Mobile Home Parts Store

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted] , and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because: [My complaint was properly addressed to Reed E [redacted] (now RELX Group plc) and RELX Group has not responded Their subsidiary LexisNexis Risk Solutions is hereby attempting to answer a complaint which is not addressed to them, nor does this small subsidiary have access to all relevant information, including but not limited to the customer list(s) of the parent company RELX I have never used my name as a company name and, further, a UCC search does not reveal a UCC filing with such a name My previous one complaint (not 5) to a different Revdex.com relating to the LexisNexis subsidiary resulting in LexisNexis telling me the [redacted] who supposedly is not my father -- in fact is an individual by the same name who they list at the same address as my sister-in-law [redacted] (a name and address that I also opted out from) Please note that this response today does not represent a 2nd complaint against RELX, it is merely a follto my one and only complaint (not complaints).] In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above Sincerely, [redacted] ***

This correspondence is in response to the complaint RELX Group and its subsidiary, LexisNexis Risk Solutions FL Inc("LexisNexis"), received from your office on behalf of [redacted] ***Thank you for your patience while we reviewed this matter and prepared the appropriate responseLexisNexis has reviewed [redacted] ***’s concern and reports the following: Please be advised that [redacted] has been in regular contact with LexisNexis since he initially contacted our offices on September **, Contact from [redacted] included five previous complaints to the Ohio Revdex.com, as well as complaints to the Ohio Attorney General and LexisNexis’ offices in Alpharetta, GeorgiaAs of today, [redacted] ***’s identity does not appear in any of our public-facing productsWe additionally suppressed his identity from our Accurint productWhen [redacted] ***’s request to have his information suppressed was received he was mailed a letter which included the following verbiage: “Please note that your information will remain in the following products and services: restricted public records products which are available to commercial and government entities that meet LexisNexis credentialing requirements and are used to detect and prevent fraud, enforce transactions, perform due diligence, and other critical business and government functions; products regulated by the Fair Credit Reporting Act; third party data available through real time gateways; news; and legal documentsThis suppression request does not expire, and LexisNexis will attempt to suppress all of the information available based on the information you provided in your opt-out requestDue to the variations in personal information contained in public records, or insufficient or inaccurate information provided in a suppression request, it is possible that personal information about you may be reintroduced to LexisNexis products in the futureIf you become aware that your personal information is available through LexisNexis publicly facing products in the future, please notify the LexisNexis Privacy Hotline and the issue will be investigated so that we may take appropriate action.” LexisNexis does not use data supplied from individuals for the purposes of an individual request for information suppression (commonly referred to as an “opt out”) to be used in any of our productsAny new data on an individual would come from a third-party data sourceLexisNexis previously explained this process to [redacted] ***After receiving [redacted] ***’s requests to have his information, along with the information of family members and businesses removed from our public-facing products, LexisNexis processed the requests and opted the individuals and businesses out of our public-facing productsPlease note that we opted out name and address combinations for [redacted] and his relativesDue to the nature of [redacted] ***’s complaint, we additionally removed his identity from our Accurint productKindly be advised that the Accurint report is not a consumer report, and, as such, the Accurint report is not governed by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (U.S.C § 1681, et seq.)After subsequent regular contact from [redacted] ***, LexisNexis Corporate Counsel, Jillian B***, contacted [redacted] by phone on March 10, to explain how data is linked in our systems and to provide him with a clear understanding of the challenges in processing his specific opt-out requestsAmong these challenges is the fact that there are numerous Peter Kirns and David Kirns living in the United States, and thus, we are not able to suppress the names altogether as he requestedDuring our conversations, [redacted] mentioned the reporting of his name and home address in association with the company, The Camelback Group which presented additional challenges in that [redacted] listed himself as a registered agent for The Camelback Group whose company’s information is in fact made public and shares an address with his homePlease note it is not part of LexisNexis’ standard procedures to opt businesses out of our databases and our systems cannot suppress individual fields within a business recordThe opt out was completed and his company is no longer reporting in our public-facing productsLastly, it was explained to [redacted] that these suppressions will not prevent other companies from reporting this information, nor does it guarantee that the information will be forever suppressed from our databases due to the complexities with data matching as we discussedIf [redacted] should have any further questions, please have him contact the LexisNexis Consumer Center via email at [redacted] or by phone at [redacted] The LexisNexis Consumer Center’s hours of operation are Monday – Friday from AM to PM Eastern TimeThank you for allowing LexisNexis the opportunity to assist [redacted] ***

