[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: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: Regards, [redacted] I have been try to return the items back but they try to kill and I have a copy of the email I sent it to them asking them I need to return the phone's back I call them so many times and every time I call the it been recorded and when I asked them play back the phone call they say we have no access the the calls so you can ask them if they can play back to my phone calls and you find how many times I asked them I need to return the phone backThank You
March 26, [redacted] [redacted] [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, Incwere 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 lot of new bracelets, including bangles, cuffs, and more purchased via Liquidation.com On August 2014, she filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment he received was misrepresented as advertised by the seller in the auction listing [redacted] said that she “only received one item that was remotely similar to the photosAll others are cheap beaded bracelets and plastic banglesThe photos show beautiful metal and rhinestone bangles, cuffs, and bracelets”.Our disputes team reviewed [redacted] ’ [redacted] claim and concluded that the auction listing was accurate and did not validate her claim that the lot was misrepresented The auction manifest clearly states “styles include bangle, cuff and more, assorted colors and sizes, you will receive units similar to the ones picturedYou may not receive the exact units pictured.” As such, her claim was deniedFurther, [redacted] filed a chargeback with PayPal 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.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***Compliance AssociateLiquidity Services, Inc
September 11th, 2015Dear [redacted] , Liquidation.com is in receipt of the response submitted by [redacted] In his response, [redacted] states that he is dissatisfied with the reply provided by our company to his initial complaint [redacted] purchased an auction lot of toy figurines items in new condition from Liquidation.com and believes that the sizes are not appropriate as they are smaller then what he thought they would be [redacted] said that the items he received do not stand up.In our initial response, we said that the disputes team denied the claim because they determined the auction listing was properly listedNeither the auction listing nor the manifest specified specific sizes/dimensions of the toysAlso, the manifest did not list individual figurines to be received, it only stated the quantityThe auction listing states each lot contains an assorted mixIn his most recent response, [redacted] said that he did not receive any [redacted] minifigurines and the toys he received do not stand upIn deciding this matter, our disputes team relied upon the objective measures given in the auction listing We regret that [redacted] remains unsatisfied with our response; however, we stand by our decision to deny the dispute based on the evidence providedWe hope that we have provided some clarity regarding our current positionRegards,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: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: there is a difference between untested to salvage, untested means some should be working or not in great shape, to receive all not working or broken units is not called returned, seller used this so they can get away with disputes, buyers are not protected in this business, better protection for buyers has to be in place Regards, [redacted]
[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: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: July 22, [redacted] RevDex.com K Street, NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20005- RE: Liquidation.com, ID# [redacted] Dear [redacted] , Please be advised that on June 16, I filed a complaint with [redacted] regarding this matter After hearing from both sides, [redacted] decided in my favor on June 30thI have since returned all of the items, and have received a full refund in the amount of $ I thank you for your assistance in this matter, but the dispute has already been resolved Regards, [redacted] ***
May 21st, 2015Dear [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 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 his dispute was denied[redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for one (1) lot of items, including designer handbags & jewelry, purchased via Liquidation.comOn April 29th, he filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment he received was missing the authenticity card advertised by the seller in the auction listing [redacted] said that he had expected to receive the authenticity card for the Prada handbag, but that he had not received the authenticity cardHe stated “this was the most expensive bag in the lot and one of the only reasons we were willing to bid that amountWe will lose approximately $due to the failure to pack ALL of the items we paid for”He requested that the entire lot be returned at the seller’s expense, return only the Prada bag (at buyer’s expense) for $to be refunded to him, or we keep the bag and the seller issues a $refund.Our disputes team reviewed [redacted] ***’s claim and confirmed with the seller that the authenticity card was packed with the Prada bag and did not validate his claim that he was missing the cardThe seller was able to provide sufficient support documentation to validate full shipment of all items due for this transaction, including authenticity cardThe seller stated the claimed missing authenticity card was shipped inside the purse and there was no support documentation received to validate the need for a shipping claim concerning damage or tampering of the package(s) during the shipment processThe seller of this lot is a reputable and punctual client of Liquidation.com and we have no previous complaints for lack/loss of other authenticity cards.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 Compliance Associate
November 16, 2015Dear [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 the seller and Liquidity Services were in violation of a buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID’s [redacted] , [redacted] , and [redacted] [redacted] believes that our company is in breach of this contract because his dispute was denied[redacted] was the winning bidder of auctions, each for one lot of assorted electronic items, purchased via Liquidation.comOn October 14th, he filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment he received not in the condition listed and was grossly misrepresented [redacted] stated “I got few items those are salvage, broken and not usable” [redacted] submitted pictures to support his dispute.Our disputes team reviewed [redacted] ’s claim and concluded that the auction listing was accurate and did not validate his claim that the items were salvage or brokenThe auction listing states all three lots of electronics listed in the condition of “returns”In the description, it states “the majority of Returns do have some operational and/or cosmetic problemDepending on a company's return policy, these items may also reflect a measurable amount of useIn 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 handlingAccordingly, Returns can exhibit a wide range of individual product and package conditions that can differ substantially from the original manufacturing”The auction manifest also listed each item individually and their grade/condition as “returns”As such, his 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 marketplaceRegards, Amanda O***Compliance AssociateLiquidity Services
