Washington DC & Eastern Pennsylvania in regards to your complaint #[redacted].To: [email protected] LLC refunded the money back to my account on 11/ /2015 in full. However, they suspended my account for unknown reasons and have sanctioned me from participating in future auctions. I called them for an explanation on why and they informed me that only one account per household. I stated that I am the only person in my household that has an account. They further declined allowing me access to auctions. 
Regards,
[redacted]

May 17, 2014
[redacted]
Revdex.com
1411 K Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005-3404
RE: [redacted], ID# [redacted]
Dear [redacted],
Please accept this response to the complaint filed by...

**. [redacted] with the Revdex.com. **. [redacted] described concerns he had as a buyer on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services, Inc. were in violation of a buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID [redacted]. **. [redacted] believed that our company was in breach of this contract because he disagreed with our company’s canceled transaction policy; however, it has since been settled in his favor.
**. [redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for a lot of three (3) new Oakley jackets purchased via Liquidation.com. On January 15, he filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that his shipment was grossly misrepresented by the seller in the auction listing. **. [redacted] said that two of the three jackets were stamped in red as “SAMPLE.” He stated that he would not have bid at all, had this been disclosed. He provided photos in support of his claim and requested a full refund. 
Our disputes team reviewed **. [redacted]’ claim and concluded that it would be honored with a full refund upon return of the merchandise to the seller. He was notified on January 25 that he had five (5) days to put the merchandise in the mail or the refund offer would become null and void. Then on February 27, our company received an e-mail from **. [redacted] that he had just discovered our earlier correspondence regarding the refund return and that he had just sent the items. By that time, the refund offer had long expired, so upon receipt the buyer was provided a full refund of $145.25 to his account, but he was also assessed a $200 transaction cancelation fee for sending an unauthorized return. Later, the cancelation fee was waived as a one-time courtesy to **. [redacted]. 
We apologize for any inconvenience experienced by **. [redacted] and consider the matter closed with the refund payment and elimination of the assessed fee. 
Regards,
[redacted]
Corporate Paralegal
Liquidity Services, Inc.

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. 
Regards,
[redacted]

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
1) The Liquidation.com story line continues to grow.  Answer # 1:, "Our disputes team reviewed [redacted]’s claim and concluded that the claim could not be honored because the dispute was filed well past the two-day inspection period allowed on Liquidation.com transactions. The delivery of this shipment was scheduled on September 18, but the dispute on the shipment was not filed until over a month later, on October 31." Now...there is an admission that "our customer service team suggested that the dispute be given special consideration due to the amount of the loss."  Well..it seems clear that I was telling the truth initially and the initial response from Liquidity Services (LS) was at best not considered in full.
2)  I am not accusing the warehouse of stealing anything yet I did "speculate" that they could have.  My point is not that they stole it but there should be a requirement of due process even with an internal investigation.  Just saying, "our guys  say they did it right" when it is self serving for LS to do so is not a thorough investigation as previously claimed.  
3) Liquidity Services claims "A coordinated chain of individuals would be required to undertake the action raised by [redacted]." Perhaps, this is true.  On our end here's how it happened and why "such a large lot was reported so late".  We received the shipment and sold several items fairly quickly without opening the boxes. Shortly afterwards (2-4 weeks), our customers returned several items saying the transceivers were missing.  Perhaps...I'll speculate again...our customers ordered the product just to get the transceivers.  Our response at that point was to open the remaining 8 Home Theater systems of which 3 had transceivers and 5 had no transceivers.  
Our mistake is not completing a full receiving protocol and for trusting LS and their meticulous process that they investigated and describe as "reviewing our internal data system which records detailed lotting and shipping information. This check showed that the shipment was complete and ready.  It was a refurbished lot that had been inspected and given a Grade A rating.  It had also been reviewed prior to sending.  Finally, a discussion with the warehouse manager raised no issues."  
So, here's the truth once again.  We received 5 [redacted] Home Theater Systems without transceivers. Given all of LS checks, rechecks and detailed systems analysis and oversight...we are still missing 10 transceivers.  
Since we last wrote we found 10 transceivers on [redacted] for $20 each. They have also been for sell for near $100 each and [redacted] is selling them for $52.  Send us $200 for the transceivers and let's end this dispute.
Regards,
[redacted]

November 21, 2014
[redacted]
Revdex.com
1411 K Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005-3404
 
RE: [redacted], ID# [redacted]
 
Dear [redacted],
Please accept this response to the complaint filed by [redacted] with the Revdex.com. [redacted]...

