Liquidity Services Inc

Please accept this response to the complaint filed by Mr*** *** with the RevDex.comMr*** described concerns he 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 *** and ***Mr*** believes that our company is in breach of this contract because his disputes were denied. Mr*** was the winning bidder of an auction for one lot of thirteen (13) A Grade *** ***
*** Digital Cameras (returns) and one lot of six (6) A Grade Camera Accessories-*** Interchangeable Lens (returns), purchased via Liquidation.comOn March 11th, he filed two disputes with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment he received was not in the condition listed and grossly misrepresentedMr*** stated “items were listed as returns everything I received is boxed as refurbished.” Mr*** submitted screen shots of the auction listing to support his claim. Our disputes team reviewed Mr***’s claim and concluded that the screen shots of the auction listing was insufficient/invalid and they were unable to validate his claimOur disputes team informed Mr*** that his dispute claim could not be honored as they were unable to validate the claim based on the screen shot support he providedAs such, his claim was denied. Further, Mr*** filed a chargeback with *** for the transactionChargebacks are specifically prohibited in our User Agreement because the buyer maintains possession of merchandise without paying for itFor this reason, Mr***’s Liquidation.com user account was de-activated. We regret that Mr*** 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*** Compliance Associate Liquidity Services

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed as Answered]
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:I feel that liquidation.com should have put in power supply cords and remote controls with these players and should have replaced of the playersI paid $for these and they said that they were valued at $2,which I can not believe
Regards,
*** ***

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:
The pictures that was presented on the site was nothing like the merchandise that I receivedThe advertisement was for "High Quality" MSRP $1,500, this cheap plastic glass are not worth this price at all.
The Auction advertisement and wording was misleading if you say High Quality in your description I expected to receive High Quality not low end cheap plastic glasses
I noticed that auction advertisement for the sunglasses wording have been corrected to reflect what the consumer is really receiving, if this was presented when I bidded on the sunglasses I would not have bid on themLiquidation falsely advertise and worded the merchandise incorrectly
Regards,
*** ***

April 3, 2015*** *** ***Revdex.comK Street, NW, 10th FloorWashington, DC 20005-3404RE: *** *** ***, ID# ***Dear *** ***,We have been unable to recover any transaction records relating to the complaint filed
by *** *** *** with the Revdex.com There are five (5) usernames with the last name *** registered on Liquidation.com and none of them have a single transaction completed In order to respond to the complaint, we will need to retrieve additional information from *** ***.Please ask *** to provide the name of the website where she made her purchase, and any of the following that she can include: her registered Username, the Transaction ID number, the Auction ID number, the date of the transactions, etc.After we have the information we need to proceed, we would be happy to respond to *** ***’s complaint Thank you.Regards,Cary *H***Corporate ParalegalLiquidity Services, Inc

November 25, 2015Dear *** ***,Please accept this response to the complaint filed by *** *** *** with the Revdex.com*** *** described concerns he had as a bidder on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services were in violation of a buyer’s purchase
agreement for auction ID *** *** believes that our company is in breach of this contract due to not being able to complete the transaction as he paid with a credit card in the name of ‘*** ***’.*** *** bid on an auction for one lot of white tucked from and white ribbed tunic tops items on Liquidation.comThe sale closed on October 29th and *** *** submitted payment with a credit card in the name of ‘*** ***’ as the funds were not available in his personal account on November 4th.The transaction was originally cancelled due to seller complications and therefore *** *** could not obtain the itemsThe full refund was credited back to the credit card used for payment; however, *** *** was also notified on November 4th that the credit card he offered for payment in the name of ‘*** ***’ was associated with another Liquidation.com account with the same user informationThe account under ‘*** ***’ was assessed a nonpayment fee for unpaid transaction *** in August and is still unpaid at this time.Our customer relations department notified *** *** that the transaction was cancelled and his account had been deactivated as Liquidation.com only allows one account per household, address or personThe full refund was issued back to *** ***’s card on November 18 th.We regret that *** *** 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***Compliance AssociateLiquidity Services

DO NOT BID at Liquidation.comTheir business is a scam They allow their sellers to send you garbage, and then they protect those sellers behind a useless dispute processIf you buy something in their Consumer Electronics auctions, it is likely that you will be getting somebody else's e-waste Complete junk and DOA electronic devices There is absolutely no difference between their "salvage" category and "returns."

