LocateFamily.com

LocateFamily.com will remove information from public view if the individual making the request can prove that the information in question refers to himself/herselfTo do this LocateFamily.com requires that the individual provide a photograph of or a scanned image of a valid piece of identification
containing the name and address information as displayedThis should be e-mailed to LocateFamily.com via [email protected] such proof is received, LocateFamily.com will indicate in its records that the ID proof has been received for a given e-mail address and will promptly remove the information from public viewThis means that any future requests (should the information inadvertently be re-displayed) using the same e-mail address for the same information will be processed without delay.Tell us why here

Here is how you find them: BBB Upstate New York has the file--they apparently left without a forwarding address--some research shows 665 Third Street #207 San Francisco, CA 94107 Regardless of your outcome contact your congressperson and senator

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.  Regards, [redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
1) It is unreasonable and ridiculous for LocateFamily.com to compel me to create an email with a name that resembles the name in the posting on their website.  Using their example, Donald Duck could create an email address using my legal name and have the posting removed.2) It is not reasonable for LocateFamily.com to determine what is an objectionable posting on their website.  They are now engaging in a pissing contest with no logical justification for keeping the posting.  Would anyone other the subject of the posting exert this much effort to have the posting removed.3) As I stated previously, if the posting was initiated by a spurned lover, that spurned lover would have no interest in removing it.If LocateFamily.com continues to refuse to cooperate, I will engage legal counsel to have the defamatory, harassing post removed.
Regards,[redacted]  [redacted]

Revdex.com:
Attached is an invoice showing my name and address.You want these details but do not even give an email address for scanned information to be sent by reply.Hence why I have to use this 'legal' email address.I should not have to prove who I am when you have used my information without my knowledge or consent.WHO ARE YOU?????You are not being transparent - hiding behind another company profile.You truly are a dangerous scamming operation that should be removed from Google.'family'??? what a joke...you have no concept of the word, and no conscience.Shame on you for the stress and upset you cause to an older widow and thousands of other people.
Regards,
[redacted]

Unfortunately, if the individual in question is not willing to prove they are who they claim to be we will not be able to honor their request. We encourage this individual to provide us with a scanned copy of valid ID in which the name and address in question are visible, and any other information can be blurred. Once received we will confirm that the e-mail address being used is valid for the individual and address in question and will remove the information. This would also mean that any future  requests (should the information re-appear) would be processed automatically because we would already have a confirmation that the e-mail address on file is legitimate.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.
It is ridiculous for LocateFamily.com to expect me to create a new email account simply to satisfy their unreasonable requirements.  LocateFamily.com has violated my privacy and personal safety by posting a personal message that was sent to me.  I insist LocateFamily.com remove the posting,and any and all information they have about me, and prevent searches on their website from showing any of my information
Regards,
[redacted]

This individual communicated with us using 4 different e-mail addresses and various names:[redacted] 
[redacted]As you can imagine, it is almost impossible for us to...

authenticate this individual because of the unnecessary use of aliases.We are still not able to ascertain that this individual is who they claim to be, but despite this, we authorized a request to remove information that was received on February 4th 2018 and had it processed with the information removed on the same day, February 4th 2018.

Revdex.com:Yes they are correct that I sent them 6 requests to remove my information. If you request a copy of what I SENT THEM YOU WILL SEE THAT I copy and pasted whatever I COULD. 1 was lengthy. In hopes thats the link they were looking for. You know it is really sad that they will not remove my information. ASK THEM TO SEE WHAT I SENT THEM. YOU WILL SEE I PROVIDED THE INFORMATION IN VARIOUS FORMS OF WHERE I FOUND MY INFO. NOTHING HAS BEEN GOOD ENOUGH. WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO? PLEASE REMOVE MY INFORMATION, it shouldnt be this difficult. Also if you google my name both [redacted]" and "[redacted]" you will see what I want removed. Please do it ASAP Thank you!!
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Regards,[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.The police have advised me not give you my ID, as you have no legal right to ask for it. On top of that, if you have read what I wrote I said quite CLEARLY that I am married I have no ID in that surname. It is impossible. Why are you concerned about people lying to get other peoples info off your site? Stop buying peoples information if you're that concerned.You are now breaking both US and Canadian law. I have sent the owner of locatefamily.com an email, and I expect my information removed in 48 hours. You have removed other peoples here, and my lawyer has advised me that's actually great for us, because it shows you actually have no procedure you just indiscriminately remove and keep info up.
Regards,
[redacted]

We have no way of knowing that this individual is in fact who they claim to be. To prevent abuse, and as a simple means of authentication, we ask that users use an e-mail address that resembles their name.The alternative is that this individual can e-mail us a scanned copy of valid ID and we will...

promptly honor the request.

