Looking at notes in our system this claim has not been completely resolved yet there is still emails going back and forth about getting someone out to the residence to see about repairing the furniture this complaint is a little premature as we are still working with the customer to settle the claim
and to get items repaired and we will continue to do so
*** *** from our Quality Control Department was to look into this when she was contacted on I believe it was Friday the 30th. *** has taking the action and reviewed the paperwork and customer this morning had a credit put back onto their credit card in the amount of $Thank You
!
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
Regards,
*** *** In regards to the answer the business gave. The business was unwilling to work with us until we contacted the Revdex.com. We are willing to work with them in getting our damaged item fixed and they now have said they will work with us but nothing has been said about the missing items. Their management had originally said that even though our item was damaged it still could be used and they were unwilling to help us have the damaged fixed. Since we filed with you they are now saying we could get an estimate on having our item fixed but nothing has been said about the missing items
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
Thier is no offer for compensation in this last messageThey aren't even offering the amount of cents per pound because they are excluding items that weight a lotThey also speak of *** as if he is still a employee of theirsHe is notI called and attempted to speak with him and was told "'he no longer works here"Their needs to be a fair and reasonable offer made or a different approach on my end will be takenAlso they don't address the packing materials I was charged for that I did not receive my items wrappedThey also don't address charging me for a storage where they charged per items that they ruined for example the couch they cracked in halfWhy should I pay to store a ruined item???
Regards,
*** ***
Hello!!The complaint against
the moving company said that it would reach out to me and offer me another settlement amountI have not received or heard from themI would like to re open the caseI didn't realize be agreeing to them offering me another amount would close the casePlease advise as to how or what I need to doThank you *** ***
*** ***
To Whom It May Concern
We are aware that *** *** is unhappy with our decision to deny an alleged property damage claimAs a courtesy, we have turned the claim over to the Military Claims Office in Norfolk, VA, which is standard operating procedure for a military member when they are
in disagreement as to the settlement of their claim
We have shared with *** *** the reasoning for this denial:
1) His move took place in July 02,At the time of delivery, the alleged property damage caused by our crew, was not documented on his Loss & Damage Statement or the Scorecard signed by his wife, on the day of the move(this is SOP on a military move)
2) *** *** notified Republic Moving of his alleged property damage claim on October 15, That is year and months after our crew allegedly scratched the hardwood floorsThe rules pertaining to shipments moved under SDDC's DPS Program state very clearly, that he needs to notify the TSP of the damage within days
3) *** *** initiated the claim filing in the DPS System on Sept11, (days after his move was completed)However, he did NOT file the alleged floor damage claim until October 24, (days after his move was completed)This means that he did not meet the day notification of loss and damage deadline
As a courtesy, *** *** (Republic Employee), arranged for an inspection by a 3rd party serviceApparently, *** *** notified his landlord / property management companySoon after we received an email from the floor repair company and the ***, not requesting that we repair the floor BUT replace an area of the floorEmails were exchanged between *** at Republic, the floor repair company, and *** *** over the next couple months
In mid-January, *** brought the file to me for reviewI told her that I was hesitant to authorize the repair for two reasons: (1) Republic was not notified of the damages in a timely manner and (2) there was no proof that our crews were responsibleMeanwhile, we requested the claim file from the TSP who managed the claimInformation contained in that file confirmed the timeline for filing
February 9, 2015, *** (Republic) advised *** *** that she was NOT authorized to proceed with any repairs or replacement of the floors, that his claim was denied by management
February 10, 2015, I emailed *** *** and advised of my review of his claim, and that I felt there was no proof that our crews damaged the floor year and months prior, and that he did not notify our office in a timely manner to file his claim for property damage
February, 17, 2015, I received an email from *** *** requesting that I reconsider, and he argued my points of denialMeanwhile, *** reached out to the Military Claims Office (MCO) in Norfolk, and inquired if the claim had been filed (per SOP)The email response she received indicated that the MCO had no record of communication with *** *** on this matterShe went one step further, and contacted the local Personal Property office to inquire if *** *** reached out to their office to file his claimAgain, we were advised that there was no communication documented between the PPSO and *** *** pertaining to the claim
Today, I have reached out to the Landlord / Property Management Company to advise of our findingsHave not received a return phone call or email response as of 2:We believe that the MCO will find resolution on this matter, as this is their Function in the SDDC Personal Property Program (DP3)
We take these matters very seriously, as we move a lot of military families in and out of San Diego and the surrounding military installationsWe have done what we feel is in the best interest of the military member, and turned this over to the Military Claims Office to reviewWe have every confidence, that the MCO will get this resolved quickly
Should you need any supporting documentation, please don’t hesitate to contact me directly
Respectfully,
*** ***
Republic Moving
Spoke with the claims department they are still working on getting estimates to see about repairing items and then also about the claims manager speaking with management about the other items.thank you
We
have an ongoing claim settlement going with this customer: she has been given
two offers to settle her claim which she has refused. We are preparing
one more: if she refuses again we will submit this file to the Revdex.com for
their Mediation services.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by 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
DoD
My responses to the comments made by Republic are highlighted below (for sake of clarity, I've included the text from the comments made by Ms[redacted] from Republic and provided responses to applicable remarks):"To
Whom It May Concern
We
are aware that [redacted] is unhappy with our decision to deny an alleged
property damage claimAs a courtesy, we have turned the claim over to the
Military Claims Office in Norfolk, VA, which is standard operating procedure
for a military member when they are in disagreement as to the settlement of
their claim
We
have shared with [redacted] the reasoning for this denial:
1)
His move took place in July 02,At the time of delivery, the
alleged property damage caused by our crew, was not documented on his
Loss & Damage Statement or the Scorecard signed by his wife, on the day of
the move(this is SOP on a military move).
Response (#1): Republic is factually in error. Military PCS regulations allow for the option
to have movers unpack household goods in their entirety or partially. Any damages identified the day of the move
are to be documented on the forms provided at the time of the move. Any additional damages are to be filed within
days. This would include any
additional damages identified after movers have left. This allowance accommodates the impossibility
of any service member to realistically inspect every item contained in a 17,
lbs move in what amounts to roughly hours.
