Liquidity Services Inc

August 22, 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 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] believes that our company is in breach of this contract because her dispute was denied.
[redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for a lot of 30 designer handbags in Used condition purchased via Liquidation.com. On July 31, she filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment she received was grossly misrepresented by the seller in the auction listing. [redacted] said that she only received one of the items from the auction photos and that the name brands shown in the listing were not sent. She provided photos in support of her dispute and requested a full refund.
Our disputes team reviewed [redacted]’s claim and concluded that it could not be honored because the auction listing was properly represented. The seller sent the correct number and type of items advertised. The auction listing states that there will be designer inspired handbags and genuine leather bags. It also reads, “You will receive items like the ones shown in the pictures.”
Further, [redacted] filed a chargeback with [redacted] for the transaction. 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. Due to the chargeback, we can provide no further consideration of the dispute. When [redacted] registered as a member of our website, she agreed to follow our dispute procedures and stands in violation with the chargeback.
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,
Cary *. H[redacted]
Corporate Paralegal
Liquidity Services, Inc.

[redacted],Please accept our apologies as it appears the email with the required support was not escalated to the Supervisor for review and subsequently was closed. Upon receiving your complaint, we were able to locate the email containing the support and have overturned the denial for a full refund...

in your favor. Again, we sincerely apologize for this error and will work with you to make things right. If you have any questions about the refund, please give us a call at ###-###-#### and reference your dispute ID of [redacted].Thank you,Liquidation.com

[redacted] bid, and won a salvage auction where the listing indicated the merchandise in the lot were returns, but were classified as Salvage since these were not tested and accessories may not be included. In addition, we do highlight on all Salvage auctions that the assets in these lots are...

intended for professional buyers, as most of the merchandise can only be used for parts. Because of the condition of the product(s), these assets are offered “as-is, where-is” with no returns, guarantees, or claims as to working condition.

[redacted], Upon further review, we have honored your claim for the [redacted] & the [redacted]. Those units are worth 12.39% of the lot value and we ask that you allow 1-5 business days for the funds to reflect in your account. The refund has been pushed through...

our system today, 12/2817. The total refund amount processed is $876.61.Unfortunately, we couldn't honor the other units mentioned in the dispute because they are properly listed as returns. Returned merchandise were assets sold to a customer, who then either physically brought the item back to a store or mailed it to a specified location. Reasons for returning a product may not have any correlation to its utility (i.e., size, color, model, etc.), and as a result may be in fine working order. The majority of returns, however, do have some operational and/or cosmetic problems. Depending on a company's return policy, these items may also reflect a measurable amount of use. In addition, since most of these items are sent through a reverse supply chain (e.g. from a customer back to a store or a centralized warehouse), they can show signs of further handling. Timestamped products, such as food, supplements, car seats, and refrigerators, may be expired. Returns may not come in their original packaging and often do not have any of the advertised documentation or additional parts and/or accessories. Accordingly, returns can exhibit a wide range of individual product and package conditions that can differ substantially from the original manufacturing.Thank You,Liquidation.com

April 3, 2015[redacted]Revdex.com[redacted]
RE:  [redacted] ID# [redacted]Dear [redacted]Please accept this response to the complaint filed by [redacted] with the Better...

Business Bureau.  [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 became impatient with the dispute process; however, the matter has since been resolved in her favor.[redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for a lot of 28 women’s plus-size jeans from Lucky, Levis, Charter Club and Style & Co. in Shelf Pulls condition purchased via Liquidation.com.  On January 12, she filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment she received was missing units and grossly misrepresented by the seller in the auction listing. [redacted] said that she only received 22 of 28 pairs of jeans.  She also complained that nearly all of the jeans were Style & Co. brand instead of a more mixed distribution.  Also, she mentioned that the box may have been opened/disturbed in transit.  She provided photos in support of her dispute and requested a full refund.Due to [redacted] statements regarding the potentially disturbed packaging, a shipping claim was filed with [redacted] on her behalf on January 19.  Our disputes team reviewed [redacted] claim and concluded that a partial refund for the six (6) pairs of missing jeans would be appropriate due to the shipping claim.  The refund was unable to be processed, however, because [redacted] had already filed a chargeback claim.  Chargebacks are specifically prohibited in our User Agreement because the buyer maintains possession of merchandise without paying for it.  For this reason, [redacted] Liquidation.com user account was de-activated.Our disputes team completed its full review of the claim and determined that a full refund would be awarded to [redacted] upon return of the merchandise to the seller.  Return shipping labels were provided and the return was confirmed.We apologize for any inconvenience experienced by [redacted] and consider the matter closed with the refund payment.Regards,Cary C. H[redacted]Corporate ParalegalLiquidity 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 as Answered]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: They said it is salvaged. FACTS are some phones are not salvaged at all. They posted the faked photos misleading me to bid and thought there would be no bending phones or horrible damaged units. They hide the damaged phones from photos. Here are the photos I attached showed the bent phones are not salvaged at all. I lost 10 of them to make hard profit.
Regards,
[redacted]

