Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:
In his recent response to my complaint, *** *** of
Pacific Hearing Care appears to be trying to defend what has happened by
arguing that 1) I am “not aware of the complexities involving
business-to-business direct mail companies, how companies gather data and
maintain mailing lists, and domestic mail regulation,” and 2) I am not a
customer of Pacific Hearing CareIn the company’s first response to my
complaint to the Revdex.com, it was also strongly implied that I was unreasonableMr
***’s assertion in 1) regarding my not being aware, is conjecture on his part,
and a rather inadequate, vague defense, and his statement in 2) is irrelevant to the
issue (as I noted previously)I offer the following facts, for which I have
solid evidence: It has been about months since I first requested in writing
via Pacific Hearing Care’s website that they not send unsolicited mail to
*** ***, *** *** **., ***, HI *** *** died about three
months after that request to Pacific Hearing CareAfter another mailing from
Pacific Hearing Care arrived, on August 25, I again asked Pacific Hearing
Care in writing via their website to stop sending unsolicited mail to ***
***’s addressAfter another mailing from Pacific Hearing Care arrived, on
March 23, I again asked Pacific Hearing Care in writing via their website
to stop sending unsolicited mail to *** ***’s addressPacific Hearing Care
never replied to the email address I used when sending the
stop-sending-unsolicited-mail messages to the companySo when yet another
mailing was received in September 2014, on September 26, I again asked the
company to stop sending unsolicited mail to the deceased *** ***I also
filed a complaint with the Revdex.com because it was clear that
Pacific Hearing Care/their direct mailing agency would most likely continue to
send mail to *** ***, despite their being informed that she died more than a
year ago
The following statement is factual, and I think it is
appropriate information for all who use the Revdex.com to get
relevant information about companies, with which consumers are thinking of
doing business: The manner in which Pacific Hearing Care uses
business-to-business direct mail companies can lead to and has led to someone
continuing to receive Pacific Hearing Care’s unwanted and unsolicited mail
months after a request to stop sending mail was made in writing via the
company’s official websiteUntil a complaint was made to the Revdex.com, Pacific
Hearing Care never responded to the person requesting that the unsolicited mail
be stopped
I think that the two responses from Pacific Hearing Care to
my complaint included flawed arguments and irrelevant information, but I chose
not to mention them in my statement in the previous paragraph.
Sincerely,*** ***
[redacted]
Revdex.com of
Hawaii, Inc.
[redacted], HI [redacted]
ID # [redacted]
October 6th, 2014
Dear [redacted],
We are in receipt of the
above references comp[redacted]nt. Please be
advised of...
the following:
1.
Quite often,
people are not aware of the complexities involved with business-to-business
direct-mail companies, and how these companies gather data and maintain mailing
lists. Therefore, it is our policy to
refrain from telephone conversations that involve any form of profanity, and have
the potential to escalate into, or are adversarial in nature as a result of a
consumer being misinformed.
2.
People that call
our company with requests to be removed from mailing lists are assisted, and
then forwarded to a prerecorded message that provides further information on how to
go about having one’s name removed from commercial mailing lists. Furthermore, the information provided is the
same provided on Federal Trade Commission’s website.
3.
The piece of mail
[redacted] received is advertising, and we are in compliance with all U.S. Postal
Service regulations as provided in the USPS Domestic Mail Manual, and Uniform
Commercial Codes.
4.
We have no
control over the mailing lists since all direct mail pieces are outsourced to
companies on the U.S. mainland for processing.
5. Please be advised that [redacted] is not our Customer, nor has [redacted] ever been a
Customer.
Finally, we have no objection
to [redacted] doing what most reasonable people do by simply discarding our promotional
piece in the recycle bin or rubbish should he not recycle.
As stated previously, and based on [redacted]'s response, it appears he
is not aware of the complexities involving business-to-business direct mail
companies, how companies gather data and maintain mailing lists, and domestic
mail regulations. Companies remove names
when periodic updates are conducted, and we do make an effort to request that
names and addresses be removed, however, it takes time for requests to work
their way through the numerous organizations that collect and share data.
Moreover, although [redacted] is not a customer, nor has he ever been, we
have noted his requests, but we have not received any guarantees from any
companies, agencies, or their affiliates that this would be done within any
specific period of time. However, we
will continue to assist [redacted] by passing on his request each time received.
Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because:
In his recent response to my complaint, *** *** of
Pacific Hearing Care appears to be trying to defend what has happened by
arguing that 1) I am “not aware of the complexities involving
business-to-business direct mail companies, how companies gather data and
maintain mailing lists, and domestic mail regulation,” and 2) I am not a
customer of Pacific Hearing CareIn the company’s first response to my
complaint to the Revdex.com, it was also strongly implied that I was unreasonableMr
***’s assertion in 1) regarding my not being aware, is conjecture on his part,
and a rather inadequate, vague defense, and his statement in 2) is irrelevant to the
issue (as I noted previously)I offer the following facts, for which I have
solid evidence: It has been about months since I first requested in writing
via Pacific Hearing Care’s website that they not send unsolicited mail to
*** ***, *** *** **., ***, HI *** *** died about three
months after that request to Pacific Hearing CareAfter another mailing from
Pacific Hearing Care arrived, on August 25, I again asked Pacific Hearing
Care in writing via their website to stop sending unsolicited mail to ***
***’s addressAfter another mailing from Pacific Hearing Care arrived, on
March 23, I again asked Pacific Hearing Care in writing via their website
to stop sending unsolicited mail to *** ***’s addressPacific Hearing Care
never replied to the email address I used when sending the
stop-sending-unsolicited-mail messages to the companySo when yet another
mailing was received in September 2014, on September 26, I again asked the
company to stop sending unsolicited mail to the deceased *** ***I also
filed a complaint with the Revdex.com because it was clear that
Pacific Hearing Care/their direct mailing agency would most likely continue to
send mail to *** ***, despite their being informed that she died more than a
year ago
The following statement is factual, and I think it is
appropriate information for all who use the Revdex.com to get
relevant information about companies, with which consumers are thinking of
doing business: The manner in which Pacific Hearing Care uses
business-to-business direct mail companies can lead to and has led to someone
continuing to receive Pacific Hearing Care’s unwanted and unsolicited mail
months after a request to stop sending mail was made in writing via the
company’s official websiteUntil a complaint was made to the Revdex.com, Pacific
Hearing Care never responded to the person requesting that the unsolicited mail
be stopped
I think that the two responses from Pacific Hearing Care to
my complaint included flawed arguments and irrelevant information, but I chose
not to mention them in my statement in the previous paragraph.
Sincerely,*** ***
[redacted]
Revdex.com of
Hawaii, Inc.
[redacted], HI [redacted]
ID # [redacted]
October 6th, 2014
Dear [redacted],
We are in receipt of the
above references comp[redacted]nt. Please be
advised of...
the following:
1.
Quite often,
people are not aware of the complexities involved with business-to-business
direct-mail companies, and how these companies gather data and maintain mailing
lists. Therefore, it is our policy to
refrain from telephone conversations that involve any form of profanity, and have
the potential to escalate into, or are adversarial in nature as a result of a
consumer being misinformed.
2.
People that call
our company with requests to be removed from mailing lists are assisted, and
then forwarded to a prerecorded message that provides further information on how to
go about having one’s name removed from commercial mailing lists. Furthermore, the information provided is the
same provided on Federal Trade Commission’s website.
3.
The piece of mail
[redacted] received is advertising, and we are in compliance with all U.S. Postal
Service regulations as provided in the USPS Domestic Mail Manual, and Uniform
Commercial Codes.
4.
We have no
control over the mailing lists since all direct mail pieces are outsourced to
companies on the U.S. mainland for processing.
5. Please be advised that [redacted] is not our Customer, nor has [redacted] ever been a
Customer.
Finally, we have no objection
to [redacted] doing what most reasonable people do by simply discarding our promotional
piece in the recycle bin or rubbish should he not recycle.
Thank-you,
[redacted]
Pacific Hearing Care
ID [redacted]
Dear [redacted],
As stated previously, and based on [redacted]'s response, it appears he
is not aware of the complexities involving business-to-business direct mail
companies, how companies gather data and maintain mailing lists, and domestic
mail regulations. Companies remove names
when periodic updates are conducted, and we do make an effort to request that
names and addresses be removed, however, it takes time for requests to work
their way through the numerous organizations that collect and share data.
Moreover, although [redacted] is not a customer, nor has he ever been, we
have noted his requests, but we have not received any guarantees from any
companies, agencies, or their affiliates that this would be done within any
specific period of time. However, we
will continue to assist [redacted] by passing on his request each time received.
Sincerely,
[redacted]
Pacific Hearing Care