This is practically impossible, and military regulation accounts for
that, which is why the days are provided to service members
2)
[redacted] notified Republic Moving of his alleged property damage claim on October
15, That is year and months after our crew allegedly
scratched the hardwood floorsThe rules pertaining to shipments moved under
SDDC's DPS Program state very clearly, that he needs to notify the TSP of the
damage within days. Response (#2): Republic is correct in that I notified
Republic Moving year and months after the crew damaged the hardwood
floors. What Republic fails to mention
is the requirement for military service members to file damage claims via the
Defense Personal Property System (DPPS) within days, not notify the moving
company directly I followed this
required procedure and remained within the timeline required (days). I was notified on May that my claim
was finalized. After subsequent inquiry
into how to handle the declined floor damage claim, I received an e-mail from
Global Claim Services on Aug (see ENCL 2) that directed me to contact
my "delivery agent". I subsequently
contacted the TSP at the number provided, per instructions in the e-mail. So, while my contact with Republic was year
and months from the date of the damage they caused, I handled the claim in
full accordance with military procedures, and from the date it was made aware
to me that I needed to contact Republic (Aug 2014) to the date I actually
contacted them, it was only months and days
3)
[redacted] initiated the claim filing in the DPS System on Sept11, (
days after his move was completed)However, he did NOT file the alleged floor
damage claim until October 24, (days after his move was
completed)This means that he did not meet the day notification of
loss and damage deadline. Response (#3): Republic is making a claim. Documentation attached (see attachment ENCL
1) attests to this fact. The LDR date
(Loss-Damage-Report date) indicates the claim was submitted days (not 71),
and clearly states that all damages were filed within prescribed timelines
(note the statement, "Not Late: LDR has
all items on it" in red text)
As
a courtesy, [redacted] (Republic Employee), arranged for an inspection by a
3rd party serviceApparently, [redacted] notified his landlord / property
management companySoon after we received an email from the floor repair
company and the [redacted], not requesting that we repair the floor BUT replace
an area of the floor. Emails were
exchanged between [redacted] at Republic, the floor repair company, and [redacted]
over the next couple monthsResponse ("As a courtesy
"):
ENCL highlights the e-mail communications between myself and a Republic
representative ([redacted]). In this e-mail
thread, an e-mail from [redacted] (Republic) dated Oct indicates that
following the estimate provided by the local contracting company, Republic will
"move forward with
assigning him to call you and schedule the repairs." This in no way suggests
this was a "courtesy inspection" and only indicates they have approved the
repair. In no way did Republic ever
indicate they were still reviewing the claim for approval purposes. Moving forward with scheduling the repair is
clear communication that the repair has been approved. Additionally, ENCL corroborates
above-referenced e-mail. This is an
e-mail from the local contractor assigned to conduct the repairs. In this e-mail, the representative clearly
asks us to identify dates so they could "begin working" on our floors. As can be seen in this e-mail, there is
nothing that states they either performed a "courtesy inspection", nor were
they still arbitrating over the claim to determine if they were authorized (or
not) to perform the repair.
In mid-January, [redacted] brought the
file to me for reviewI told her that I was hesitant to authorize the repair
for two reasons: (1) Republic was not notified of the damages in a timely
manner and (2) there was no proof that our crews were responsibleMeanwhile,
we requested the claim file from the TSP who managed the claimInformation
contained in that file confirmed the timeline for filing. Response ("In
mid-January
"): Republic is making a
claim. Again, see ENCL for the
documentation stating that my claim was submitted in accordance with prescribed
timelines. Secondly, in a phone
conversation with Republic representative, I asked for written documentation
from the moving company that articulated their timelines for submitting a
claim. I explained that it was not until
Aug (see ENCL 2) that I was instructed to contact the "delivery
agent." My initial contact to Republic
was Oct 2014, months and days, from the e-mail directing me to contact
them. Despite my request on Feb
in a phone conversation with a Republic representative ([redacted]), Republic has yet
to provide any documentation to me that ndicates this time period exceeds a
threshold for reporting damages
February 9, 2015,
[redacted] (Republic) advised [redacted] that she was NOT authorized to proceed with
any repairs or replacement of the floors, that his claim was denied by
management.
February 10, 2015,
I emailed [redacted] and advised of my review of his claim, and that I felt
there was no proof that our crewsdamaged the floor year and months prior,
and that he did not notify our office in a timely manner to file his claim for
propertydamage. Response ("February 10, 2015
"): Republic
representative claims she "felt" there was no proof. I have sufficient proof. I have provided pictures to the
Transportation Service Provider on multiple occasions – both in October
when they asked for them the first time, and again in February when they asked
for the same pictures again. I have a
walkthrough inspection from the landlord with no indication said damages were
there prior to our occupying the house.
The owner of the house who saw the scratches also attested these were
not there prior. I have testimony from
my wife, who was 7-months pregnant at the time the movers arrived, that the
movers brought our couches into the house and dragged them across the
floor. I was physically not present at
the time, and there was no way she was physically able to move a couch. It was not until later that evening, after
movers had left and after she signed the documents that we learned of the
damages
February, 17, 2015,
I received an email from [redacted] requesting that I reconsider, and he
argued my points of denialMeanwhile, [redacted] reached out to the Military Claims
Office (MCO) in Norfolk, and inquired if the claim had been filed (per SOP)
The email response she received indicated that the MCO had no record of
communication with [redacted] on this matterResponse
("February 17, 2015
"): This is
factually in error and not consistent with procedures as I was directed to
comply with. MCO handles damages to
household goods. Global Claim servicesrepresentative instructed me on Aug to contact the delivery agent (see ENCL
2). Of course there is no communication
with the MCO – I had no issues with the other items claimed, which were all
part of my household goods, vice the floor.
She went one step further, and contacted the local Personal Property
office to inquire if [redacted] reached out to their office to file his claim
Again, we were advised that there wasno communication documented between
the PPSO and [redacted] pertaining to the claim
Today,
I have reached out to the Landlord / Property Management Company to advise of
our findingsHave not received a return phone call or email response as of
2:We believe that the MCO will find resolution on this matter, as this is
their Function in the SDDC Personal Property Program (DP3). MCO will not find a resolution to this
matter. Response
("Today, I have
"): It is not a part of
household goods. It is a responsibility
of the moving company, per ENCL
We
take these matters very seriously, as we move a lot of military families in and
out of San Diego and the surrounding military installationsWe have done
what we feel is in the best interest of the military member, and turned this
over to the Military Claims Office to reviewWe have every confidence,
that the MCO will get this resolved quickly.
