Money Mart/Loan Mart

Good morningIn response to Mrs. [redacted] claim Carey Moving & Storage responded appropriately to the claim. A repair firm which is recommended by headquarters did repair her items that were damaged in transit. Items that are damaged are either repaired to the condition at time of move or replace...

and in this case they were able to repair. Mrs. nor Mr. [redacted] did not report any mishandaling or unprofessionalism at any time for pack, load or delivery.  Our coordinator made calls to the customer on all occasions and never was told anything regarding the crew.  The coordinator that handled her move was not even notified of any damages for also 30 days after the move occured and a claim form was mailed out and the claim form was not received for almost another 30 days. All claims that are received in our office are handled accordingly. In regards to her residential damage the customer must report within 24 hours which is stated in the letter that the customer received via email on June 7 2016 that clearly indicates that the damage must be notified within 24 hours. In this case the damage to residence was reported almost 30 days later. The 24 hour period protects the consumer and the company because once our truck leaves the residence we do not have knowledge as to what transpires at the residence.Claims are handled in serveral different ways. One is to repair if possible, replace if warranted. Research is done to find like or similar items that are broken to be cashed out or an appearance allowance is made. There are several items that have been denied because of documentation provided that was signed by the customer in this case the washer and dryer. The claim was paid out accordingly to the cash allowance however and additional $100.00 was also mailed as a goodwill gesture. I have attached documents that support how the items were cashed out. I acknowledge that it is very difficult to remain unaffected in a situation such as this, I must support the position already taken. Please reach out to me with any questions or concerns you may have.Annette C[redacted]/Claims AdjsuterCarey Moving & Storage

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. 
To offer me $25 is insulting.  That will not even cover the cost of the parts, let alone the cost of a technician to come and repair it. The refrigerator was in proper working order prior to it being moved.  There were NO pre-existing conditions.  For them to claim that their negligence in leaving it out in below freezing temperatures all day (the very thing that caused the damage) was an "act of God" is ridiculous.  It is their negligence, pure and simple. They knew, or should have known, that this could cause the damage that it did, indeed, cause.  If they were at all honorable, they would own their responsibility in this matter and have my refrigerator repaired properly, covering the full cost for the same.
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. 
Regards,
[redacted] Carey Moving & Storage has failed to provide acceptable documentation that our load was weighed. They claim their office was closed on 4/17/17 when the truck loading was completed so the load was weighed the next morning. Yet they wrote the date 4/17/17 on the hand written ‘scale ticket’.  Carey sent a picture of a metal box and of an outdated calibration seal. This proves nothing. We are asking for a date and time and weight printed out officially on an acceptable weight ticket by a scale machine. Anyone can write anything they want by hand and the driver for our move stated to both of us that the load wasn’t weighed. Their professional estimator had 2 visits to our home to do an accurate estimate. The last one was a few days before move out day. I was personally with him and made certain he looked in every closet, under beds, we had brought the few items down from the small attic, did the garage, front and back yards and a small outdoor storage cabinet both times he was there. Carey Moving has not provided documentation that they credited us for the number of boxes (half of our load) that we packed ourselves. They just said they didn't charge us. The documentation should reflect the number of boxes we packedThey have provided no justification for a 25 % increase.We do not accept that their ‘scale ticket’ meets the S C required intra-state move regulations (and by their own admission) has an inaccurate date written on it. It is unacceptable that the owner has not responded to our repeated requests for communication to resolve this. It appears to us that Carey Moving & Storage think they have no accountability for our intra-state move.

Last Friday I received a phone call from Mr. [redacted] at the SC Regulatory office.  He stated that Carey Moving & Storage had called them to discuss the complaint. Mr [redacted] said that Mr C[redacted] stated that his scale does not print the date. Mr [redacted] said he knows of a few other scales that do not print the date in SC. My husband submitted some additional information for the Regulatory office to review. Mr [redacted] said that the investigation was still on going and they would contact us with their findings and follow up with a letter.