October 14, [redacted] Revdex.com K Street, NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20005- 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 of a laptop under warranty operated by Liquidity Services, Inc [redacted] believes that our company is in breach of this contract because his warranty request was denied On May 19, [redacted] purchased a recertified laptop computer via [redacted] .com with a 90-Day Warranty serviced by Liquidity ServicesThe laptop experienced intermittent issues where it would power down when running on batteryOn September 4, [redacted] contacted our warranty service personnel to submit a warranty claimHe said that he had evidence that the power problems had occurred during the 90-day period after purchase Our warranty personnel denied service to [redacted] because the 90-day warranty period concluded on August Therefore the unit was no longer eligible for repair service under the warrantyWhen [redacted] questioned his eligibility, he was informed that the 90-day warranty expired days after purchase and that any claim needed to be initiated prior to the expirationHe was then advised to seek local repair for his laptop instead We regret that [redacted] is dissatisfied with his purchase; however, we feel that we have handled the matter in accordance with the warranty conditions Regards, Cary *H [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 responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: Liquidation.com clearly states in there response there policy and that "returns" cover a range of products, which leaves much room for deceptionThey claim I can review sellers or buyers feedback but that does not give much information, because these resources didn't tell me that the seller sold broken/unusable itemsLiquidation.com also failed to point out that after the brief explanation of "Returns" they tell you to see manifest for more in formation on product's coditionTo conclude this is there stated policy, and no where in it does it state that I could receive unusable (iea metal economic friendly water bottle with the top broken off rendering it unfixable by anyone but the original manufacturer)So unless they include in there explanation of Returns that you could receive garbage/unusable (items unrepairable) I think they are deceiving customers.Upon further investigation I found out that this particular auction was fulfilled by liquidation.com, so they had eyes on the products and were possibly aware of the physical condition of the itemsOur disputes team reviewed [redacted] ***’s claim and concluded that the claim could not be honored because the merchandise was properly identified, falling within the broad definition of Returns, given on the auction listing as follows:Returns were sold to a customer, who then either physically brought the item back to a store or mailed it to a specified locationReasons for returning a product may not have any correlation to its usefulness (i.e., size, color, model, etc.), and as a result that product may be in fine working orderThe majority of Returns, however, do have some operational and/or cosmetic problemDepending on a company's return policy, these items may also reflect a measurable amount of useIn 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 handlingThey generally do not come in original packaging and often do not have any of the advertised documentation or additional parts and/or accessoriesAccordingly, Returns can exhibit a wide range of individual product and package conditions that can differ substantially from the original manufacturing Regards, [redacted] ***
March 23, 2015Mr [redacted] Revdex.comK Street, NW, 10th FloorWashington, DC 20005-3404RE: Mr [redacted] , ID# [redacted] Dear Mr [redacted] ,Please accept this response to the complaint filed by Mr [redacted] with the RevDex.com Mr [redacted] described concerns he had as a buyer on our website, stating that Liquidity Services, Incwas in violation of buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID [redacted] Mr [redacted] believes that our company is in breach of this contract because he disagrees with the application of our company policies.Mr [redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for a lot of home improvement tools in Returns condition purchased via Liquidation.com After placing his bid, he conducted some further research on the individual auction items and determined that the retail prices advertised by the seller did not match his findings Mr [redacted] then attempted to contact Liquidation.com to cancel his bid prior to the close of the auction; however, the bid remained in force with no response from customer serviceAs described in the User Agreement that Mr [redacted] agreed to follow when he registered for our website, a bid is a binding offer This was further underlined in the auction advertising which states, “Attention: By bidding, you are entering into a legally binding contract to purchase this lot if you are the winning bidder.” Finally, Mr [redacted] had the opportunity to research the auction items prior to placing his bid He could have modified or withheld his bid if he was uncomfortable with the auction Therefore, customer service had no obligation to remove his legitimate bid from consideration.We regret that Mr [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 CH***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 responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: First of all, let me state that I appreciate Liquidation.com's response to my complaint It does give me hope that we can come to an amicable resolution As far as I can tell, Liquidation.com's proposed remedy to the issue/complaint is: " [redacted] (sp) may have his Liquidation.com user account re-activated if he wishes" While that may lead to further activity in resolving this issue (although that is not specifically stated), the reactivation of my account in and of itself does not in any way make me whole again The response provided by Liquidation.com seems to indicate that they do now seem to understand the issue and facts pertaining to this case and now in fact realize that I neither have the merchandise nor the $650+ that I paid for said merchandise If I have misunderstood Liquidation.com's remedy, then I apologize and please clarify your position.While I would gladly agree to take possesion of the original auction