Response ("We take these matters
"): Republic has not done all they can do. They have misrepresented themselves, as is
clear in the attachments provided. I
have patiently and politely tried to articulate the details of the
situation. I was initially received with
overwhelming assistance and what is clear acceptance of responsibility of the
damages with a clear path to getting the issue repaired. Suddenly, and without warning, the decision
to move forward was reversed with abrupt termination of any future
communication by Ms[redacted] (Republic) in an e-mail to me. I am appalled that such a reversal is
allowed. I have moved my family times
in years of service, and this is the first time I have ever encountered such
challenges
Should
you need any supporting documentation, please don't hesitate to contact me
directly
Respectfully,
[redacted]
Republic Moving" [redacted]NO FURTHER RESPONSES[redacted]
Regards,
[redacted]
1. There will be no refund on the storage as it is a service that we provided.2. Regarding the paying for packing that did not happen, we are reviewing the pwk with what was charged and if there is any discrepancies and needs a refund of any monies we will refund that after the audit.3. We have made numerous offers and will be making no more and will goto arbitration with the Revdex.com. Update:
Unfortunately it is the busiest time of the year for us in the industry, no excuse but we do try our best to accommodate our customer in going back to the residence to pick up their empty cartons (as when the deliveries are made the crews at that time are supposed to unpack and take away the debris...
that same day) and again we do this to accommodate our customer and the ones that don't want us to unpack their items the crews do try their best to go back and get the empties when we are notified. Our apologies for the what you feel was horrible customer service as that is one thing that our company does thrive on is excellent customer service, so I am just astonished that you did not receive that type of service. I have emailed the customer to find out all details and to take care of getting the empty cartons picked up as soon as possible, I am just waiting to hear from her and we will get this taking care of.
From: [redacted] <[redacted][email protected]>Date: February 16, 2016 at 11:15:54 AM PSTTo: [redacted] <[redacted]>Cc: Republic Claims <[email protected]>Subject: Re: [redacted]Hello [redacted],Just so I am clear on the combined agreement for moving and services and freight bill. My items were taken by [redacted] as stated on the invoice? [redacted] had told me the day prior to the move since it was scheduled less then 3 days prior. That regular 60 cent per pound did not apply. It also did not state that items would be excluded.On Feb 10, 2016, at 2:52 PM, [redacted] <[redacted]> wrote:Dear Mrs. [redacted],We are pleased to advise you that we have completed our review of your claim dated 10/28/2015. We find that you elected to release your house hold goods at a value not to exceed 60 cents per pound per article; hence our maximum liability has been based on that election: Italian wood hutch 120 lbs. $72.00#131 chair 14 lbs. $8.40#115 white dining chair 9 lbs. $5.40#113 white dining chair 9 lbs. $5.40Oil painting 13 lbs. $7.80Formal dining table 75 lbs. $45.00Formal dining table-base 25 lbs. $15.00Iron DENIED – PACKED BY OWNER #157 recliner chair 70 lbs. $42.00Blue couch 80 lbs. $48.00White couch 86 lbs. $51.60Artificial plant 12 lbs. $7.20Water garden hose 10 lbs. $6.00Wood framed mirror 60 lbs. $36.00Tool container tote 10 lbs. $6.00Tool container tote 10 lbs. $6.00California king mattress 74 lbs. $44.40Curling iron DENIED – PACKED BY OWNER White dining chair 9 lbs. $5.40#191 gold vase 8 lbs. $4.80Hotel collection trash can 5 lbs. $3.00 Hotel collection soaps 2 lbs. $1.20Welcome mat 3 lbs. $1.80 T.V. stand #95 DENIED – PRE-EXISTING DAMAGEDesk #170 47 lbs. $28.20Night stand 19 lbs. $11.40Vase PBO packed by owner DENIEDItalian wood Desk #130 80 lbs. $48.00Office -art 27 lbs. $16.20Bed room painting 12 lbs. $7.20Hallway art 48 lbs. $28.80Great room art 48 lbs. $28.80 2 candle sticks 2 lbs. $1.20T.V. stand # 169 DENIED – PRE-EXISTING DAMAGEChina plate 3 lbs. $1.80Glass & wood coffee table DENIED – PRE-EXISTING DAMAGEKids white mirror 16 lbs. $9.60Kids night stand #142 DENIED – PRE-EXISTING DAMAGE Love Seat # 138 92 lbs. $55.20Foot rest #137 DENIED – PRE-EXISTING DAMAGE #067 DENIED – PACKED BY OWNER #242 DISH PACK – WET DENIED – NOT NOTATIONS AT DELIVERY ON DELIVERY DOCS#95 T.V. STAND DENIED – PRE-EXISTING DAMAGE TREADMILL DENIED- NORMAL WEARTOTAL SETTLEMENT: $658.80Finally, upon receipt of your acceptance of this offer in writing, (please sign the attached claim release and return it to me) we will immediately process payment in the amount of $658.80. You should receive a check within 7 to 10 days of processing. Please let me know if you have any questions or perhaps you require further information. Thank you! Kind Regards, [redacted]Claims Manager
Please see attached you will notice that on her estimate she signs for basic .60 cent valuation and also on the Bill of Lading she wrote in .60 cents and also initialed ne3xt to it. To answer the questions you have should actually be answered by the claims manager who has been working with this customer as the last I heard is that we were taking her to mediation through the Revdex.com. Also [redacted]o the sales representative who has more than 20 years in this industry and is very accurate and very good at what he does he would have never told her any different on the valuation.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by 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.The company on 2/11/16 did not give a additional 3rd offer like they had informed you the Revdex.com that they would do. That was the date of their 2nd offer that I 100% rejected. Also they told me that after my move date that I had 9 months to give them a list of damaged items. It's not my fault that this company ruined so much of my furniture that I didn't catch it all at one time. I tried to get photos and the claims going asap! My drop off of items was on late Oct 2015. It's only in Feb 2016 that I noticed the two additional stands were damaged. We can do this either way. But their was no 3rd offer that should have included all the packing materials I was charged, the storage, and the items they tried to exclude for no reason and the 2 extra night stands. The dishonesty of this company doesn't surprise me. You saw it yourself they said they would make a 3rd offer which I am sure they originally had no intention of doing and then just sat back hoping I would forget they damaged over 20,000$ worth of my items.