We are sorry your move was not incident free and understand your concerns.  We take claims seriously and strive to provide as much information to our customers as possible to explain the moving process and options regarding the valuation protection.  The salesperson who handled your move has been in this industry for over 40 years and presents customers with their protection options and the cost for each.  When a customer elects their protection we believe they have an understanding of this valuation which can be found on the Estimate and Order for Service as well as in the Rights and Responsibilities brochure detailing the various options. Based on the Bill of Lading, which is a contractual agreement, and the tariff provisions under which your move took place, you chose to release your household goods at Full Value/Replacement Value Protection with a $500.00 deductible.  This deductible is applied toward your claim before we take any liability.  This deductible is like a claim you may make on your car.  The repair was less than your deductible.  Therefore, with repairs of the dresser and replacement of the lamp shade being less than $500.00, we are unable to take liability. While we appreciate the issues you have raised, the option was yours as to the selection of valuation protection desired for your move.  We hope you can understand our position in this matter.

Mike C[redacted] made call to Mrs. [redacted] to discuss details of her move and to listen to her concerns.  Mrs. [redacted] stated she will send a timeline document detailing her relocation.  In the meantime we have spoken to the Office of Regulatory Staff and reviewed the information with them to see if they notice any irregularities.  They stated they will call & talk to Mrs. [redacted].

Re: Complaint Response- Complaint ID [redacted] - Ms. [redacted]Monetary Management of California, Inc. d/b/a Money Mart hereby respectfully responds to the complaint submitted by Ms. [redacted].  According to our records, on September 21, 2016, Ms. [redacted] applied and was approved for a $4,000...

installment loan at our branch located at 5400 Stockton Blvd. in Sacramento, California.  The installment loan received has a tiered rate feature with the effective interest rate and corresponding monthly payments decreasing annually. We could not confirm that an employee named "[redacted]" worked at this store during the timeline of the complaint details.  However, we did interview the store manager whom originated this loan for Ms. [redacted].  Based on that conversation, and given the amount of time that has elapsed since this loan was originated, we could not validate the consumer's claims.  At this time, we do not report loan performance (positive or negative) to the credit bureaus for this loan product. In line with Ms. [redacted]'s comments, we have records of complaints submitted on June 6 and June 30, 2017.  [redacted] from our Customer Service Department also found and communicated similar results to Ms. [redacted] when she reviewed and responded to both complaints.  However, we did find that there was approximately a 1-week lag between the customer's complaint submission on June 6, 2017 and [redacted]'s unsuccessful first contact attempt.  As a company, our goal is to attempt to make initial contact with a customer in a timelier manner.  We will be forwarding this issue to customer Service management for review. The loan agreement signed by Ms. [redacted] is legally binding and she is still obligated to pay all amounts owing there under.  As we have no evidence of the alleged misinformation provided to Ms. [redacted], we are unable to provide the customer with her desired settlement.  We encourage Ms. [redacted] to contact our collections department at [redacted] to discuss payment arrangements that work with her budget.Sincerely, [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. 
Regards,
[redacted]
As stated in the complaint, the insurance was presented to us as coverage for the entire shipment in the event of a catastrophic event (vehicle accident) not as a coverage for negligent behavior on the part of moving personnel. Good business practice would correct the damage caused by irresponsible actions by their personnel as described in the complaint. I would not have agreed to such a large amount of coverage with a corresponding high price, when the common occurrence would be incidental damage (as in our case) for a far lesser amount. The insurance was worthless.

Review: I went to cash my check at this Money Mart on Florin rd and they basically collected money from me that I didn't owe. It all started a couple of weeks ago at the Money Mart further down on Florin rd. I don't know if the lady behind the glass was having a bad day or what but first thing she was rude. So I figured, "not my issue" and proceeded to cash my check. She ran my name through the system and she tells me I owe 30 dollars. Mind you, I haven't taken out any loans/payday advances from anywhere. I thought it was weird and told her I didn't owe them anything. The next thing she tells me is that she could get it waved and cleared. She cleared it almost in an instant. Fast forward to the 24th of July and the next thing you know I owe 94 dollars out of a check that was 134. The lady behind the counter tells me that it's a mistake from the company I work for. She told me to go up to my job and ask them for a refund because it was their mistake. I went to my job two days later and ask them if they knew anything about this. They were confused. I NEVER have problems with my checks. Collecters fee my foot!!!Desired Settlement: I want my money they took out my check. I only received 11 dollars that week.