[redacted] described concerns he had as a recipient of multiple company e-mails that he did not request.
[redacted] said that he received several unwanted e-mails and wanted them to cease. He was not on any of the distribution lists for the company e-mails he received, but his e-mail was located in a database for another marketplace.
There was an error that caused some of our users to received multiple, unsolicited e-mails in succession. Once we became aware of the problem, we moved quickly to identify the source and correct it so that no further disruption would occur. Additionally, [redacted] has been globally unsubscribed from all of our marketplaces per his request.
We apologize for any inconvenience experienced by [redacted] and consider the matter closed with his removal from all distribution lists.
 
Regards,
Cary *. H[redacted]
Corporate Paralegal
Liquidity Services, Inc.

January 14, 2016
Dear [redacted],
Please accept this response to the complaint filed by [redacted] with the Revdex.com. [redacted] described concerns she had as a bidder on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services were in violation of a...

buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID [redacted]. [redacted] believes that our company is in breach of this contract due to her dispute being denied.[redacted] bid on an auction for one lot of New Solid 14K Gold Rope Necklace Chains- not plated or filled on Liquidation.com. On December 29th, 2015 she filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment she received was “not in condition listed and was grossly misrepresented” stating the chains were “fraud the ad stated 10 rope chains all 14Kt gold type of metals should have listed the two but only wrote solid gold so that was misrepresented”. [redacted] said that the chains stick to a magnet and requested a full refund.Our disputes team reviewed [redacted]’s claim and concluded that there was insufficient support to validate the claim. The disputes team informed [redacted] that the claim could not be honored as jewelry clasps contain metal parts which will cause magnetic attraction. [redacted] then responded to the dispute denial and requested to reopen the dispute as she was not satisfied.
On January 6th, 2016 our disputes team replied back to [redacted]’s response and stated “the results found from the support received showing magnetic attraction to the clasp only, did not properly validate the dispute claim. Our research found support indicating that many clasps contain metal components. You may provide support within a reasonable amount of time showing that the units have been properly tested for gold quality and validate the misrepresentation. Once the support is received, we will reopen your dispute and review accordingly”.
On January 7th, [redacted] filed a chargeback for transaction [redacted]. Also, that same day [redacted]’s claim was reopened and it was determined that Liquidation.com would issue a refund upon return delivery. [redacted] was informed once we received the items, we allow the seller 2 days for inspection and then she would receive a full refund. Liquidation.com is expected to receive the items on January 18th once they are inspected, [redacted] will receive the full refund.[redacted] filed a chargeback with [redacted] for the transaction. Chargebacks are specifically prohibited in our User Agreement For this reason; [redacted]’s Liquidation.com user account was de-activated.
We regret that [redacted] was dissatisfied with the auction services provided by Liquidation.com; and we feel that this matter was handled in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the Liquidation.com marketplace.
Regards, Amanda O[redacted]
Compliance Associate
Liquidity Services

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. 
Regards,
[redacted]

June 25, 2014
[redacted]
Revdex.com
1411 K Street, NW, 10th Floor
Khosravan, DC 20005-3404
RE: **. [redacted], ID# [redacted]
Dear **. [redacted],
Please accept this response to the complaint filed by **....

[redacted] with the Revdex.com. **. [redacted] described concerns she had as a buyer on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services, Inc. were in violation of a buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID [redacted]. **. [redacted] believed that our company was in breach of this contract because she received merchandise that could not be sold; however, it has since been resolved in her favor.
**. [redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for a lot of 72 ladies sports bras purchased via Liquidation.com. On May 5, she filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that her shipment was not in the condition advertised in the auction listing. **. [redacted] said that the new bras that she received had a strong chemical smell and that many had mold on them. Therefore, these items could not be sold as new merchandise. She provided photos and requested a full refund. Also, she sent a few bras as samples for review in cooperation with our customer service disputes request.
Our disputes team reviewed **. [redacted]’s claim and concluded that it would be honored with a full refund upon return of the merchandise to the seller. A full refund of $153.13 was initiated to the **. [redacted]’s account on June 9; however, she had filed a chargeback during the disputes process. Chargebacks are specifically prohibited in our User Agreement because the buyer maintains possession of merchandise without paying for it. For this reason, **. [redacted]’s Liquidation.com user account was de-activated.
We feel that this matter was handled in accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the Liquidation.com marketplace and consider the matter closed with the refund payment.
Regards,
[redacted]
Corporate Paralegal
Liquidity Services, Inc.