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by 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.
Problem: Damaged large piece of furniture and lost 2 other pieces. Refused to work with us in getting item repaired and replacing lost itemsDesired Outcome: Republic Moving originally said that they would pay to have our item repaired and for us to get a quote to have the work done We sent the quote to them and have never heard from them since.Regards,
[redacted]
Attached are a few documents pertaining to the [redacted] property damage claim. This documentation is how we arrived at our determination, and denied responsibility for the alleged damages to the floor.
1) The DPS Claim screenshot, which clearly shows that [redacted] filed his household goods claim within the 75 day guideline, but the floor damage was not filed until 113 days after the delivery. If he was aware of the floor damage on delivery day, why not file the entire claim at once? Why the 5 week delay?
2) DD619-1 which shows that we did a partial unpack at residence on the day of the move. We delivered nearly 18,000 pounds, and provided a partial unpack of cartons. I am certain that we were at residence for a very long day. Long enough, to unpack and document a broken beer stein. If the floors were damaged by the moving crew, there was plenty of time and opportunity to discover and document the damage.
3) The scorecard, members representative checked off that we used floor protection. Members representative check off that he / she did a walk through after unloading the shipment. Again, opportunity to discover the floor was scratched. The only damage noted was the beer stein. Nothing about the floor. [redacted] was not present during the move, per his rebuttal.
4) DD1850, Notification of Loss & Damage.....the infamous beer stein is listed as broken. Nothing noted about scratched floors.
5) 2 pictures of the scratches that were apparently caused by the moving crew..........I would say that those scratches are noticeable. I cannot imagine that they went unnoticed during the unpacking and / or walk through process.
Its unfortunate that [redacted] is not happy with our decision, and appalled by our actions. We settle claims based on documentation, and there is not sufficient documentation or proof to hold the moving crew responsible for these scratches. [redacted] obviously understands the moving process, as he has moved 9 times in 18 years.
I am still awaiting direction from the Military Claims Office in Norfolk, VA. We will move forward based on their guidance on this matter.
Respectfully,
[redacted]
Another offer was sent on 02/10/2016 received a response from customer on 02/23/16 trying to add on more items to the claim. At this point there will be no more offers and will be going through the Revdex.com for Mediation.
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the last response made by 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:The arguments presented by Ms. [redacted] (Republic) regarding timelines - which is the central element of her argument against me - have no basis in fact. Her statements are incorrect, and her comments regarding my time in service and description of at item claimed as "infamous" are insulting and demeaning, and representative of a lack of value ascribed to a personal item that my family regarded as important. Her comment stating, "I would think..." indicates a subjective notion, not based in fact, but based on a subjective notion of what she feels is correct - clearly not something that justifies a business decision or action. The attachment and below description highlight facts surrounding my complaint that refute Republic's position and rebuttal:- There are 2 parts to a claim - the Loss/Damage Report, or LDR, (#1) and the Claim (#2). DPS regulations state the following (see highlighted in the DPS website screen capture on pg. 3 of attachment):-- #1) Loss/Damage Report - "You should notify the Transportation Service Provider (TSP) [the Moving Company] of any loss or damage to your personal property within 75 days of the delivery of your shipment." The instructions in paragraph 2 of the screen capture (pg. 3) state that LDR can be submitted via the DPS module. The time stipulation is 75 days. NOTE...see pg 1 of the attachment. This is the "LDR" screen capture. I've highlighted the date that it was submitted - 9/11/2013. Hardwood floors WERE annotated and submitted WITHIN the required timeline. I do not see how you can dispute this. -- #2) Claim - "In order to be eligible for Full Replacement Value (FRV), you must file a claim directly with the Transportation Service Provider (TSP) via DPS within 9 months from the date of delivery. If the claim is filed more than 9 months from the delivery date you will only be eligible for depreciated value up to two years from delivery."NOTE...see pg 2 of the attachment. This is the "CLAIM" screen capture, the one that you included in your rebuttal on Revdex.com.org. Yes, you have the day count right, 113, but your statement misrepresents which document that daycount applies to. You state the 113 days was the initial LDR. This is not true. This is the date the "CLAIM" was created, NOT/NOT the "LDR". And as such, is well within the 9 month window requirement. Lastly, I have repeatedly asked for documentation from the company highlighting their official policies, as well as contact information for Ms. [redacted]'s supervisor. Both requests remain unanswered. My demands remain - replacement of the damaged portions of the hardwood floor that their movers caused during our move into this house, as well as return of the piece of spare hardwood that the company Republic initially approved to perform the work (a local contractor) took from our house in an effort to match stain color. Republic later reneged on this approval, forcing the local contractor to terminate any scheduling of the repair - this action left the contractor still in possession of our spare hardwood floor piece. I also demand a formal apology from Republic for personal insult to me and unprofessional behavior in reneging on an approval that forced me to spend exhaustive efforts to rectify.Regards,[redacted]
If they will agree to pay the amount checked off in the box of 3824.43 and the packing material price of 778.19 then we can resolve this. They are dragging this out way to long and have not provided a statement from [redacted] ( that no longer works there) stating that he did or did not lie to me or address that the move was made in less then 3 days which makes the 60 cent per pound invalid. But just to get this over with they can pay the above amount with is more then fair considering 20,000$ worth of items were damaged.
Republic Moving & Storage was just the Service Provider for this job. All claims etc are to be settled the with account which is [redacted] as they would be the responsible party to handle the claims and any issues that arose with this job. We also did have our Quality Control go to the...
residence on the day of packing and loading and you can see by the pictures we are very detailed in our packing and be very aware if we packed a jewelry box and the crews stated that they did not pack a jewelry box or even seen one, and also the customer did sign the a Before Packing List and also initialed that there was NO JEWELERY in the shipment and after packing signed on the same page after packing, that none of the above items listed were NOT included in the Household goods. And also on the High Value Inventory sheet no High Value Items were listed. I will attach these signed and initialed forms so you can view them. Also yes there was a shuttle at origin but there was no shuttle at destination and nothing on the drivers pwk about a shuttle at destination. So as you can clearly see on the signed and initialed pwk from the customer there was no jewelry in the shipment.Please let me know if you have any questions
Looking at notes in our system this claim has not been completely resolved yet there is still emails going back and forth about getting someone out to the residence to see about repairing the furniture this complaint is a little premature as we are still working with the customer to settle the claim
and to get items repaired and we will continue to do so
*** *** from our Quality Control Department was to look into this when she was contacted on I believe it was Friday the 30th. *** has taking the action and reviewed the paperwork and customer this morning had a credit put back onto their credit card in the amount of $Thank You
!