March 14, 2017Dear [redacted]Please accept this response to the complaint filed by [redacted] with the Revdex.com.  [redacted] describes concerns he has around transaction ID [redacted] which consisted of a [redacted] w/ Liquid...

Cooled [redacted] 3.2GHz CPU, 32GB DDR4, [redacted] GTX1080 8GB, 3TB HDD, 480GB SSD & Win 10 Home 641 $2,872.70 $2,872.70 8[redacted]91 NO HARD DRIVE DOES NOT BOOT 1 $2,872.  The lot was listed as ‘salvage’ condition.  This auction was listed on www.liquidation.com and [redacted]’s bid of $1,161 was the winning bid on 2-1-2017.  The total transaction cost after taxes and shipping charges was $1,505.71.  The product was delivered to [redacted] on Monday, 02/06/2017, at 2:39PM, and [redacted] filed a dispute with us on 2-6-2017 which stated the following:DISPUTE RECEIVED; NOT IN CONDITION LISTED, GROSSLY MISREPRESENTED; All parts listed in the auction have already been removed from the desktop. Cannot be sold for parts if the parts have already been removed. Video card listed is not present in PC, all the ram has been removed, as well as the cpu. The cpu cooler is also missing. I demand a full refund of $1505.71 as what I received is in no way shape or form what was described in this auction.While our disputes department originally denied this dispute, after further review we will be processing a refund totaling $1,505.71.  This refund should take approximately 3-5 business days.  Liquidation.com offers a wide variety of bulk wholesale merchandise to cater to the unique needs of professional buyers. We regret that [redacted] was dissatisfied with the auction services provided by Liquidation.com, and encourage him to continue to utilize our dispute handling process for dealing with claims, as per our Terms and Conditions. We wish to thank you for allowing Liquidation.com a chance to address [redacted]’s claim. Regards,Andy B[redacted]Senior Manager, Customer SupportLiquidity Services

I spoke with [redacted] on 3/23/18 regarding his claim and was able to investigate further and found the following information:   The laptop in question was an Acer laptop purchased on 8/5/14 via our [redacted] platform. These laptops were refurbished by a company called...

[redacted] and also came with a 90 day repair warranty from the date of purchase. While speaking with [redacted], he indicated that the laptop was still functional and that the performance was slow and he had additional concerns about the hard disk drive utilization.   I then left [redacted] a voicemail on the afternoon of 3/23/18 informing him that there wasn’t any further action we could take as the purchase was made, and the 90 day repair window closed, many years ago.

GovDeals offers Online Auction Services to over 10,000 government entities in the U.S and Canada. Seller’s manage their own auctions and set their own terms and conditions (Auction rules) for which the buyers must adhere. We receive many complaints from unsatisfied bidders due to the fact that the...

seller locks their account for defaulting on the payment or the pickup of items won from our government clients. These complaints are usually dismissed due to the fact that the bidder did not follow their obligations to pay for and pickup items won and did not abide by the government seller's Terms and Conditions. In the case of Mr. [redacted], the seller locked his account because he failed to comply with the seller terms of payment and removal.  When a seller locks a bidder’s account, they are essentially saying “I do not want to do business with this individual”; we will not go against the seller wishes to reverse this lock. Aside from the other locks on his account, Mr. [redacted] may bid on items offered by more than 10,000 other sellers.Thanks you for your attention to this matter and let me know if you need any other information about this complaint or our company. Regards,Carrie M

[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 as Answered]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:
The response in incorrect. I scheduled to pick up two pallets and was only given one. That is the reason for the complaint. Regards,
[redacted]

Mr. [redacted] filed a dispute regarding transaction [redacted] on 8/28/17.  We followed our standard dispute resolution process and honored the dispute by notifying Mr. [redacted] on 9/7/17.  The items were returned to the seller on 9/12/17 and a full refund of $145.25 was completed on 9/18/17. ...