June 25, 2014
[redacted]
Revdex.com
1411 K Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005-3404
 
RE: **. [redacted], ID# [redacted]
 
Dear **. [redacted],Please accept this response to the...

complaint filed by **. [redacted] with the Revdex.com. **. [redacted] described concerns he had as a buyer on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services, Inc. were in violation of a buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID [redacted]. **. [redacted] believed that our company was in breach of this contract because there was a delay in resolving a wrong shipment issue; however, it has since been resolved.
**. [redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for a lot of four consumer electronics items in Returns condition purchased via Liquidation.com. On May 8, he contacted our Customer Service Department to inform them that he had received a shipment of overstock clothing rather than the items he had purchased. He was then told that the incorrect shipment would be picked up for return the next day. When the package was not recalled the next day, he again contacted our customer service personnel for a resolution. However, subsequent phone calls did not yield satisfactory results, and **. [redacted] decided to file a chargeback on the transaction. He refused to release the chargeback without receiving confirmation that the package had been returned and a full refund issued.
An internal investigation of the error determined that four shipments had been mis-routed from our North [redacted] warehouse and that **. [redacted]’s shipment was among them. While our warehouse personnel were working with customer service to determine the best solution to all four shipment errors, **. [redacted] was not given proper communication and proceeded to file a chargeback. However, chargebacks are specifically prohibited in our User Agreement because the buyer maintains possession of merchandise without paying for it. For this reason, Ms. [redacted]’s Liquidation.com user account was de-activated. Ultimately, the package was returned to our warehouse on May 19 and a full refund was processed to the buyer’s account on May 20.
We apologize for any inconvenience experienced by **. [redacted] and consider the matter closed with the refund payment.
 
Regards,
[redacted]
Corporate Paralegal
Liquidity Services, Inc.

Hi,
Here is the complete information about the site, my cr, and sale number. Also note that I opened case with that company. They recently informed me that since I asked my credit card company to get me the refund for disputed amount, they will close my account. Most probably the reason they cant find my record is because they have deleted my account. 
http://www.govliquidation.com/
cr: [redacted]
COMPANY NAME:  Digitware system
SALE NUMBER:   [redacted]
case number: [redacted]
INVOICE NUMBER:   [redacted]

[redacted]Revdex.com1411 K Street, NW, 10th FloorWashington, DC  20005-3404RE:  [redacted], ID# [redacted]Dear [redacted],Please accept this response to the complaint filed by [redacted] with the Revdex.com.  [redacted] described concerns he...

had as a buyer on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services, Inc. were in violation of a buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID [redacted].  [redacted] believes that our company is in breach of this contract because his dispute was initially denied, but we have since settled the matter in his favor.[redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for 13 pallets of Home Depot seasonal product in Returns condition purchased via Liquidation.com. On January 1, he filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the merchandise he received was missing units and grossly misrepresented by the seller in the auction listing. He said that once the pallets were opened that they were missing shelving valued over $4,000 and that many other items that had been listed on the manifest accompanying the auction listing were absent.  Also, some of the items that were included seemed to be Salvage condition rather than Returns condition.  [redacted] indicated that 37 items were missing from among the 500 items in the sale and that many of those were higher value items.  He requested a replacement of the items missing from the manifest.Our disputes team reviewed [redacted]’s claim and initially denied it because [redacted] had taken possession of the items from our Las Vegas warehouse and signed a materials release form approving the sale.  As detailed in the pickup confirmation/instructions sent to [redacted], by signing the materials release form [redacted] waived his right to a dispute on the transaction after removal of the property from the warehouse.  This is company policy because we cannot fairly evaluate the condition of a lot after it leaves our possession, as items could be damaged or removed in transit.When [redacted] filed his dispute, he was properly denied by sound company policy; however, given the logistical difficulties of inspecting such a large load (13 pallets) on site, the buyer was encouraged to file a reopen request for a re-examination of his claim.  It was then determined that a partial refund of 25% of his purchase price would be issued.  A partial refund of $553.14 was processed to [redacted] on January 16.We apologize for any inconvenience experienced by [redacted] and consider the matter closed with the partial refund payment.Regards,Cary *. H[redacted]Corporate ParalegalLiquidity Services, Inc.