Business

Response:

Dear Mr. [redacted]: Monetary Management of California, Inc. d/b/a Money Mart® hereby respectfully responds to the above-referenced complaint. According to our records, Mr. [redacted] cashed a payroll check from [redacted] in the amount of $69.58 on June 4, 2015. The payroll check subsequently returned and a $25.00 returned item fee was assessed for a total outstanding balance of $94.58. Ms. [redacted] returned on July 2, 2015 and cashed another payroll check in the amount of $53.29. Ms. [redacted] subsequently returned on July 24, 2015 to present a new payroll check in the amount of $134.74. At that time, Ms. [redacted] was advised of the outstanding $94.58. The outstanding balance was paid out of the check she cashed on July 24, 2015. After conducting a full investigation of Ms. [redacted]’s claims, we were unable to validate Ms. [redacted]’s statement that she was treated poorly by the store’s staff during her transaction. Our records do not show that a separate $30.00 fee was ever charged or waived when we cashed the check for Ms. [redacted] on July 2, 2015. Our records show that due to a system error we overcollected the amount of $25.00 from Ms. [redacted]. We are sending Ms. [redacted] a $25.00 refund check along with a copy of this letter and a copy of the returned check so she can pursue reimbursement of the returned check from [redacted]. Please extend our apologies to Ms. [redacted] for any inconvenience she experienced. We hope this issue has been resolved to Ms. [redacted]’s satisfaction. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at [redacted]. Thank you. Sincerely, [redacted] Compliance AnalystSent on: 8/14/2015 4:25:43 PM

Consumer

Response:

I am rejecting this response because: I don't owe Money Mart anything. If I ever owed a loan I made sure to pay it off. Why does my place of employment have to get involved? They did there part. Now it's up to Money Mart to fix this situation. I want all the money owed by Money Mart to me or I might have to take this up in court. What they're saying doesn't add up to me. Some of the dates are irrelevant and don't comply with the dates that I told you about. Matter of fact, those dates that I cashed the check, I never had any problems cashing a check in June or the beginning of July for that matter. I refuse to have my complaint swept under the rug and it hasn't been resolved.

Review: I went into this moneymart on July 24th to get a cash advance and I was told they writing not take the money out until August 13th. But they took it out with out my permission. I went in there and the manager who helped me that day said oh well I don't remember what happened all though my check clearly said August 13th so basically my bank charged me a 27.50 fee that I'm forced to pay because this company can take your money whenever they want to. And they can lie whenever they want toDesired Settlement: I would like the 27.50 fee back for my check being processed early

Business

Response:

Monetary Management of California, Inc. d/b/a Money Mart hereby respectfully responds to the above-referenced complaint. According to our records, Ms. [redacted] obtained a loan from Money Mart on July 24, 2015. This loan was due on July 31, 2015. Ms. [redacted] did not return to the store to pay in cash by the close of business on the due date. According to the terms of the loan agreement, payment was submitted electronically on August 4, 2015. It was returned by her bank unpaid on August 10, 2015.After conducting a full review of our records, we are unable to verify Ms. [redacted]'s claim that we stated that her loan payment would be deferred until August 13, 2015. Although the contract clearly stated that the loan was due on July 31, 2015. Ms. [redacted]'s check references "8/13/15" in the memo line. This indicates that the store may not have clearly communicated the correct due date to Ms. [redacted] at the time of the transaction. Thus, if Ms. [redacted] can provide proof of the fee charged by her bank, we will refund the bank fee that was a result of the misunderstood due date.Please extend our apologies to Ms. [redacted] for any inconvenience she experienced. I encourage her to contact me directly to provide proof of the bank fee at [email protected]. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at [redacted]. Thank you.Sincerely,[redacted]Compliance Analyst