This correspondence is in response to the complaint LexisNexis Risk Solutions FL Inc. ("LexisNexis") received from your office on behalf of [redacted]. Thank you for your patience while we reviewed this matter and prepared the appropriate response. First, please note that our delay in responding to [redacted]’s latest comments were due to the misrouting of the mailed complaint your office sent on July 8, 2016. While the communication was addressed to our parent company, Reed E[redacted] (now RELX Group plc), it was meant for the subsidiary LexisNexis Risk Solutions Inc. (“LexisNexis”). We apologize for the delay in the response as the letter has now been forwarded to the correct department to properly address [redacted]’s comments. We believe we have thoroughly resolved [redacted]’s complaints as noted below. LexisNexis has repeatedly denied [redacted]’s assertion that the data he provided to opt out of certain LexisNexis products was used in our databases and sold to customers. The only use of the data [redacted] provided was to search our databases and suppress records. The online search tool referenced in [redacted]’s complaint, Radaris, is not a LexisNexis entity. We also conducted a search of our records and questioned our business and no one found a record of selling data to Radaris. [redacted] submitted to the Revdex.com of Ohio on 5 occasions and this is now the second submission to your office. LexisNexis takes [redacted]’s assertions that his data was not fully removed from PeopleWise extremely serious and has thoroughly investigated each time the issue was raised. In the case of his latest assertion that the name “Peter Kirn” with an address of “Greenwood Village, CO” is still displaying in the product, we were not told by [redacted] when processing his opt out that he had also used the name Peter Kirn as a company name. In our systems there is a record from a UCC filing indicating a business named Peter Kirn. [redacted] continues to assert that his deceased father is still displaying in our products. Please note that LexisNexis does not remove deceased individuals from products because their data is still valid and the fact that they are noted as deceased helps aid in preventing identity theft and other individuals from using their personal information. However, due to the serious nature of [redacted]’s complaint, we opted [redacted]’s father out of certain products, including PeopleWise. The record he is viewing for David Kirn which [redacted] believes is his father is actually a separate David Kirn who was born over 40 years after his father and has a different social security number. These are two different individuals as we have informed [redacted] previously. There are a multitude of Peter Kirns in the country and records do not all have middle names. We will continue to work to ensure that [redacted]’s information is not displayed in our public facing products and hope that he is satisfied with this response. If [redacted] should have any further questions, please have him contact the LexisNexis Consumer Center via email at [email protected] or by phone at 866-868-95*4. The LexisNexis Consumer Center’s hours of operation are Monday – Friday from 8 AM to 7 PM Eastern Time. Thank you for allowing LexisNexis the opportunity to assist [redacted].

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:

[My complaint was properly addressed to Reed E[redacted] (now RELX Group plc) and RELX Group has not responded.  Their subsidiary LexisNexis Risk Solutions is hereby attempting to answer a complaint which is not addressed to them, nor does this small subsidiary have access to all relevant information, including but not limited to the customer list(s) of the parent company RELX.  I have never used my name as a company name and, further, a UCC search does not reveal a UCC filing with such a name.  My previous one complaint (not 5) to a different Revdex.com relating to the LexisNexis subsidiary resulting in LexisNexis telling me the [redacted] who supposedly is not my father -- in fact is an individual by the same name who they list at the same address as my sister-in-law [redacted] (a name and address that I also opted out from).  Please note that this response today does not represent a 2nd complaint against RELX, it is merely a follow-up to my one and only complaint (not 2 complaints).]
 
 
 
 
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved:First, let me say that Reed E[redacted] has not denied my charge that they used the opt-out information I provided to them to improve the accuracy, marketability, and profitability of their LexID product.  It is vividly clear that this company used my confidentially supplied information -- provided by me for the sole purpose of opting out – to update their non-forward facing database(s).  And Reed E[redacted] does not deny that forward-facing product, which was supposed to be opted out within 72 hours – was in fact updated and sold to Reed E[redacted] clients for several months.  Upon information and believe, clients such as, but not limited to, Radaris.com.Yes, I did file one complaint with the Ohio Revdex.com.  Jillian B[redacted] in Georgia responded that that one complaint.  We exchanged information and updates approximately four times.  But one complaint with subsequent updates does not constitute six different complaints to two different states!  It is one complaint relating to LexisNexis.When it became clear that parent company Reed E[redacted] in New York was also a beneficiary of the unjust actions of LexisNexis, I expanded my complaint to include Reed E[redacted].PeopleWise is a Reed E[redacted] subsidiary.  To this day you can type in my name in the Business Name tab of PeopleWise and see my forward facing information.  This is spite of the fact that there is not and never was a business by that name in Greenwood Village, CO.My father’s name is still forward facing in Reed E[redacted]’s subsidiary KnowX.com, even though the address they publish was on my father’s death certificate (which was submitted to Reed E[redacted] multiple times).It is absolutely laughable that Jillian B[redacted] and Reed E[redacted] continue to say it is difficult to opt out my name because so many people in the world share my name.  To the contrary, there is not one other person in the entire world who shares my first name, middle name, and last name.  There is only one other person in the world who shares my first name, middle initial, last name.  There are fewer than two dozen people in the world who share my first and last name.It is a lie to say that Reed E[redacted] does not publish my opted out information in forward facing product.  And it is forward facing for an address where my children still live – an address where I have in the past received threats to my life and the lives of my children.  Reed E[redacted] is unconscionable in their disregard for their written Privacy Policy – and in their quest for profit over the physical safety of those U.S. citizens they abuse. 
 