The products purchased were listed by a third-party seller and we will make sure to provide all of Mr. [redacted] feedback and comments to the seller.

Date: Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 2:37 PMSubject: Response to complaint ID [redacted]To: [redacted] <[redacted]@myRevdex.com.org> Complaint ID: [redacted] bid on a Salvage auction, which according to our terms states these assets have been identified as defective for reasons concerning their...

functionality, appearance or both. Salvage assets usually can only be used for parts and are therefore recommended for professional buyers specialized in repairs or resale parts. In addition, this particular auction further commented on the condition of the merchandise by identifying there were missing components, and contained cracked screens. Auction listing description is attached for reference.  Liquidity Services Inc.____Andy B

Thank you for your patience while we reviewed this claim.   I confirmed that we indeed had a shipping mix up with this [redacted]'s merchandise - that we were able to correct.  [redacted] now has the correct merchandise.  It delivered to him on Monday 2/13/2017 at 4:00 pm and was signed...

for by [redacted].  We shipped it via [redacted] Freight and the Tracking number  is [redacted].  We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience caused by the mix up and delay and will be issuing [redacted] 2 promotional codes for up to 10% off his next two purchases on liquidation.com.  We invite [redacted] to contact us at any time for any assistance needed in his shipping matters.

January 19, 2015Dear [redacted],
We appreciate the opportunity to review and respond to the claims associated with [redacted]’ auction participation.On November 13, 2014 Government Liquidation determined that [redacted]’ property claim was valid. Government Liquidation...

allowed for the return of the property for a full invoice refund. Subsequently, Government Liquidation advised [redacted] of the claim resolution and instructed him that our agent would retrieve the property.Sale [redacted] lot [redacted] was returned to our site and verified on November 19, 2014. [redacted] was notified of his pending refund in the amount of $30,910.00 on November 25, 2014. This refund was fully executed and completed for [redacted] on December 1, 2014, check #[redacted].
After the full lot invoice refund was completed, [redacted] requested additional shipping expenses in the amount of $600.00. Government Liquidation requested receipts from [redacted] relating to his additional expenses, which [redacted] provided. After careful consideration Government Liquidation approved a $200.00 refund for [redacted]' expenses. This was due to detention fees that Government Liquidation incurred at the site level pertaining to lot 7766. These detention fees were directly associated with timeframe issues for the return of the property caused by [redacted]’ cooperation efforts. [redacted] was notified regarding the $200.00 refund on December 18, 2014. This refund was fully executed and completed for [redacted] on December 29, 2014, check #[redacted].
Subsequently, [redacted] disputed Government Liquidation’s resolution related to his original shipping charges. [redacted]’ claim was elevated. Government Liquidation approved the additional $400.00 refund for [redacted] was notified regarding this refund on January 15, 2015 via e-mail. The $400.00 refund is currently in process at this time.
Government Liquidation has approved full refunds for both the original refund amount for lot [redacted] and the $600.00 in shipping charges ($31,510,00), which are associated with the receipts [redacted] has provided.
Again, Government Liquidation wishes to thank you for allowing us to address the claims mentioned.
Regards,
Cary H. 
Corporate Paralegal

When the buyer first submitted the dispute, the documents provided showed the package was of incorrect weight, but did not indicate any additional charge. Only 2 of 3 pages were provided (see attached [redacted]Receipt [redacted]).Upon Revdex.com complaint, we reopened the dispute and reached out to the buyer...

directly to obtain the 3rd page in hopes the dollar amount was there. Buyer submitted and we processed the refund in the amount $96.76 on October 18th (see system record in the screenshot). Refund was sent to the Buyer's [redacted] account.

[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 as Answered]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: I pointed out the damage immediately to the forklift operator. She advised me to file a claim online through the website. If I had been advised properly to file a complaint before departing, I would have.
Regards,
[redacted]

The transaction in question ([redacted]) was purchased with the buyer arranging their own shipping. When Buyers do this, they are advised to inspect all merchandise prior to removing it from the seller's location. Once the merchandise is taken off the property, the right to submit a dispute is waived....