item as presented on the Liquidation.com website that I bid on and won, I doubt that they still have it or can locate it if they do Alternate to that solution, I would like to have the payment that I made refunded As I said, I am trying to be as reasonable as possible in not asking for reimbursement for automobile expenses, meals, etcrelated to this action I would just like the merchandise or to have my money refunded A couple points of note First, the lot in question (Auction ID# [redacted] ) was supposed to have items in it, not as stated in the response I just wanted to clarify that for the record Secondly, it is true that the chargeback was initiated after exhausting all other courses of remedy in dealing with Liquidation.com customer service and warehouse personnel Once I was essentially called a liar for saying that I never contacted Liquidation.com customer service, I could see that there was nothing else I could do to seek remedy from the company without some kind of escalation to/from a third party.Once again, thank you for your response and I look forward to final resolution of this complaint Regards, [redacted]
March 14, 2017Dear [redacted] Please accept this response to the complaint filed by [redacted] with the Revdex.com [redacted] describes concerns she has around the business practices at our Las Vegas, NV warehouse site [redacted] complaint stated the following:Selling Practices Customer’s Statement of the Problem: Company needs to be investigated for shill bidding and insider informationWhile we appreciate [redacted] raising concern about these practices, we require more specific information (i.eexamples of the stated behavior, names, dates, transactions, etc.) to more thoroughly investigate and respond to this complaint Unless we receive such information, we will not be able to provide a more detailed response to the issues raised in the complaint.Liquidation.com offers a wide variety of bulk wholesale merchandise to cater to the unique needs of professional buyersWe regret that [redacted] was dissatisfied with the auction services provided by Liquidation.comWe wish to thank you for allowing Liquidation.com a chance to address [redacted] claimRegards, [redacted]
[redacted] Revdex.comK 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, Incwere 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 pallets of Home Depot seasonal product in Returns condition purchased via Liquidation.comOn 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 listingHe said that once the pallets were opened that they were missing shelving valued over $4,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 items were missing from among the 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 (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 $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***Corporate ParalegalLiquidity Services, Inc
November 21, [redacted] Revdex.com K Street, NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20005- 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 seller on our website, stating that Liquidity Services, Inchad not properly paid her for completed transactions; however, the matter has since been resolved [redacted] sold a lot of cosmetics items on Liquidation.com on September That Transaction ID [redacted] would have paid $to her in an October check; however, in the meantime another sold auction had received a buyer dispute (Transaction ID [redacted] )When a dispute is filed on an auction, $is withheld until the dispute is resolvedThis is why [redacted] ’ check was $less than she expectedAfter resolution of the buyer dispute on Transaction ID [redacted] , the $was released to [redacted] and paid on October 23, which was after her Revdex.com dispute filingWe include paperwork with our payments to describe the payout calculationsWe apologize for any inconvenience or misunderstanding experienced by [redacted] and consider the matter closed with the funds disbursementRegards, Cary *H [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 responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: Ok so you "normalized" my bid of $20,lets just for a moment say that was acceptable, even though I don't believe it was, why was my prior bid of $not upheldIt was placed at 5:36pm and stood until I increased my bid to the $20,amount at 6:At that point it was only minutes until you "normalized" my bidSo if it only takes you minutes to do this then that tells me the $bid was within reason for them yet this bid was also cancelledJust NOT fair businessFurther they refuse to elaborate on their retraction process and at what point do they consider a bid to be unrealistic and subject to retraction, they told me if I feel my bids will be misinterpreted in the future to contact customer service in advance but how is one to know what will be misinterpreted when they do not have any written procedure for their processWhile they did send me an email after the retraction and I called customer service as soon as possible with minutes remaining in the auction and they could have had every opportunity to do what was right and fair but did nothingJust flat out poor business practices Regards, [redacted]
March 23, [redacted] Revdex.comK 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, Incwere 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 a lot of assorted women’s fashion bracelets purchased via Liquidation.com On February 10, 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 listingHe said that of the units were not included in the shipment He also said that although the bracelets were advertised with values between $and $he discovered that the manufacturer’s brand had no product in the higher price range Additionally, [redacted] believed the value of the bracelets to be less than $each He provided photos in support of his claim.Our disputes team reviewed [redacted] ’s claim and concluded that the claim could not be honored because the photo evidence was insufficient to support the claim The disputes team requested additional information and photos since the photos received did not cover the entire claim but only a single item However, the request for more support was ignored, and the claim was denied When [redacted] expressed his displeasure with the decision, he was told that he could submit a reopen claim request along with more robust support No reopen request was filed Without the cooperation of [redacted] , the claim remained 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,Cary *H***Corporate ParalegalLiquidity Services, Inc