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
Regards,
*** *** In regards to the answer the business gave. The business was unwilling to work with us until we contacted the Revdex.com. We are willing to work with them in getting our damaged item fixed and they now have said they will work with us but nothing has been said about the missing items. Their management had originally said that even though our item was damaged it still could be used and they were unwilling to help us have the damaged fixed. Since we filed with you they are now saying we could get an estimate on having our item fixed but nothing has been said about the missing items
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
Thier is no offer for compensation in this last messageThey aren't even offering the amount of cents per pound because they are excluding items that weight a lotThey also speak of *** as if he is still a employee of theirsHe is notI called and attempted to speak with him and was told "'he no longer works here"Their needs to be a fair and reasonable offer made or a different approach on my end will be takenAlso they don't address the packing materials I was charged for that I did not receive my items wrappedThey also don't address charging me for a storage where they charged per items that they ruined for example the couch they cracked in halfWhy should I pay to store a ruined item???
Regards,
*** ***
Hello!!The complaint against
the moving company said that it would reach out to me and offer me another settlement amountI have not received or heard from themI would like to re open the caseI didn't realize be agreeing to them offering me another amount would close the casePlease advise as to how or what I need to doThank you *** ***
*** ***
To Whom It May Concern
We are aware that *** *** is unhappy with our decision to deny an alleged property damage claimAs a courtesy, we have turned the claim over to the Military Claims Office in Norfolk, VA, which is standard operating procedure for a military member when they are
in disagreement as to the settlement of their claim
We have shared with *** *** the reasoning for this denial:
1) His move took place in July 02,At the time of delivery, the alleged property damage caused by our crew, was not documented on his Loss & Damage Statement or the Scorecard signed by his wife, on the day of the move(this is SOP on a military move)
2) *** *** notified Republic Moving of his alleged property damage claim on October 15, That is year and months after our crew allegedly scratched the hardwood floorsThe rules pertaining to shipments moved under SDDC's DPS Program state very clearly, that he needs to notify the TSP of the damage within days
3) *** *** initiated the claim filing in the DPS System on Sept11, (days after his move was completed)However, he did NOT file the alleged floor damage claim until October 24, (days after his move was completed)This means that he did not meet the day notification of loss and damage deadline
As a courtesy, *** *** (Republic Employee), arranged for an inspection by a 3rd party serviceApparently, *** *** notified his landlord / property management companySoon after we received an email from the floor repair company and the ***, not requesting that we repair the floor BUT replace an area of the floorEmails were exchanged between *** at Republic, the floor repair company, and *** *** over the next couple months
In mid-January, *** brought the file to me for reviewI told her that I was hesitant to authorize the repair for two reasons: (1) Republic was not notified of the damages in a timely manner and (2) there was no proof that our crews were responsibleMeanwhile, we requested the claim file from the TSP who managed the claimInformation contained in that file confirmed the timeline for filing
February 9, 2015, *** (Republic) advised *** *** that she was NOT authorized to proceed with any repairs or replacement of the floors, that his claim was denied by management
February 10, 2015, I emailed *** *** and advised of my review of his claim, and that I felt there was no proof that our crews damaged the floor year and months prior, and that he did not notify our office in a timely manner to file his claim for property damage
February, 17, 2015, I received an email from *** *** requesting that I reconsider, and he argued my points of denialMeanwhile, *** reached out to the Military Claims Office (MCO) in Norfolk, and inquired if the claim had been filed (per SOP)The email response she received indicated that the MCO had no record of communication with *** *** on this matterShe went one step further, and contacted the local Personal Property office to inquire if *** *** reached out to their office to file his claimAgain, we were advised that there was no communication documented between the PPSO and *** *** pertaining to the claim
Today, I have reached out to the Landlord / Property Management Company to advise of our findingsHave not received a return phone call or email response as of 2:We believe that the MCO will find resolution on this matter, as this is their Function in the SDDC Personal Property Program (DP3)
We take these matters very seriously, as we move a lot of military families in and out of San Diego and the surrounding military installationsWe have done what we feel is in the best interest of the military member, and turned this over to the Military Claims Office to reviewWe have every confidence, that the MCO will get this resolved quickly
Should you need any supporting documentation, please don’t hesitate to contact me directly
Respectfully,
*** ***
Republic Moving
Spoke with the claims department they are still working on getting estimates to see about repairing items and then also about the claims manager speaking with management about the other items.thank you
We
have an ongoing claim settlement going with this customer: she has been given
two offers to settle her claim which she has refused. We are preparing
one more: if she refuses again we will submit this file to the Revdex.com for
their Mediation services.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by 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
DoD
My responses to the comments made by Republic are highlighted below (for sake of clarity, I've included the text from the comments made by Ms[redacted] from Republic and provided responses to applicable remarks):"To
Whom It May Concern
We
are aware that [redacted] is unhappy with our decision to deny an alleged
property damage claimAs a courtesy, we have turned the claim over to the
Military Claims Office in Norfolk, VA, which is standard operating procedure
for a military member when they are in disagreement as to the settlement of
their claim
We
have shared with [redacted] the reasoning for this denial:
1)
His move took place in July 02,At the time of delivery, the
alleged property damage caused by our crew, was not documented on his
Loss & Damage Statement or the Scorecard signed by his wife, on the day of
the move(this is SOP on a military move).
Response (#1): Republic is factually in error. Military PCS regulations allow for the option
to have movers unpack household goods in their entirety or partially. Any damages identified the day of the move
are to be documented on the forms provided at the time of the move. Any additional damages are to be filed within
days. This would include any
additional damages identified after movers have left. This allowance accommodates the impossibility
of any service member to realistically inspect every item contained in a 17,
lbs move in what amounts to roughly hours.