 
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above

This communication is written in response to the Revdex.com complaint filed by the LexisNexis customer in Complaint ID [redacted].  The customer is an attorney practicing in the Port Washington, NY area who subscribed to our legal research database.  This customer complains that not all of the...

content she believed would be included in her subscription package was provided to her by LexisNexis.  This customer also states that she was to receive a 3 month “trial period” with no money due until month four.  These complaints are unfounded. The contract that this customer signed with LexisNexis clearly describes the content she was to receive as: (a) Federal Labor & Employment Agency & Admin Materials, (b) Labor and Employment Law Analytical, and (c) NY Enhanced with Full Federal.  This customer was given the opportunity to review the contract (including these content listings) before it was signed.  In addition, the free period of her contract is clearly stated as 8/*/15 to 9/**/15 or two months (not three).  Also, the contract states that this is a “free period,” not a trial period which allowed this customer to terminate.  The agreement was non-terminable through September **, 2018, as we allowed this customer a free trial of the database before the contract was signed. We also have a copy of the proposal that was presented to this customer before she signed the contract, and it matches the content and free period reflected in the signed agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, customer satisfaction is of the highest importance to LexisNexis.  We have therefore terminated this customer’s account as requested by her.  We will credit all amounts back to her account for charges incurred in November and December such that no further amounts will be due and owing by her to LexisNexis.

This correspondence is in response to the complaint RELX Group and its subsidiary, LexisNexis Risk Solutions FL Inc. ("LexisNexis"), received from your office on behalf of [redacted]. Thank you for your patience while we reviewed this matter and prepared the appropriate response. LexisNexis has...

reviewed [redacted]’s concern and reports the following: Please be advised that [redacted] has been in regular contact with LexisNexis since he initially contacted our offices on September **, 2015. Contact from [redacted] included five previous complaints to the Ohio Revdex.com, as well as complaints to the Ohio Attorney General and LexisNexis’ offices in Alpharetta, Georgia. As of today, [redacted]’s identity does not appear in any of our public-facing products. We additionally suppressed his identity from our Accurint product. When [redacted]’s request to have his information suppressed was received he was mailed a letter which included the following verbiage: “Please note that your information will remain in the following products and services: restricted public records products which are available to commercial and government entities that meet LexisNexis credentialing requirements and are used to detect and prevent fraud, enforce transactions, perform due diligence, and other critical business and government functions; products regulated by the Fair Credit Reporting Act; third party data available through real time gateways; news; and legal documents. This suppression request does not expire, and LexisNexis will attempt to suppress all of the information available based on the information you provided in your opt-out request. Due to the variations in personal information contained in public records, or insufficient or inaccurate information provided in a suppression request, it is possible that personal information about you may be reintroduced to LexisNexis products in the future. If you become aware that your personal information is available through LexisNexis publicly facing products in the future, please notify the LexisNexis Privacy Hotline and the issue will be investigated so that we may take appropriate action.” LexisNexis does not use data supplied from individuals for the purposes of an individual request for information suppression (commonly referred to as an “opt out”) to be used in any of our products. Any new data on an individual would come from a third-party data source. LexisNexis previously explained this process to [redacted]. After receiving [redacted]’s requests to have his information, along with the information of family members and businesses removed from our public-facing products, LexisNexis processed the requests and opted the individuals and businesses out of our public-facing products. Please note that we opted out 70 name and address combinations for [redacted] and his relatives. Due to the nature of [redacted]’s complaint, we additionally removed his identity from our Accurint product. Kindly be advised that the Accurint report is not a consumer report, and, as such, the Accurint report is not governed by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C § 1681, et seq.). After subsequent regular contact from [redacted], LexisNexis Corporate Counsel, Jillian B[redacted], contacted [redacted] by phone on March 10, 2016 to explain how data is linked in our systems and to provide him with a clear understanding of the challenges in processing his specific opt-out requests. Among these challenges is the fact that there are numerous Peter Kirns and David Kirns living in the United States, and thus, we are not able to suppress the names altogether as he requested. During our conversations, [redacted] mentioned the reporting of his name and home address in association with the company, The Camelback Group which presented additional challenges in that [redacted] listed himself as a registered agent for The Camelback Group whose company’s information is in fact made public and shares an address with his home. Please note it is not part of LexisNexis’ standard procedures to opt businesses out of our databases and our systems cannot suppress individual fields within a business record. The opt out was completed and his company is no longer reporting in our public-facing products. Lastly, it was explained to [redacted] that these suppressions will not prevent other companies from reporting this information, nor does it guarantee that the information will be forever suppressed from our databases due to the complexities with data matching as we discussed. If [redacted] should have any further questions, please have him contact the LexisNexis Consumer Center via email at [redacted] or by phone at [redacted]. The LexisNexis Consumer Center’s hours of operation are Monday – Friday from 8 AM to 7 PM Eastern Time. Thank you for allowing LexisNexis the opportunity to assist [redacted].