May 17, [redacted] Revdex.com K Street, NW, 10th Floor [redacted] , DC 20005- 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, Incwere 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 pallets of general merchandise, including toys, light fixtures, sink, toilet, etc., in Salvage condition purchased via Liquidation.comOn March 1, she filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the merchandise she received was grossly misrepresented and not in the condition advertised by the seller in the auction listingShe said that she did not receive the pallets pictured in the photos accompanying the auction listing** [redacted] opined that the merchandise she received is mostly garbage that could not even reasonably be classified as Salvage (to be used for parts only)She also said the shipment contained broken and bent light fixtures, food that had been violated by vermin, and worn out sneakersShe also stated that there were specific items, such as a wreath, which she had wanted and not receivedShe provided photos in support of her claim and requested a full refund Our disputes team reviewed ** [redacted] ’s claim and concluded that it could not be honored because her supporting photos did not show that the merchandise was in a condition other than advertisedThere were no signs of vermin, and the defects described and shown fell within the acceptable range for Salvage condition merchandiseOur definition of Salvage merchandise as provided in the auction listing reads, “Salvage assets have been identified as defective for reasons concerning their functionality, appearance or bothSalvage assets usually can only be used for parts.” Furthermore, we do not allow for returns of Salvage lotsThe following notice is explicitly listed in the auction advertising: IMPORTANT: Please note that the condition of this lot is SALVAGESalvage assets are intended for professional buyers, as most can be used only for partsThese assets are offered "as-is, where-is" with no returns, guarantees, or claims as to working condition 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
May 2, 2014Dear [redacted] ,We appreciate the opportunity to review and respond to the claims associated with [redacted] ***’s auction participation.All potential buyers are informed of the auction'procedures and agree to the Terms and Conditions at the time of registration as well as upon placement of their bidsOur records indicate that [redacted] agreed to the Terms and Conditions at the time of registration on Thu Oct 12:29:Agreement of the Terms and Conditions also occurred when [redacted] placed his winning bid on Sale [redacted] , Lot [redacted] (Tue Jan 18:43:2014) and when he placed his winning bid on Sale ***, Lot [redacted] (Wed Jan 01:07:2014) on Government Liquidation’s websiteSubsequently, on January 09, 2014, [redacted] was invoiced for both lots, and Government Liquidation received payment in full, $747.54, via his [redacted] accountA copy of the paid invoice is enclosed with this letter[redacted] then corresponded with site personnel in an effort to schedule an appointment to pithe property associated with Lot [redacted] and Lot [redacted] from Sale *** [redacted] was informed by site personnel that the property could not be located and was advised to contact Government Liquidation’s Customer Service Department for recourse.On January 17, 2014, [redacted] contacted Government Liquidation’s Customer Service Department [redacted] explained the situation to a Customer Service Representative, and the Customer Service Representative advised [redacted] to outline his concerns in writing by replying to a claim form that we would send to him.Subsequently, on January 19, 2014, [redacted] initiated a charge-back, as the claim form had not been sent to himOn January 20, 2014, the Customer Service Department verbally informed [redacted] that a full refund, $747.54, was in process and that he would be receiving a written confirmation within the coming business days.On January 23, 2014, a full refund, $747.54, was issued to [redacted] ***’s [redacted] account and a written confirmation was e-rnailed to [redacted] ***A copy of the refund confirmation is enclosed with this letterA copy of the written confirmation is enclosed with this letter.Due to the aforementioned, [redacted] cancelled the charge-back with [redacted] , as his dispute with Government Liquidation was resolved.Again, Government Liquidation wishes to thank you for allowing us to address the claims mentioned.Regards,
January 7, [redacted] Revdex.comK 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, Incwere 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 had not received his purchase or a refund, but he has since been refunded in full.On November 28, [redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for a lot of medical devices and equipment in Returns condition purchased via Liquidation.com When he did not receive his shipment after several weeks, he filed a chargeback with [redacted] on the transaction.Shortly after the shipment should have been delivered, we discovered that the tracking number for the shipment was incorrect and therefore the shipment could not be located On December 8, it was decided that we would issue a full refund if we did not receive confirmation of delivery from the carrier In the meantime, we waited for delivery confirmation to arrive After three weeks, we moved forward with the refund and authorized a full payment of $to [redacted] ***’s account on December 26.Further, [redacted] ***’s Liquidation.com user account was de-activated as a result of the chargeback he filed with [redacted] Chargebacks are specifically prohibited in the user agreement which [redacted] agreed to follow when he registered as a user on our website There was no record of a dialogue between [redacted] and our customer service team to attempt to settle the matter, and it does not appear that an effort was made by [redacted] to request a refund.We apologize for any inconvenience experienced by [redacted] and consider the matter closed with the refund payment.Regards,Cary H***Corporate ParalegalLiquidity Services, Inc
May 17, [redacted] Revdex.com K Street, NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20005- 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, Incwere 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 four (4) items, including an [redacted] 7-inch [redacted] tablet, purchased via Liquidation.comOn February 28, he filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment he received was missing units advertised by the seller in the auction listing** [redacted] said that he had expected to receive four [redacted] tablets, but that he had only received one tablet and some accessoriesHe requested that three more tablets be sent to him or that he be allowed to return the shipment he received for a full refund Our disputes team reviewed ** [redacted] ’s claim and concluded that the auction listing was accurate and did not validate his claim that he was missing itemsThe auction manifest clearly lists each of the four items: 7” [redacted] Tablet, Ac charger, USB Cable, and User ManualBuyers are responsible for performing due diligence before bidding on an auctionThe users of our website are equal, professional buyers and sellers conducting transactions via our Liquidation.com marketplaceA bidding mistake by the purchasing party cannot be grounds to reverse a completed transaction by a seller 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 responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: Regards, [redacted] I have been try to return the items back but they try to kill and I have a copy of the email I sent it to them asking them I need to return the phone's back I call them so many times and every time I call the it been recorded and when I asked them play back the phone call they say we have no access the the calls so you can ask them if they can play back to my phone calls and you find how many times I asked them I need to return the phone backThank You