This is practically impossible, and military regulation accounts for
that, which is why the days are provided to service members
2)
[redacted] notified Republic Moving of his alleged property damage claim on October
15, That is year and months after our crew allegedly
scratched the hardwood floorsThe rules pertaining to shipments moved under
SDDC's DPS Program state very clearly, that he needs to notify the TSP of the
damage within days. Response (#2): Republic is correct in that I notified
Republic Moving year and months after the crew damaged the hardwood
floors. What Republic fails to mention
is the requirement for military service members to file damage claims via the
Defense Personal Property System (DPPS) within days, not notify the moving
company directly I followed this
required procedure and remained within the timeline required (days). I was notified on May that my claim
was finalized. After subsequent inquiry
into how to handle the declined floor damage claim, I received an e-mail from
Global Claim Services on Aug (see ENCL 2) that directed me to contact
my "delivery agent". I subsequently
contacted the TSP at the number provided, per instructions in the e-mail. So, while my contact with Republic was year
and months from the date of the damage they caused, I handled the claim in
full accordance with military procedures, and from the date it was made aware
to me that I needed to contact Republic (Aug 2014) to the date I actually
contacted them, it was only months and days
3)
[redacted] initiated the claim filing in the DPS System on Sept11, (
days after his move was completed)However, he did NOT file the alleged floor
damage claim until October 24, (days after his move was
completed)This means that he did not meet the day notification of
loss and damage deadline. Response (#3): Republic is making a claim. Documentation attached (see attachment ENCL
1) attests to this fact. The LDR date
(Loss-Damage-Report date) indicates the claim was submitted days (not 71),
and clearly states that all damages were filed within prescribed timelines
(note the statement, "Not Late: LDR has
all items on it" in red text)
As
a courtesy, [redacted] (Republic Employee), arranged for an inspection by a
3rd party serviceApparently, [redacted] notified his landlord / property
management companySoon after we received an email from the floor repair
company and the [redacted], not requesting that we repair the floor BUT replace
an area of the floor. Emails were
exchanged between [redacted] at Republic, the floor repair company, and [redacted]
over the next couple monthsResponse ("As a courtesy
"):
ENCL highlights the e-mail communications between myself and a Republic
representative ([redacted]). In this e-mail
thread, an e-mail from [redacted] (Republic) dated Oct indicates that
following the estimate provided by the local contracting company, Republic will
"move forward with
assigning him to call you and schedule the repairs." This in no way suggests
this was a "courtesy inspection" and only indicates they have approved the
repair. In no way did Republic ever
indicate they were still reviewing the claim for approval purposes. Moving forward with scheduling the repair is
clear communication that the repair has been approved. Additionally, ENCL corroborates
above-referenced e-mail. This is an
e-mail from the local contractor assigned to conduct the repairs. In this e-mail, the representative clearly
asks us to identify dates so they could "begin working" on our floors. As can be seen in this e-mail, there is
nothing that states they either performed a "courtesy inspection", nor were
they still arbitrating over the claim to determine if they were authorized (or
not) to perform the repair.
In mid-January, [redacted] brought the
file to me for reviewI told her that I was hesitant to authorize the repair
for two reasons: (1) Republic was not notified of the damages in a timely
manner and (2) there was no proof that our crews were responsibleMeanwhile,
we requested the claim file from the TSP who managed the claimInformation
contained in that file confirmed the timeline for filing. Response ("In
mid-January
"): Republic is making a
claim. Again, see ENCL for the
documentation stating that my claim was submitted in accordance with prescribed
timelines. Secondly, in a phone
conversation with Republic representative, I asked for written documentation
from the moving company that articulated their timelines for submitting a
claim. I explained that it was not until
Aug (see ENCL 2) that I was instructed to contact the "delivery
agent." My initial contact to Republic
was Oct 2014, months and days, from the e-mail directing me to contact
them. Despite my request on Feb
in a phone conversation with a Republic representative ([redacted]), Republic has yet
to provide any documentation to me that ndicates this time period exceeds a
threshold for reporting damages
February 9, 2015,
[redacted] (Republic) advised [redacted] that she was NOT authorized to proceed with
any repairs or replacement of the floors, that his claim was denied by
management.
February 10, 2015,
I emailed [redacted] and advised of my review of his claim, and that I felt
there was no proof that our crewsdamaged the floor year and months prior,
and that he did not notify our office in a timely manner to file his claim for
propertydamage. Response ("February 10, 2015
"): Republic
representative claims she "felt" there was no proof. I have sufficient proof. I have provided pictures to the
Transportation Service Provider on multiple occasions – both in October
when they asked for them the first time, and again in February when they asked
for the same pictures again. I have a
walkthrough inspection from the landlord with no indication said damages were
there prior to our occupying the house.
The owner of the house who saw the scratches also attested these were
not there prior. I have testimony from
my wife, who was 7-months pregnant at the time the movers arrived, that the
movers brought our couches into the house and dragged them across the
floor. I was physically not present at
the time, and there was no way she was physically able to move a couch. It was not until later that evening, after
movers had left and after she signed the documents that we learned of the
damages
February, 17, 2015,
I received an email from [redacted] requesting that I reconsider, and he
argued my points of denialMeanwhile, [redacted] reached out to the Military Claims
Office (MCO) in Norfolk, and inquired if the claim had been filed (per SOP)
The email response she received indicated that the MCO had no record of
communication with [redacted] on this matterResponse
("February 17, 2015
"): This is
factually in error and not consistent with procedures as I was directed to
comply with. MCO handles damages to
household goods. Global Claim servicesrepresentative instructed me on Aug to contact the delivery agent (see ENCL
2). Of course there is no communication
with the MCO – I had no issues with the other items claimed, which were all
part of my household goods, vice the floor.
She went one step further, and contacted the local Personal Property
office to inquire if [redacted] reached out to their office to file his claim
Again, we were advised that there wasno communication documented between
the PPSO and [redacted] pertaining to the claim
Today,
I have reached out to the Landlord / Property Management Company to advise of
our findingsHave not received a return phone call or email response as of
2:We believe that the MCO will find resolution on this matter, as this is
their Function in the SDDC Personal Property Program (DP3). MCO will not find a resolution to this
matter. Response
("Today, I have
"): It is not a part of
household goods. It is a responsibility
of the moving company, per ENCL
We
take these matters very seriously, as we move a lot of military families in and
out of San Diego and the surrounding military installationsWe have done
what we feel is in the best interest of the military member, and turned this
over to the Military Claims Office to reviewWe have every confidence,
that the MCO will get this resolved quickly.
