Please see attachment that was sent to the customer yesterday in response to the rejection.We'd also like to clarify that the $the customer is referring to is months of the monthly shipping charge of $The wording in the contract is there to benefit the customer, not to take advantage of themWhen a new service agreement is entered into our system, we have no definitive way of knowing how many orders the customer will be placing per month so the contract is set up in the system with the standard monthly shipping charge of $ The charge is only billed to recover a portion of our direct costs to our shipping vendors The majority of our customers benefit from this small shipping charge because they order supplies multiple times a monthOnce a customer has a couple months of order history and it shows that they are only ordering once a quarter, then MRC will gladly reverse the monthly shipping charge and convert the billing to a $per order basis, because this is more beneficial to the customer Once again, there is no intention mislead or take advantage of the customer MRC is only attempting to recover its costs incurred through the shipping function As an accommodation to the customer, MRC refunded the months of $and also provided the additional $requested by the customer In our opinion this is fair consideration to close out the ***er and should not be listed on the Revdex.com website as it is clearly stated in our contracts
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by [redacted] from MRC, the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Per my complaint I have spent several hours trying to resolve issues with MRC. If they would handle these issues in a professional and timely [redacted]er on their own and per their contract, it would not require the additional time and efforts in trying to resolve through mediation.
They are not only costing our company money but costing themselves money by wasting everyone's valuable time. I appreciate the $79.00 that they overcharged us being credited back but I still want to see $100 credited towards my time and that's being considerate. This continues to drag on. [redacted] apologizes for the way his department has been running but I truly feel like this is intentional and they think if they ignore it will go away.. It's not right.
Regards,
[redacted]
[redacted]
Please see attachment that was sent to the customer yesterday in response to the rejection.We'd also like to clarify that the $31.92 the customer is referring to is 4 months of the monthly shipping charge of $7.98. The wording in the contract is there to benefit the customer, not to take advantage of them. When a new service agreement is entered into our system, we have no definitive way of knowing how many orders the customer will be placing per month so the contract is set up in the system with the standard monthly shipping charge of $7.98. The charge is only billed to recover a portion of our direct costs to our shipping vendors. The majority of our customers benefit from this small shipping charge because they order supplies multiple times a month. Once a customer has a couple months of order history and it shows that they are only ordering once a quarter, then MRC will gladly reverse the monthly shipping charge and convert the billing to a $10 per order basis, because this is more beneficial to the customer. Once again, there is no intention mislead or take advantage of the customer. MRC is only attempting to recover its costs incurred through the shipping function. As an accommodation to the customer, MRC refunded the 10 months of $7.98 and also provided the additional $100 requested by the customer. In our opinion this is fair consideration to close out the [redacted]er and should not be listed on the Revdex.com website as it is clearly stated in our contracts.
Please see attached and let me know if there's anything else needed from our end to close this complaint.Thank you.[redacted]From: [redacted]Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 10:53 AMTo: [redacted]Subject: FW: Freight Credit MemoAttachments: Invoice [redacted].pdfThis is what I sent to the...
Customer.From: [redacted]Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 5:21 PMTo: '[redacted]Subject: Freight Credit MemoMolly,Attached is the credit memo as discussed.Once again I apologize for the added time and effort that you have had to invest in sorting this mess out.Please don’t hesitate to contact me if anything else arises. I will gladly work towards
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.
Regards,
[redacted]
Please see attachment that was sent to the customer yesterday in response to the rejection.We'd also like to clarify that the $the customer is referring to is months of the monthly shipping charge of $The wording in the contract is there to benefit the customer, not to take advantage of themWhen a new service agreement is entered into our system, we have no definitive way of knowing how many orders the customer will be placing per month so the contract is set up in the system with the standard monthly shipping charge of $ The charge is only billed to recover a portion of our direct costs to our shipping vendors The majority of our customers benefit from this small shipping charge because they order supplies multiple times a monthOnce a customer has a couple months of order history and it shows that they are only ordering once a quarter, then MRC will gladly reverse the monthly shipping charge and convert the billing to a $per order basis, because this is more beneficial to the customer Once again, there is no intention mislead or take advantage of the customer MRC is only attempting to recover its costs incurred through the shipping function As an accommodation to the customer, MRC refunded the months of $and also provided the additional $requested by the customer In our opinion this is fair consideration to close out the ***er and should not be listed on the Revdex.com website as it is clearly stated in our contracts
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by [redacted] from MRC, the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Per my complaint I have spent several hours trying to resolve issues with MRC. If they would handle these issues in a professional and timely [redacted]er on their own and per their contract, it would not require the additional time and efforts in trying to resolve through mediation.
They are not only costing our company money but costing themselves money by wasting everyone's valuable time. I appreciate the $79.00 that they overcharged us being credited back but I still want to see $100 credited towards my time and that's being considerate. This continues to drag on. [redacted] apologizes for the way his department has been running but I truly feel like this is intentional and they think if they ignore it will go away.. It's not right.
Regards,
[redacted]
[redacted]
Please see attachment that was sent to the customer yesterday in response to the rejection.We'd also like to clarify that the $31.92 the customer is referring to is 4 months of the monthly shipping charge of $7.98. The wording in the contract is there to benefit the customer, not to take advantage of them. When a new service agreement is entered into our system, we have no definitive way of knowing how many orders the customer will be placing per month so the contract is set up in the system with the standard monthly shipping charge of $7.98. The charge is only billed to recover a portion of our direct costs to our shipping vendors. The majority of our customers benefit from this small shipping charge because they order supplies multiple times a month. Once a customer has a couple months of order history and it shows that they are only ordering once a quarter, then MRC will gladly reverse the monthly shipping charge and convert the billing to a $10 per order basis, because this is more beneficial to the customer. Once again, there is no intention mislead or take advantage of the customer. MRC is only attempting to recover its costs incurred through the shipping function. As an accommodation to the customer, MRC refunded the 10 months of $7.98 and also provided the additional $100 requested by the customer. In our opinion this is fair consideration to close out the [redacted]er and should not be listed on the Revdex.com website as it is clearly stated in our contracts.
Please see attached and let me know if there's anything else needed from our end to close this complaint.Thank you.[redacted]From: [redacted]Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 10:53 AMTo: [redacted]Subject: FW: Freight Credit MemoAttachments: Invoice [redacted].pdfThis is what I sent to the...
Customer.From: [redacted]Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 5:21 PMTo: '[redacted]Subject: Freight Credit MemoMolly,Attached is the credit memo as discussed.Once again I apologize for the added time and effort that you have had to invest in sorting this mess out.Please don’t hesitate to contact me if anything else arises. I will gladly work towards
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.
Regards,
[redacted]