March 26, [redacted] [redacted] [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, Incwere 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 lot of new bracelets, including bangles, cuffs, and more purchased via Liquidation.com On August 2014, she filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment he received was misrepresented as advertised by the seller in the auction listing [redacted] said that she “only received one item that was remotely similar to the photosAll others are cheap beaded bracelets and plastic banglesThe photos show beautiful metal and rhinestone bangles, cuffs, and bracelets”.Our disputes team reviewed [redacted] ’ [redacted] claim and concluded that the auction listing was accurate and did not validate her claim that the lot was misrepresented The auction manifest clearly states “styles include bangle, cuff and more, assorted colors and sizes, you will receive units similar to the ones picturedYou may not receive the exact units pictured.” As such, her claim was deniedFurther, [redacted] filed a chargeback with PayPal 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.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***Compliance AssociateLiquidity Services, Inc
September 11th, 2015Dear [redacted] , Liquidation.com is in receipt of the response submitted by [redacted] In his response, [redacted] states that he is dissatisfied with the reply provided by our company to his initial complaint [redacted] purchased an auction lot of toy figurines items in new condition from Liquidation.com and believes that the sizes are not appropriate as they are smaller then what he thought they would be [redacted] said that the items he received do not stand up.In our initial response, we said that the disputes team denied the claim because they determined the auction listing was properly listedNeither the auction listing nor the manifest specified specific sizes/dimensions of the toysAlso, the manifest did not list individual figurines to be received, it only stated the quantityThe auction listing states each lot contains an assorted mixIn his most recent response, [redacted] said that he did not receive any [redacted] minifigurines and the toys he received do not stand upIn deciding this matter, our disputes team relied upon the objective measures given in the auction listing We regret that [redacted] remains unsatisfied with our response; however, we stand by our decision to deny the dispute based on the evidence providedWe hope that we have provided some clarity regarding our current positionRegards,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: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: there is a difference between untested to salvage, untested means some should be working or not in great shape, to receive all not working or broken units is not called returned, seller used this so they can get away with disputes, buyers are not protected in this business, better protection for buyers has to be in place Regards, [redacted]
[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: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: July 22, [redacted] RevDex.com K Street, NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20005- RE: Liquidation.com, ID# [redacted] Dear [redacted] , Please be advised that on June 16, I filed a complaint with [redacted] regarding this matter After hearing from both sides, [redacted] decided in my favor on June 30thI have since returned all of the items, and have received a full refund in the amount of $ I thank you for your assistance in this matter, but the dispute has already been resolved Regards, [redacted] ***
May 21st, 2015Dear [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 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 his dispute was denied[redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for one (1) lot of items, including designer handbags & jewelry, purchased via Liquidation.comOn April 29th, he filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment he received was missing the authenticity card advertised by the seller in the auction listing [redacted] said that he had expected to receive the authenticity card for the Prada handbag, but that he had not received the authenticity cardHe stated “this was the most expensive bag in the lot and one of the only reasons we were willing to bid that amountWe will lose approximately $due to the failure to pack ALL of the items we paid for”He requested that the entire lot be returned at the seller’s expense, return only the Prada bag (at buyer’s expense) for $to be refunded to him, or we keep the bag and the seller issues a $refund.Our disputes team reviewed [redacted] ***’s claim and confirmed with the seller that the authenticity card was packed with the Prada bag and did not validate his claim that he was missing the cardThe seller was able to provide sufficient support documentation to validate full shipment of all items due for this transaction, including authenticity cardThe seller stated the claimed missing authenticity card was shipped inside the purse and there was no support documentation received to validate the need for a shipping claim concerning damage or tampering of the package(s) during the shipment processThe seller of this lot is a reputable and punctual client of Liquidation.com and we have no previous complaints for lack/loss of other authenticity cards.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 Compliance Associate
November 16, 2015Dear [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 the seller and Liquidity Services were in violation of a buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID’s [redacted] , [redacted] , and [redacted] [redacted] believes that our company is in breach of this contract because his dispute was denied[redacted] was the winning bidder of auctions, each for one lot of assorted electronic items, purchased via Liquidation.comOn October 14th, he filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment he received not in the condition listed and was grossly misrepresented [redacted] stated “I got few items those are salvage, broken and not usable” [redacted] submitted pictures to support his dispute.Our disputes team reviewed [redacted] ’s claim and concluded that the auction listing was accurate and did not validate his claim that the items were salvage or brokenThe auction listing states all three lots of electronics listed in the condition of “returns”In the description, it states “the majority of Returns do have some operational and/or cosmetic problemDepending on a company's return policy, these items may also reflect a measurable amount of useIn 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 handlingAccordingly, Returns can exhibit a wide range of individual product and package conditions that can differ substantially from the original manufacturing”The auction manifest also listed each item individually and their grade/condition as “returns”As such, his 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 marketplaceRegards, Amanda O***Compliance AssociateLiquidity Services