November 21,
*** *** ***
Revdex.com
K Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005-
RE: *** *** ***, ID# ***
Dear *** ***,
Please accept this response to
the complaint filed by *** *** *** with the Revdex.com*** *** described concerns he had as a recipient of multiple company e-mails that he did not request
*** *** said that he received several unwanted e-mails and wanted them to ceaseHe 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 successionOnce we became aware of the problem, we moved quickly to identify the source and correct it so that no further disruption would occurAdditionally, *** *** has been globally unsubscribed from all of our marketplaces per his request
We apologize for any inconvenience experienced by *** *** and consider the matter closed with his removal from all distribution lists
Regards,
Cary *H***
Corporate Paralegal
Liquidity Services, Inc

June 27,
*** ***
Revdex.com
K Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005-
RE: *** ***, ID# ***
Dear ***,
Please accept this response to the
complaint filed by *** *** with the Revdex.com*** described concerns he had as a buyer on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services, Incwere in violation of a buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID *** 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.
*** was the winning bidder of an auction for a lot of pieces of *** accessories and more by *** in New condition purchased via Liquidation.comOn May 19, he filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the merchandise he received was missing unitsHe said he only received out of the items*** also said the shipment only included of the types of items advertised in the auction and sent evidence for his dispute*** then suggested that the seller deliver the remaining product or a partial refund for the missing items.Once the dispute was received, our team contacted the seller about the missing units in the lotInitially, *** was told that the auction was properly listed based on the evidence and photos that he sent*** reopened the dispute, and said that the photos did not reflect the quantity of merchandise he received, and that he was still missing unitsThe seller then suggested that he would be willing to send the quantity of missing items to the buyer to settle the dispute.
Our disputes team was in agreement with the seller’s solution and the seller sent the missing items, including the cables and armband clips that were missing in the original shipment
We apologize for any inconvenience experienced by *** and consider the matter closed with the additional shipment by the seller
Regards,
*** ** ***
Corporate Paralegal
Liquidity Services, Inc

Dear *** ***,
Please accept this response to the complaint filed by *** *** *** with the Revdex.com*** *** described concerns he had as a bidder on our website, stating that Liquidity Services has not yet provided his refund amount of $for transaction ID
***.*** *** bid on an auction for one lot of children’s clothing *** *** items on Liquidation.comThe sale closed on July 2nd, however, due to a listing error, the sale was cancelled and an invoice was not generatedAlthough listing errors are infrequent occurrences, Liquidity Services may immediately remove a listing to review and ensure accuracyOn July 9th, the customer relations department issued a refund via check, check number in the amount of $It was later determined that *** *** did not receive the check therefore it was cancelled*** *** provided his bank information on January 5th so that the funds could be wired back to his accountThe wire was processed to go back to *** ***’s account on January 8th, however the wire was rejected as the information was invalidOur customer relations department then reached out to *** *** to inform him that the wire had been rejected and they have not yet received a response with valid bank information from *** ***Liquidation.com would like to resolve *** ***’s claim immediately and obtain valid bank information and this matter can be resolvedYour cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated, please provide us with a valid phone number and email address where we can reach you to obtain valid bank informationYou may also provide your bank information via this Revdex.com response