Response ("We take these matters
"): Republic has not done all they can do. They have misrepresented themselves, as is
clear in the attachments provided. I
have patiently and politely tried to articulate the details of the
situation. I was initially received with
overwhelming assistance and what is clear acceptance of responsibility of the
damages with a clear path to getting the issue repaired. Suddenly, and without warning, the decision
to move forward was reversed with abrupt termination of any future
communication by Ms[redacted] (Republic) in an e-mail to me. I am appalled that such a reversal is
allowed. I have moved my family times
in years of service, and this is the first time I have ever encountered such
challenges
Should
you need any supporting documentation, please don't hesitate to contact me
directly
Respectfully,
[redacted]
Republic Moving" [redacted]NO FURTHER RESPONSES[redacted]
Regards,
[redacted]
1. There will be no refund on the storage as it is a service that we provided.2. Regarding the paying for packing that did not happen, we are reviewing the pwk with what was charged and if there is any discrepancies and needs a refund of any monies we will refund that after the audit.3. We have made numerous offers and will be making no more and will goto arbitration with the Revdex.com. Update:
Unfortunately it is the busiest time of the year for us in the industry, no excuse but we do try our best to accommodate our customer in going back to the residence to pick up their empty cartons (as when the deliveries are made the crews at that time are supposed to unpack and take away the debris...
that same day) and again we do this to accommodate our customer and the ones that don't want us to unpack their items the crews do try their best to go back and get the empties when we are notified. Our apologies for the what you feel was horrible customer service as that is one thing that our company does thrive on is excellent customer service, so I am just astonished that you did not receive that type of service. I have emailed the customer to find out all details and to take care of getting the empty cartons picked up as soon as possible, I am just waiting to hear from her and we will get this taking care of.
From: [redacted] <[redacted][email protected]>Date: February 16, 2016 at 11:15:54 AM PSTTo: [redacted] <[redacted]>Cc: Republic Claims <[email protected]>Subject: Re: [redacted]Hello [redacted],Just so I am clear on the combined agreement for moving and services and freight bill. My items were taken by [redacted] as stated on the invoice? [redacted] had told me the day prior to the move since it was scheduled less then 3 days prior. That regular 60 cent per pound did not apply. It also did not state that items would be excluded.On Feb 10, 2016, at 2:52 PM, [redacted] <[redacted]> wrote:Dear Mrs. [redacted],We are pleased to advise you that we have completed our review of your claim dated 10/28/2015. We find that you elected to release your house hold goods at a value not to exceed 60 cents per pound per article; hence our maximum liability has been based on that election: Italian wood hutch 120 lbs. $72.00#131 chair 14 lbs. $8.40#115 white dining chair 9 lbs. $5.40#113 white dining chair 9 lbs. $5.40Oil painting 13 lbs. $7.80Formal dining table 75 lbs. $45.00Formal dining table-base 25 lbs. $15.00Iron DENIED – PACKED BY OWNER #157 recliner chair 70 lbs. $42.00Blue couch 80 lbs. $48.00White couch 86 lbs. $51.60Artificial plant 12 lbs. $7.20Water garden hose 10 lbs. $6.00Wood framed mirror 60 lbs. $36.00Tool container tote 10 lbs. $6.00Tool container tote 10 lbs. $6.00California king mattress 74 lbs. $44.40Curling iron DENIED – PACKED BY OWNER White dining chair 9 lbs. $5.40#191 gold vase 8 lbs. $4.80Hotel collection trash can 5 lbs. $3.00 Hotel collection soaps 2 lbs. $1.20Welcome mat 3 lbs. $1.80 T.V. stand #95 DENIED – PRE-EXISTING DAMAGEDesk #170 47 lbs. $28.20Night stand 19 lbs. $11.40Vase PBO packed by owner DENIEDItalian wood Desk #130 80 lbs. $48.00Office -art 27 lbs. $16.20Bed room painting 12 lbs. $7.20Hallway art 48 lbs. $28.80Great room art 48 lbs. $28.80 2 candle sticks 2 lbs. $1.20T.V. stand # 169 DENIED – PRE-EXISTING DAMAGEChina plate 3 lbs. $1.80Glass & wood coffee table DENIED – PRE-EXISTING DAMAGEKids white mirror 16 lbs. $9.60Kids night stand #142 DENIED – PRE-EXISTING DAMAGE Love Seat # 138 92 lbs. $55.20Foot rest #137 DENIED – PRE-EXISTING DAMAGE #067 DENIED – PACKED BY OWNER #242 DISH PACK – WET DENIED – NOT NOTATIONS AT DELIVERY ON DELIVERY DOCS#95 T.V. STAND DENIED – PRE-EXISTING DAMAGE TREADMILL DENIED- NORMAL WEARTOTAL SETTLEMENT: $658.80Finally, upon receipt of your acceptance of this offer in writing, (please sign the attached claim release and return it to me) we will immediately process payment in the amount of $658.80. You should receive a check within 7 to 10 days of processing. Please let me know if you have any questions or perhaps you require further information. Thank you! Kind Regards, [redacted]Claims Manager
Please see attached you will notice that on her estimate she signs for basic .60 cent valuation and also on the Bill of Lading she wrote in .60 cents and also initialed ne3xt to it. To answer the questions you have should actually be answered by the claims manager who has been working with this customer as the last I heard is that we were taking her to mediation through the Revdex.com. Also [redacted]o the sales representative who has more than 20 years in this industry and is very accurate and very good at what he does he would have never told her any different on the valuation.
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by 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.The company on 2/11/16 did not give a additional 3rd offer like they had informed you the Revdex.com that they would do. That was the date of their 2nd offer that I 100% rejected. Also they told me that after my move date that I had 9 months to give them a list of damaged items. It's not my fault that this company ruined so much of my furniture that I didn't catch it all at one time. I tried to get photos and the claims going asap! My drop off of items was on late Oct 2015. It's only in Feb 2016 that I noticed the two additional stands were damaged. We can do this either way. But their was no 3rd offer that should have included all the packing materials I was charged, the storage, and the items they tried to exclude for no reason and the 2 extra night stands. The dishonesty of this company doesn't surprise me. You saw it yourself they said they would make a 3rd offer which I am sure they originally had no intention of doing and then just sat back hoping I would forget they damaged over 20,000$ worth of my items.