October 14, [redacted] Revdex.com K Street, NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20005- 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 of a laptop under warranty operated by Liquidity Services, Inc [redacted] believes that our company is in breach of this contract because his warranty request was denied On May 19, [redacted] purchased a recertified laptop computer via [redacted] .com with a 90-Day Warranty serviced by Liquidity ServicesThe laptop experienced intermittent issues where it would power down when running on batteryOn September 4, [redacted] contacted our warranty service personnel to submit a warranty claimHe said that he had evidence that the power problems had occurred during the 90-day period after purchase Our warranty personnel denied service to [redacted] because the 90-day warranty period concluded on August Therefore the unit was no longer eligible for repair service under the warrantyWhen [redacted] questioned his eligibility, he was informed that the 90-day warranty expired days after purchase and that any claim needed to be initiated prior to the expirationHe was then advised to seek local repair for his laptop instead We regret that [redacted] is dissatisfied with his purchase; however, we feel that we have handled the matter in accordance with the warranty conditions Regards, Cary *H [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 responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: Liquidation.com clearly states in there response there policy and that "returns" cover a range of products, which leaves much room for deceptionThey claim I can review sellers or buyers feedback but that does not give much information, because these resources didn't tell me that the seller sold broken/unusable itemsLiquidation.com also failed to point out that after the brief explanation of "Returns" they tell you to see manifest for more in formation on product's coditionTo conclude this is there stated policy, and no where in it does it state that I could receive unusable (iea metal economic friendly water bottle with the top broken off rendering it unfixable by anyone but the original manufacturer)So unless they include in there explanation of Returns that you could receive garbage/unusable (items unrepairable) I think they are deceiving customers.Upon further investigation I found out that this particular auction was fulfilled by liquidation.com, so they had eyes on the products and were possibly aware of the physical condition of the itemsOur disputes team reviewed [redacted] ***’s claim and concluded that the claim could not be honored because the merchandise was properly identified, falling within the broad definition of Returns, given on the auction listing as follows:Returns were sold to a customer, who then either physically brought the item back to a store or mailed it to a specified locationReasons for returning a product may not have any correlation to its usefulness (i.e., size, color, model, etc.), and as a result that product may be in fine working orderThe majority of Returns, however, do have some operational and/or cosmetic problemDepending on a company's return policy, these items may also reflect a measurable amount of useIn 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 handlingThey generally do not come in original packaging and often do not have any of the advertised documentation or additional parts and/or accessoriesAccordingly, Returns can exhibit a wide range of individual product and package conditions that can differ substantially from the original manufacturing Regards, [redacted] ***
March 23, 2015Mr [redacted] Revdex.comK Street, NW, 10th FloorWashington, DC 20005-3404RE: Mr [redacted] , ID# [redacted] Dear Mr [redacted] ,Please accept this response to the complaint filed by Mr [redacted] with the RevDex.com Mr [redacted] described concerns he had as a buyer on our website, stating that Liquidity Services, Incwas in violation of buyer’s purchase agreement for transaction ID [redacted] Mr [redacted] believes that our company is in breach of this contract because he disagrees with the application of our company policies.Mr [redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for a lot of home improvement tools in Returns condition purchased via Liquidation.com After placing his bid, he conducted some further research on the individual auction items and determined that the retail prices advertised by the seller did not match his findings Mr [redacted] then attempted to contact Liquidation.com to cancel his bid prior to the close of the auction; however, the bid remained in force with no response from customer serviceAs described in the User Agreement that Mr [redacted] agreed to follow when he registered for our website, a bid is a binding offer This was further underlined in the auction advertising which states, “Attention: By bidding, you are entering into a legally binding contract to purchase this lot if you are the winning bidder.” Finally, Mr [redacted] had the opportunity to research the auction items prior to placing his bid He could have modified or withheld his bid if he was uncomfortable with the auction Therefore, customer service had no obligation to remove his legitimate bid from consideration.We regret that Mr [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 CH***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 responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: First of all, let me state that I appreciate Liquidation.com's response to my complaint It does give me hope that we can come to an amicable resolution As far as I can tell, Liquidation.com's proposed remedy to the issue/complaint is: " [redacted] (sp) may have his Liquidation.com user account re-activated if he wishes" While that may lead to further activity in resolving this issue (although that is not specifically stated), the reactivation of my account in and of itself does not in any way make me whole again The response provided by Liquidation.com seems to indicate that they do now seem to understand the issue and facts pertaining to this case and now in fact realize that I neither have the merchandise nor the $650+ that I paid for said merchandise If I have misunderstood Liquidation.com's remedy, then I apologize and please clarify your position.While I would gladly agree to take possesion of the original auction item as presented on the Liquidation.com website that I bid on and won, I