June 19,
Dear *** ***,
Government Liquidation is in receipt of the response submitted by *** ***In his response, *** *** states that he is dissatisfied with the reply provided by our company to his initial complaint*** *** bid on an auction lot of each (apprx) *** transmission part kits from Govliquidation.com and believed that his bid of $5,should have stood when we normalized his subsequent $20,bid amountIn our initial response, we said that the auction monitoring team normalized *** ***’s bid of $20,as we found it to be an error as it was a drastic jump in bid amountOur management team explained to *** *** “based on the bid amount and sequence of the bids, this was determined to be an error and was normalized”In his most recent response, *** *** stated that his previous bid of $5,should have stood when his $20,was normalizedHowever, at the time of the $20,bid that *** *** placed, the auction amount had not yet reached his previous maximum bid amount of $5,therefore it cancelled out his $5,maximum bid limit and raised it to $20,When bids are normalized, they are brought to the current bid price of the auction at that exact time, as such; the bid was normalized to the current auction price which was $1,In deciding this matter, our auction monitoring team normalized *** ***’s bid to the auction price at that time and temporarily suspended his account until we received a response from himGovernment Liquidation received *** ***’s response after the bid had closedLiquidity Services may limit, suspend, restrict or terminate our services, a buyer’s account, access to our site, and activities on our site with or without noticeIn *** ***’s case, our auction monitoring team normalized the bid, temporarily suspended the account and notified him as soon as possibleWe regret that *** *** remains unsatisfied with our response; but we hope that we have provided some clarity regarding our current positionRegards,
Amanda O***
Compliance Associate
Liquidity Services

February 13,
*** *** ***
Revdex.com
K Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005-
RE: *** *** ***, ID# ***
Dear *** ***,
Please accept this response to the
complaint filed by *** *** *** with the Revdex.com*** *** described concerns she had as a buyer on our website, stating that she disagreed with Liquidity Services, Inc.’s user identification policy*** *** believes that our company has not conducted its business practices properly because she was unable to keep her user registration.
*** *** created a Liquidation.com user account on January and purchased three auction lotsThe next day, however, her user account was de-activated because she shares a residential address with another Liquidation.com userWe do not permit more than one user account per household
This policy protects our users by providing a unique, reliable identifier for each userThis helps to establish a clear chain of custody for Liquidation.com goodsIf more than one recipient was allowed at an address, there would be little to determine who received shipments, or if anyone received them at allUnfortunately, we cannot make exceptions to this rule regardless of the enthusiasm of our potential new userA different address will need to be registered if *** *** intends to join our buyer/seller network
We regret that *** *** does not agree with our decision; however, we hope that our explanation has provided the necessary information regarding our policy
Regards,
Cary *H***
Corporate Paralegal
Liquidity Services, Inc

July 20, 2015 Dear *** ***,Liquidation.com is in receipt of the response submitted by *** *** ***In her response, *** *** states that she remains dissatisfied with the replies provided by our company to her initial complaint. *** *** states that the Liquidation.com dispute team has ruled incorrectly in considering her claim and has does not agree that she received swim shorts of quality fabricShe also says that “swim shorts mean swim short material not fake swim shorts of fabric not suitable for human wear”Finally, she stated that she cannot resell the items she received.Our dispute department has communicated with *** *** regarding her denied dispute and explained that the item sample *** *** sent in matched the auction listing as there was no specified type of material or sizes on the manifest or auction listing, therefore the claim could not be validated. In deciding *** ***’s claim, our disputes department took in to account that *** *** received swim shorts in assorted colors as the auction listing stated. We regret that *** *** does not find the material and range of sizes acceptable; however, we stand by our decision to deny the dispute based on the evidence provided. Regards,
Thank You,Amanda O***Compliance AssociateLiquidity Services