This removal request was submitted on 2018/01/16 at 08:09:07 from IP [redacted] using the e-mail in question ([redacted]).The name specified was [redacted]".Our policy is that the email address must coincide with the name otherwise we have no way of knowing if the...

individual in question is actually who he/she claims to be.We ask that this individual resubmit a new request using an e-mail address that is more similar to the name being removed.This is a simple means of authentication and is explained on our web site and a message explaining this was sent to the individual.When we receive the new request we will respect the wishes of the individual and remove the information in questions.

Our records show that this individual submitted a request to have his information removed (entry number 4 at [redacted] on 2017/06/22 using the email address "[redacted]" from IP address [redacted]" and that this information was removed from...

public view on 2017/06/23 and that a message was sent to [redacted]" indicating that the information was removed. If the individual still sees the information it is because the cache in his browser is showing it and thus he must clear his browser's cache.

The information in question has been removed.

The individual in question submitted 6 requests to have their information suspended from view via our removal form. Four of these requests were made on May 5th 2016 and two were made on May 28th 2016. The first four were rejected by our automated system because the individual did not supply...

sufficient information to process the request. The following two were rejected asking for clarification, because although some information was supplied, it was not enough for our automated system to process the request. At a minimum, our automated system requires a link to the web page containing the information in question (which this individual did not supply in the first 4 requests) and secondly the entry number pointing to the specific information in question on the page (which the individual did not provided in any of the requests). Without these 2 simple elements our automated system is unable to process requests. Had the individual in question followed the steps on the removal page/form, the information in question would have been removed from view promptly ([redacted]).Understand that the Revdex.com has no jurisdiction to intervene in these matters as our corporate entity is not constituted in the USA and as such is not obliged to adhere to US laws. HOWEVER, as we feel it is important to be a good corporate citizen we have made a simple and easily accessible form available for individuals to complete to have their requests submitted. We respect the wishes of everyone and respond promptly to requests for the suspension of information.As a gesture of good faith, we have performed a manual search for the information in question and have submitted a request to have the information in question suspended from view.

The individual in question submitted 3 requests to us: on 2016/02/11, 2017/05/12 and 2017/05/17 at 17:13:31.In his first and second requests he did not explain the situation nor did he indicate his name. Therefore our automated system did not refer the request to an administrator...

(which it would have done had there been a written comment associated with the request) and rejected his request because the name specified [redacted] did not resemble the email used "[redacted]In the last request dated yesterday May 17th 2017, he indicated his name as "[redacted]" and explained the situation in the comments field, and therefore the request was in the queue to be reviewed and approved by an administrator today May 18th 2017.Our web site explains that a request can take between 24 and 48 hours to process, but instead of being patient he submitted this complaint, which we received at 11:36 am, less than 24 hours since his last request.The telephone number in question has been removed.

This individual submitted 4 removal requests for the name "[redacted]" on February 3rd 2018 and 2 requests on February 4th 2018, using the e-mail address "[redacted]". In all cases we replied that the e-mail address used does not correspond to the name in question, and asked that...

they use an e-mail address that is more similar to the name so as to have a simple means of authenticating the request. We have no way of knowing whether this individual is actually who he/she claims to be. We would suggest that this individual either use a more appropriate e-mail address or provide us (via [redacted]) with a scanned digitized copy of valid ID and we will promptly remove the information in question.

We apologize for the error, we did in fact obtain your documents, and the error has been corrected, the information in question has been removed. Thank you

Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.  With an asterisk.  The company in the future should not send out erroneous messages stating that information was NOT removed when in fact it has been.Regards, [redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]