doubt that they still have it or can locate it if they do Alternate to that solution, I would like to have the payment that I made refunded As I said, I am trying to be as reasonable as possible in not asking for reimbursement for automobile expenses, meals, etcrelated to this action I would just like the merchandise or to have my money refunded A couple points of note First, the lot in question (Auction ID# [redacted] ) was supposed to have items in it, not as stated in the response I just wanted to clarify that for the record Secondly, it is true that the chargeback was initiated after exhausting all other courses of remedy in dealing with Liquidation.com customer service and warehouse personnel Once I was essentially called a liar for saying that I never contacted Liquidation.com customer service, I could see that there was nothing else I could do to seek remedy from the company without some kind of escalation to/from a third party.Once again, thank you for your response and I look forward to final resolution of this complaint Regards, [redacted]
March 14, 2017Dear [redacted] Please accept this response to the complaint filed by [redacted] with the Revdex.com [redacted] describes concerns she has around the business practices at our Las Vegas, NV warehouse site [redacted] complaint stated the following:Selling Practices Customer’s Statement of the Problem: Company needs to be investigated for shill bidding and insider informationWhile we appreciate [redacted] raising concern about these practices, we require more specific information (i.eexamples of the stated behavior, names, dates, transactions, etc.) to more thoroughly investigate and respond to this complaint Unless we receive such information, we will not be able to provide a more detailed response to the issues raised in the complaint.Liquidation.com offers a wide variety of bulk wholesale merchandise to cater to the unique needs of professional buyersWe regret that [redacted] was dissatisfied with the auction services provided by Liquidation.comWe wish to thank you for allowing Liquidation.com a chance to address [redacted] claimRegards, [redacted]
[redacted] Revdex.comK 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, Incwere 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 pallets of Home Depot seasonal product in Returns condition purchased via Liquidation.comOn 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 listingHe said that once the pallets were opened that they were missing shelving valued over $4,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 items were missing from among the 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 (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 $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***Corporate ParalegalLiquidity Services, Inc
November 21, [redacted] Revdex.com K Street, NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20005- 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 seller on our website, stating that Liquidity Services, Inchad not properly paid her for completed transactions; however, the matter has since been resolved [redacted] sold a lot of cosmetics items on Liquidation.com on September That Transaction ID [redacted] would have paid $to her in an October check; however, in the meantime another sold auction had received a buyer dispute (Transaction ID [redacted] )When a dispute is filed on an auction, $is withheld until the dispute is resolvedThis is why [redacted] ’ check was $less than she expectedAfter resolution of the buyer dispute on Transaction ID [redacted] , the $was released to [redacted] and paid on October 23, which was after her Revdex.com dispute filingWe include paperwork with our payments to describe the payout calculationsWe apologize for any inconvenience or misunderstanding experienced by [redacted] and consider the matter closed with the funds disbursementRegards, Cary *H [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 responseIf no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved] Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because: Ok so you "normalized" my bid of $20,lets just for a moment say that was acceptable, even though I don't believe it was, why was my prior bid of $not upheldIt was placed at 5:36pm and stood until I increased my bid to the $20,amount at 6:At that point it was only minutes until you "normalized" my bidSo if it only takes you minutes to do this then that tells me the $bid was within reason for them yet this bid was also cancelledJust NOT fair businessFurther they refuse to elaborate on their retraction process and at what point do they consider a bid to be unrealistic and subject to retraction, they told me if I feel my bids will be misinterpreted in the future to contact customer service in advance but how is one to know what will be misinterpreted when they do not have any written procedure for their processWhile they did send me an email after the retraction and I called customer service as soon as possible with minutes remaining in the auction and they could have had every opportunity to do what was right and fair but did nothingJust flat out poor business practices Regards, [redacted]
March 23, [redacted] Revdex.comK 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, Incwere 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 a lot of assorted women’s fashion bracelets purchased via Liquidation.com On February 10, 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 listingHe said that of the units were not included in the shipment He also said that although the bracelets were advertised with values between $and $he discovered that the manufacturer’s brand had no product in the higher price range Additionally, [redacted] believed the value of the bracelets to be less than $each He provided photos in support of his claim.Our disputes team reviewed [redacted] ’s claim and concluded that the claim could not be honored because the photo evidence was insufficient to support the claim The disputes team requested additional information and photos since the photos received did not cover the entire claim but only a single item However, the request for more support was ignored, and the claim was denied When [redacted] expressed his displeasure with the decision, he was told that he could submit a reopen claim request along with more robust support No reopen request was filed Without the cooperation of [redacted] , the claim remained 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,Cary *H***Corporate ParalegalLiquidity Services, Inc