Please accept this response to the complaint filed by Mr*** ** *** with the RevDex.comMr** *** described
concerns he 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 ***Mr** *** believes that our company is in breach of this contract because he does not agree with the refund amount. Mr** *** won an auction for one lot of two (2) *** ILCE60000L/S Interchangeable Lens Cameras on Liquidation.comOn July 15th, a warranty claim was filed for one of the cameras with our Customer Relations Department asserting that there were screen/lines going through the view finder and LCD screenThe repair documents were sent to Darlene ***, MrDa Silva’s client that he sold the camera to. Our warranty instructions advised to return all units received and Ms*** returned the item as well as an additional unit, a *** *** lens, that was not included as part of transaction *** between Liquidation.com and Mr** ***Ms*** may not have been aware of how the package was built as Mr** *** sold to herOur customer relations department was also unaware of the sale of the *** lens to Ms*** from Mr** ***. As such, the return instructions were not modified. Due to the repair process being prolonged, our customer relations department decided to process a refund at the per unit price of $as there was two cameras included in transaction *** and only one camera was sent in for repairOn 7/20, our customer relations department informed Mr** *** that we could only refund the amount of the camera as extra lens that was included was not purchased from Liquidation.com, therefore, we could not provide a refund for. When we tried to refund the amount of $418.50, it failed because Mr** *** initiated a claim with his financial institution at that point. Mr** *** was instructed by *** to return all units for transaction *** for a full refund and provide them with a tracking numberThe tracking number provided to *** was that of the label our customer relations department had provided to ship the camera to the repair facility. The incorrect tracking number was provided to ***. At this time, Mr** *** has a pending refund with *** to refund his total amount and has possession of one cameraLiqudation.com has received back the repaired camera with additional *** * *** *** *** *** Washington, DC United States T ###-###-#### F ###-###-#### www.LiquidityServices.com lens unit and is willing to return to Mr** *** if the *** pending refund is cancelled and a confirmed tracking number is providedAt that time, Mr** *** will have both cameras and his additional lens and the funds will be settled. Further, Mr** ***’s Liquidation.com account was deactivated due to the chargeback filed with ***Chargebacks are specifically prohibited in our User Agreement because the buyer maintains possession of merchandise without paying for it. We regret that Mr** *** remains dissatisfied with our response, but we hope that we have provided some clarity regarding our disputes process and current position. Regards, Amanda O*** Compliance Associate Liquidity Services

June 24, 2015 Dear *** ***, Please accept this response to the complaint filed by *** *** *** with the Revdex.com*** *** described concerns she had as a buyer on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services, were in violation of a buyer’s
purchase agreement for transaction ID *** *** believes that our company is in breach of this contract because her dispute was denied.*** *** was the winning bidder of an auction for one lot of designer women’s clutches, wallets and wristlets (used), purchased via Liquidation.comOn June 10th, she filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment she received was grossly misrepresented*** *** stated “according to the manifest and pictures posted on your site I was supposed to receive, I just received dirty walletsLots of them with no brand tag.” *** *** submitted a video to support her dispute. Our disputes team reviewed *** ***’s claim and concluded that the auction listing was accurate and did not validate her claim that she did not receive unit brands and types in the condition represented in the auction listingThe auction listing clearly states “Designer inspired bags, used condition; you will be receiving items similar to the ones in the pictures, wallets may contain stains and scuffs from wear.” Also, the auction listing did not include a detailed manifest of each item. Our disputes team replied to *** *** stating “the support video you have provided shows unit brands and unit types received as represented in the auction listingThe auction listing has provided details of unit types to be received however the seller has not provided a detailed manifest of specific units to be receivedThe seller has advised a mixed lot to be expected consisting of genuine and designer inspired walletsThe unit’s types and conditions match the units received from the support shownThe units have been properly classified as used condition”As such, her claim was denied. We regret that *** *** 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***Compliance AssociateLiquidity Services

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

November 25, Dear *** ***,
Please accept this response to the complaint filed by *** *** *** with the Revdex.com*** *** described concerns he had as a bidder on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services were in violation of a buyer’s
purchase agreement for auction ID *** *** believes that our company is in breach of this contract due to not being able to complete the transaction as he paid with a credit card in the name of ‘*** ***’.*** *** bid on an auction for one lot of white tucked from and white ribbed tunic tops items on Liquidation.comThe sale closed on October 29th and *** *** submitted payment with a credit card in the name of ‘*** ***’ as the funds were not available in his personal account on November 4thThe transaction was originally cancelled due to seller complications and therefore *** *** could not obtain the itemsThe full refund was credited back to the credit card used for payment; however, *** *** was also notified on November 4th that the credit card he offered for payment in the name of ‘*** ***’ was associated with another Liquidation.com account with the same user informationThe account under ‘*** ***’ was assessed a nonpayment fee for unpaid transaction *** in August and is still unpaid at this timeOur customer relations department notified *** *** that the transaction was cancelled and his account had been deactivated as Liquidation.com only allows one account per household, address or personThe full refund was issued back to *** ***’s card on November 18 thWe regret that *** *** 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 marketplaceRegards,
Amanda O***
Compliance Associate
Liquidity Services

