Response: sans-serif;">The retail purchaser has notified my store on the days noted in letterCustomer was not refused serviceHowever, we had spoken to her and informed her that we would send a technician to her house but she would be responsible for the repair time and not the parts as declared by [redacted] FurnitureThe clients purchased her sofa in February of and the factory covers all repairs for one year providing that the defect is under useful conditionsThe problem at hand is that the customer would prefer an exchange or refund prior to service examining merchandise in which is not applicable because she did have merchandise in home that surpassed the allotted warranty guidelines from manufacturer
Response:
sans-serif;">The retail purchaser has notified my store on the days noted in letter. Customer was not refused service. However, we had spoken to her and informed her that we would send a technician to her house but she would be responsible for the repair time and not the parts as declared by [redacted] Furniture. The clients purchased her sofa in February of 2013 and the factory covers all repairs for one year providing that the defect is under normal useful conditions. The problem at hand is that the customer would prefer an exchange or refund prior to service examining merchandise in which is not applicable because she did have merchandise in home that surpassed the allotted warranty guidelines from manufacturer.
Response: sans-serif;">The retail purchaser has notified my store on the days noted in letterCustomer was not refused serviceHowever, we had spoken to her and informed her that we would send a technician to her house but she would be responsible for the repair time and not the parts as declared by [redacted] FurnitureThe clients purchased her sofa in February of and the factory covers all repairs for one year providing that the defect is under useful conditionsThe problem at hand is that the customer would prefer an exchange or refund prior to service examining merchandise in which is not applicable because she did have merchandise in home that surpassed the allotted warranty guidelines from manufacturer
Response:
sans-serif;">The retail purchaser has notified my store on the days noted in letter. Customer was not refused service. However, we had spoken to her and informed her that we would send a technician to her house but she would be responsible for the repair time and not the parts as declared by [redacted] Furniture. The clients purchased her sofa in February of 2013 and the factory covers all repairs for one year providing that the defect is under normal useful conditions. The problem at hand is that the customer would prefer an exchange or refund prior to service examining merchandise in which is not applicable because she did have merchandise in home that surpassed the allotted warranty guidelines from manufacturer.