May 17, [redacted] Revdex.com K Street, NW, 10th Floor [redacted] , DC 20005- 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, Incwere 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 pallets of general merchandise, including toys, light fixtures, sink, toilet, etc., in Salvage condition purchased via Liquidation.comOn March 1, she filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the merchandise she received was grossly misrepresented and not in the condition advertised by the seller in the auction listingShe said that she did not receive the pallets pictured in the photos accompanying the auction listing** [redacted] opined that the merchandise she received is mostly garbage that could not even reasonably be classified as Salvage (to be used for parts only)She also said the shipment contained broken and bent light fixtures, food that had been violated by vermin, and worn out sneakersShe also stated that there were specific items, such as a wreath, which she had wanted and not receivedShe provided photos in support of her claim and requested a full refund Our disputes team reviewed ** [redacted] ’s claim and concluded that it could not be honored because her supporting photos did not show that the merchandise was in a condition other than advertisedThere were no signs of vermin, and the defects described and shown fell within the acceptable range for Salvage condition merchandiseOur definition of Salvage merchandise as provided in the auction listing reads, “Salvage assets have been identified as defective for reasons concerning their functionality, appearance or bothSalvage assets usually can only be used for parts.” Furthermore, we do not allow for returns of Salvage lotsThe following notice is explicitly listed in the auction advertising: IMPORTANT: Please note that the condition of this lot is SALVAGESalvage assets are intended for professional buyers, as most can be used only for partsThese assets are offered "as-is, where-is" with no returns, guarantees, or claims as to working condition 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
May 2, 2014Dear [redacted] ,We appreciate the opportunity to review and respond to the claims associated with [redacted] ***’s auction participation.All potential buyers are informed of the auction'procedures and agree to the Terms and Conditions at the time of registration as well as upon placement of their bidsOur records indicate that [redacted] agreed to the Terms and Conditions at the time of registration on Thu Oct 12:29:Agreement of the Terms and Conditions also occurred when [redacted] placed his winning bid on Sale [redacted] , Lot [redacted] (Tue Jan 18:43:2014) and when he placed his winning bid on Sale ***, Lot [redacted] (Wed Jan 01:07:2014) on Government Liquidation’s websiteSubsequently, on January 09, 2014, [redacted] was invoiced for both lots, and Government Liquidation received payment in full, $747.54, via his [redacted] accountA copy of the paid invoice is enclosed with this letter[redacted] then corresponded with site personnel in an effort to schedule an appointment to pithe property associated with Lot [redacted] and Lot [redacted] from Sale *** [redacted] was informed by site personnel that the property could not be located and was advised to contact Government Liquidation’s Customer Service Department for recourse.On January 17, 2014, [redacted] contacted Government Liquidation’s Customer Service Department [redacted] explained the situation to a Customer Service Representative, and the Customer Service Representative advised [redacted] to outline his concerns in writing by replying to a claim form that we would send to him.Subsequently, on January 19, 2014, [redacted] initiated a charge-back, as the claim form had not been sent to himOn January 20, 2014, the Customer Service Department verbally informed [redacted] that a full refund, $747.54, was in process and that he would be receiving a written confirmation within the coming business days.On January 23, 2014, a full refund, $747.54, was issued to [redacted] ***’s [redacted] account and a written confirmation was e-rnailed to [redacted] ***A copy of the refund confirmation is enclosed with this letterA copy of the written confirmation is enclosed with this letter.Due to the aforementioned, [redacted] cancelled the charge-back with [redacted] , as his dispute with Government Liquidation was resolved.Again, Government Liquidation wishes to thank you for allowing us to address the claims mentioned.Regards,
January 7, [redacted] Revdex.comK 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, Incwere 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 had not received his purchase or a refund, but he has since been refunded in full.On November 28, [redacted] was the winning bidder of an auction for a lot of medical devices and equipment in Returns condition purchased via Liquidation.com When he did not receive his shipment after several weeks, he filed a chargeback with [redacted] on the transaction.Shortly after the shipment should have been delivered, we discovered that the tracking number for the shipment was incorrect and therefore the shipment could not be located On December 8, it was decided that we would issue a full refund if we did not receive confirmation of delivery from the carrier In the meantime, we waited for delivery confirmation to arrive After three weeks, we moved forward with the refund and authorized a full payment of $to [redacted] ***’s account on December 26.Further, [redacted] ***’s Liquidation.com user account was de-activated as a result of the chargeback he filed with [redacted] Chargebacks are specifically prohibited in the user agreement which [redacted] agreed to follow when he registered as a user on our website There was no record of a dialogue between [redacted] and our customer service team to attempt to settle the matter, and it does not appear that an effort was made by [redacted] to request a refund.We apologize for any inconvenience experienced by [redacted] and consider the matter closed with the refund payment.Regards,Cary H***Corporate ParalegalLiquidity Services, Inc
May 17, [redacted] Revdex.com K Street, NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20005- 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, Incwere 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 four (4) items, including an [redacted] 7-inch [redacted] tablet, purchased via Liquidation.comOn February 28, he filed a dispute with our Customer Relations Department asserting that the shipment he received was missing units advertised by the seller in the auction listing** [redacted] said that he had expected to receive four [redacted] tablets, but that he had only received one tablet and some accessoriesHe requested that three more tablets be sent to him or that he be allowed to return the shipment he received for a full refund Our disputes team reviewed ** [redacted] ’s claim and concluded that the auction listing was accurate and did not validate his claim that he was missing itemsThe auction manifest clearly lists each of the four items: 7” [redacted] Tablet, Ac charger, USB Cable, and User ManualBuyers are responsible for performing due diligence before bidding on an auctionThe users of our website are equal, professional buyers and sellers conducting transactions via our Liquidation.com marketplaceA bidding mistake by the purchasing party cannot be grounds to reverse a completed transaction by a seller 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