August 4,
*** *** ***
Revdex.com
K Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, DC 20005-
RE: *** *** ***, ID# ***
Dear *** ***,
Please accept this response to the complaint filed by ***
*** *** with the Revdex.com*** *** described concerns she had as an employee of Liquidity Services, Inc*** *** believes that our company is violating employment law
*** *** said that while she had received paychecks on the 15th and last day of each month that she was employed by Liquidity Services, Inc., that she preferred to be paid on the 5th and 25th of the monthShe thought that the payments on the 15th and final day of the month may constitute fraud.
In short, we believe that this is not the proper forum for this inquiryFurthermore, we are within the law in our payment procedures to our employees so there is no fraud being committed with respect to the days that payments are issued to our employeesFinally, *** *** is no longer employed by Liquidity Services, Incso the complaint is moot on her personal level
We thank the Revdex.com for allowing us to respond to the complaint; however, we do not believe that it has any merit to warrant further consideration.
Regards,
Cary *H***
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 responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: I agree that my claim was denied by liquidation.com The portion that was left out by the business, is that the item was listed as a lot of blockbuster moviesThere was not a single blockbuster movie in the lotThe lot consisted of budget movies only I was told that I could dispute the claimWhen I tried to dispute the claim, I received an email back stating that the decision is final and that liquidation.com will not look at it againI called liquidation.com customer service and they stated yes you can reopen the claim which is an untrue statementThis was a gross misrepresentation of the product offered and the product received
Regards,
*** ***

August 14th, 2015 Dear *** ***, Please accept this response to the complaint filed by *** *** *** with the Revdex.com*** *** described concerns he 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 *** *** believes that our company is in breach of this contract because he was given different information from Liquidation.com representatives and *** representatives.*** *** was the winning bidder for one lot of *** ***/DVD Players on Liquidation.comAccording to our records, the serial number you have provided (***) matches the serial number from a warranty claim that is currently in progressIt was delivered on 8/11/and may take up to business days to repairThe unit will be returned under *** ground to your address in Lancaster, Texas. It seems there may have been some miscommunication regarding contacting *** for transaction *** and *** where a previous repair was requestedI have asked a representative to contact you regarding the warranty claim for ***. We regret that *** *** 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***Compliance AssociateLiquidity Services

June 10, Dear *** ***,Please accept this response to the complaint filed by *** *** ** ***
with the Revdex.com. *** *** described concerns he had as a
buyer on our website, stating that the seller and Liquidity Services were in
violation of a buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID ***. *** *** believes that our company is in
breach of this contract because his dispute was denied.*** *** was the winning bidder of an auction for a lot of
women’s tights & socks purchased via Liquidation.comOn May 26th,
2015, he filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that
the shipment he received was not in the condition listed and was grossly
misrepresented as advertised by the seller in the auction listing*** *** said
“These were represented as shelf pullsThe pictures show items with packaging
What I received is mostly loose socks, and tights with very bad packaging, and
staples through the panty hose.” Our disputes team reviewed *** ***’s claim and concluded
that the auction listing was accurate and did not validate his claim that the
lot was misrepresented. The auction
manifest clearly states the condition of the items as “shelf pulls” and
“pictures in this auction are illustrations of items we carry.” Our disputes team then replied to *** *** stating “per the
definition of Shelf Pulls in the auction listing: Shelf Pulls can exhibit a
wide range of individual product and package conditions that can differ
substantially from the original manufacturing”As such, his claim was denied.We regret that *** *** remains unsatisfied with our
response; however, we feel that this matter was handled in accordance with the
Terms and Conditions of the Liquidation.com marketplace.Regards,Amanda O***
Compliance Associate
Liquidity Services