Therefore, for this reason, the dispute filed was denied as the Buyer was given the ability to inspect the merchandise at the time of pick-up.

Mr. [redacted] October 23, 2015Mr. [redacted]Revdex.com1411 K Street, NW, 10th FloorWashington, DC 20005-3404RE: Mr. [redacted], ID# [redacted]Dear Mr. [redacted]GovLiquidation is in receipt of the response submitted by Mr. [redacted]. In his response, Mr.[redacted] states that he cannot return any of the merchandise he has purchased from GovernmentLiquidation as he has sold it all to a scrap yard. Mr. [redacted] provided photos with his initial claimto support his case.After reviewing Mr. [redacted]’s case with upper management, we have decided on the followingresolution: Once the property has been removed from our facility, Government Liquidation nolonger has custodianship of the property; it is difficult to validate a claim. GovernmentLiquidation is willing to authentically validate Mr. [redacted]’s claim and issue a refund for theproperty upon return. If there is no property to be returned, Government Liquidation is willing toissue an In-House Credit in the amount of $2,419.00, an a one-time goodwill gesture.We appreciate the opportunity to address Mr. [redacted]’s claim and feel that we have handled thematter accordingly.Regards,[redacted]

Date: Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 11:24 AMSubject: RE: My E-mail AddressTo: [redacted] <[redacted]@myRevdex.com.org>Good Morning [redacted], This e-mail is being sent with reference to complaint ID: [redacted] Our Management team reached out to this customer in January 2017 regarding his removals at the Oklahoma City warehouse: ·         [redacted] scheduled an appointment for removal for a specific invoice.·         Upon arrival at the site, [redacted] requested to remove additional invoices that he did not have appointments for.·         The site could not accommodate the additional removal requests due to personnel and scheduling unavailability; the site had allowed removal in the past as a courtesy buy could not accommodate additional removals for the date in question. The following was explained to [redacted]: ·         Lots are pulled based on the appointments that are scheduled.·         The site will do their best to add lots upon arrival but this is not guaranteed or required.·         The site has to consider appointments that have been set by other customers, manpower, scheduled timeframes, etc.·         Liquidity Services advised [redacted] confirm and schedule appointments for all invoices he wishes to remove in the future.·         [redacted] stated he was not happy that he was turned away but understood why he was turned away and will make sure to set appointments for all invoices he needs to remove.The customer confirmed with our manager that he understood our processes and there were no additional issues pending at the time. The complaint states that,  “There is no action for you to take at this time. We will contact you when we next require your input.”… I want to be sure this is removed from the open complaints/action items. Please let me know if there is any additional information required. Thank you for your time and assistance. Sincerely, Liquidity Services Inc.Steven W

[redacted], Based on the information provided, since no transaction/order details were given, we have identified the transaction ID as [redacted]. If this is incorrect, please let us know as we do not have any other dispute on file for the address provided on the Revdex.com complaint. The auction [redacted]...

bid on was a lot of 25 [redacted] in Salvage condition. The condition of this merchandise was detailed at the top of the page, with a pop-up further detailing what salvage merchandise as assets that have been “identified as defective for reasons concerning their functionality, appearance, or both. Salvage assets usually can only be used for parts.” In addition, the listing description of the auction further calls attention to the fact the merchandise within this lot was in fact salvage in 2 separate instances. Exact language on the description: “IMPORTANT: Please note that the condition of this lot is SALVAGE. Salvage assets are intended for professional buyers, as most can be used only for parts. These assets are offered "as-is, where-is" with no returns, guarantees, or claims as to working condition.” And “This is a salvage lot. Units have neither been opened nor inspected. We are unable to guarantee the contents of the units in this lot. Salvage units included in this lot are part of a large inventory purchase. No individual units were opened or tested. These phones have a clean ESN/ IMEI status right now. the status could change over time hence we do not guarantee ESN/ IMEI clean status although as of now all items are NO [redacted]. The phones are listed in salvage condition and being sold AS-IS for parts or repair and no returns will be accepted.” Because the auction clearly stated the merchandise of this lot was not functional and is being offered “as-is, where-is”, we denied the dispute. These lots are therefore recommended for professional buyers to resell as parts. Liquidation.com