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by 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.
Problem: Damaged large piece of furniture and lost 2 other pieces. Refused to work with us in getting item repaired and replacing lost itemsDesired Outcome: Republic Moving originally said that they would pay to have our item repaired and for us to get a quote to have the work done We sent the quote to them and have never heard from them since.Regards,
[redacted]
Attached are a few documents pertaining to the [redacted] property damage claim. This documentation is how we arrived at our determination, and denied responsibility for the alleged damages to the floor.
1) The DPS Claim screenshot, which clearly shows that [redacted] filed his household goods claim within the 75 day guideline, but the floor damage was not filed until 113 days after the delivery. If he was aware of the floor damage on delivery day, why not file the entire claim at once? Why the 5 week delay?
2) DD619-1 which shows that we did a partial unpack at residence on the day of the move. We delivered nearly 18,000 pounds, and provided a partial unpack of cartons. I am certain that we were at residence for a very long day. Long enough, to unpack and document a broken beer stein. If the floors were damaged by the moving crew, there was plenty of time and opportunity to discover and document the damage.
3) The scorecard, members representative checked off that we used floor protection. Members representative check off that he / she did a walk through after unloading the shipment. Again, opportunity to discover the floor was scratched. The only damage noted was the beer stein. Nothing about the floor. [redacted] was not present during the move, per his rebuttal.
4) DD1850, Notification of Loss & Damage.....the infamous beer stein is listed as broken. Nothing noted about scratched floors.
5) 2 pictures of the scratches that were apparently caused by the moving crew..........I would say that those scratches are noticeable. I cannot imagine that they went unnoticed during the unpacking and / or walk through process.
Its unfortunate that [redacted] is not happy with our decision, and appalled by our actions. We settle claims based on documentation, and there is not sufficient documentation or proof to hold the moving crew responsible for these scratches. [redacted] obviously understands the moving process, as he has moved 9 times in 18 years.
I am still awaiting direction from the Military Claims Office in Norfolk, VA. We will move forward based on their guidance on this matter.
Respectfully,
[redacted]
Another offer was sent on 02/10/2016 received a response from customer on 02/23/16 trying to add on more items to the claim. At this point there will be no more offers and will be going through the Revdex.com for Mediation.
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the last response made by 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:The arguments presented by Ms. [redacted] (Republic) regarding timelines - which is the central element of her argument against me - have no basis in fact. Her statements are incorrect, and her comments regarding my time in service and description of at item claimed as "infamous" are insulting and demeaning, and representative of a lack of value ascribed to a personal item that my family regarded as important. Her comment stating, "I would think..." indicates a subjective notion, not based in fact, but based on a subjective notion of what she feels is correct - clearly not something that justifies a business decision or action. The attachment and below description highlight facts surrounding my complaint that refute Republic's position and rebuttal:- There are 2 parts to a claim - the Loss/Damage Report, or LDR, (#1) and the Claim (#2). DPS regulations state the following (see highlighted in the DPS website screen capture on pg. 3 of attachment):-- #1) Loss/Damage Report - "You should notify the Transportation Service Provider (TSP) [the Moving Company] of any loss or damage to your personal property within 75 days of the delivery of your shipment." The instructions in paragraph 2 of the screen capture (pg. 3) state that LDR can be submitted via the DPS module. The time stipulation is 75 days. NOTE...see pg 1 of the attachment. This is the "LDR" screen capture. I've highlighted the date that it was submitted - 9/11/2013. Hardwood floors WERE annotated and submitted WITHIN the required timeline. I do not see how you can dispute this. -- #2) Claim - "In order to be eligible for Full Replacement Value (FRV), you must file a claim directly with the Transportation Service Provider (TSP) via DPS within 9 months from the date of delivery. If the claim is filed more than 9 months from the delivery date you will only be eligible for depreciated value up to two years from delivery."NOTE...see pg 2 of the attachment. This is the "CLAIM" screen capture, the one that you included in your rebuttal on Revdex.com.org. Yes, you have the day count right, 113, but your statement misrepresents which document that daycount applies to. You state the 113 days was the initial LDR. This is not true. This is the date the "CLAIM" was created, NOT/NOT the "LDR". And as such, is well within the 9 month window requirement. Lastly, I have repeatedly asked for documentation from the company highlighting their official policies, as well as contact information for Ms. [redacted]'s supervisor. Both requests remain unanswered. My demands remain - replacement of the damaged portions of the hardwood floor that their movers caused during our move into this house, as well as return of the piece of spare hardwood that the company Republic initially approved to perform the work (a local contractor) took from our house in an effort to match stain color. Republic later reneged on this approval, forcing the local contractor to terminate any scheduling of the repair - this action left the contractor still in possession of our spare hardwood floor piece. I also demand a formal apology from Republic for personal insult to me and unprofessional behavior in reneging on an approval that forced me to spend exhaustive efforts to rectify.Regards,[redacted]
If they will agree to pay the amount checked off in the box of 3824.43 and the packing material price of 778.19 then we can resolve this. They are dragging this out way to long and have not provided a statement from [redacted] ( that no longer works there) stating that he did or did not lie to me or address that the move was made in less then 3 days which makes the 60 cent per pound invalid. But just to get this over with they can pay the above amount with is more then fair considering 20,000$ worth of items were damaged.
Republic Moving & Storage was just the Service Provider for this job. All claims etc are to be settled the with account which is [redacted] as they would be the responsible party to handle the claims and any issues that arose with this job. We also did have our Quality Control go to the...
residence on the day of packing and loading and you can see by the pictures we are very detailed in our packing and be very aware if we packed a jewelry box and the crews stated that they did not pack a jewelry box or even seen one, and also the customer did sign the a Before Packing List and also initialed that there was NO JEWELERY in the shipment and after packing signed on the same page after packing, that none of the above items listed were NOT included in the Household goods. And also on the High Value Inventory sheet no High Value Items were listed. I will attach these signed and initialed forms so you can view them. Also yes there was a shuttle at origin but there was no shuttle at destination and nothing on the drivers pwk about a shuttle at destination. So as you can clearly see on the signed and initialed pwk from the customer there was no jewelry in the shipment.Please let me know if you have any questions