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 For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Counter-Response to Pacs Lab's Response to our Complaint# [redacted] To: [redacted] of Revdex.com PittsburgDrN [redacted] 's dear concern for the time he spent working on the project, and his total disregard of the quality of the product he supplied to us is a clear indication that his interests are his only concern.DrN [redacted] and I had a very long phone conversation before I agreed to hire himHe knew exactly what we were looking for in a market surveyWhat he gave us contained mostly irrelevant and grossly outdated information that was useless to usHe later sent us a Power Point show, which was created by someone else, and was also useless to us.Our project is now dead in the water thanks to this manThere is no way we could, or would, have a continued relationship with himI highly recommend that people do not pay this man for any services until after they have received an acceptable productThe only honorable thing he could do is return our money so that we can start fresh elsewhere.Sincerely, [redacted] *** 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 For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below Re: Complaint # [redacted] To: [redacted] ***DrN [redacted] and I had a long and detailed phone conversation just prior to me hiring himHe knew exactly what we were trying to accomplishThe material he supplied was largely irrelevant for that purpose and much of it was outdatedWhy would I want to pay big money for outdated information?I have to speculate that he may have farmed this work out to an intern or inexperienced helper in an effort to save moneyIt is obvious to me that the results of his work were much more important to me than they were to him.We will not be taking DrN [redacted] up on his offer for additional services for an additional feeWe've already spent the grant money we had (and then some), and we have nothing to show for itThe only honorable thing he could do, at this point, is to refund our money, so we can start fresh elsewhere.Sincerely, [redacted] ***
My name is Henry *N [redacted] , PhD/MBA, president and senior scientist for PACS Activated Carbon Services (PACS)PACS is very dedicated to satisfying client needs by providing activated carbon services for three decadesPACS has some 3,clients related to activated carbonsMany clients do repeat business with PACS.I personally made a good faith effort on the client's job order and provided the Activated Carbon Market Survey ReportIt was promptly delivered after a verbal discussion about product delivery and a few telephone calls I initiated to see what they wantedI was never given a copy of the proposal said to be submitted to [redacted] for the fundingPACS policy is that new clients pay in advance for servicesFollowing three weeks of work and prompt delivery of the product, Activated Carbon Market Survey Report, the client expressed unhappiness with the product and requested I refund their moneyI had several conversations with the client group and made several recommendations to them to permit the work to go forward, and provided an additional Power Point document on activated carbon markets and sourcingThese efforts were my attempt to satisfy the client after the project was completedThis additional work by PACS was undertaken voluntarily and without compensation and was not charged to the client.After exhausting my additional pro bono work for the client, I informed them the agreed to project was completed and additional work would require a new work order agreement with PACS providing a discount on regular client servicesThey did not entertain my offer to continue the work under a new agreementThe client group only wanted their money returnedI cannot comply with their request because of the time and efforts spent on the product, Activated Carbon Market Survey Report, and extra work I have already provided for this clientPersonally, I believe the root cause of the problem is not the PACS product delivered, but poor validation and specification of the Maine Technology Institute in the funding agreement and the expected results.In conclusion, PACS will not refund money it rightfully earned from the clientPACS would consider a new work order under a new working agreement.Respectfully,Henry N [redacted] , PhD/MBA
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 For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Counter-Response to Pacs Lab's Response to our Complaint# [redacted] To: [redacted] of Revdex.com PittsburgDrN [redacted] 's dear concern for the time he spent working on the project, and his total disregard of the quality of the product he supplied to us is a clear indication that his interests are his only concern.DrN [redacted] and I had a very long phone conversation before I agreed to hire himHe knew exactly what we were looking for in a market surveyWhat he gave us contained mostly irrelevant and grossly outdated information that was useless to usHe later sent us a Power Point show, which was created by someone else, and was also useless to us.Our project is now dead in the water thanks to this manThere is no way we could, or would, have a continued relationship with himI highly recommend that people do not pay this man for any services until after they have received an acceptable productThe only honorable thing he could do is return our money so that we can start fresh elsewhere.Sincerely, [redacted] *** 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 For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below Re: Complaint # [redacted] To: [redacted] ***DrN [redacted] and I had a long and detailed phone conversation just prior to me hiring himHe knew exactly what we were trying to accomplishThe material he supplied was largely irrelevant for that purpose and much of it was outdatedWhy would I want to pay big money for outdated information?I have to speculate that he may have farmed this work out to an intern or inexperienced helper in an effort to save moneyIt is obvious to me that the results of his work were much more important to me than they were to him.We will not be taking DrN [redacted] up on his offer for additional services for an additional feeWe've already spent the grant money we had (and then some), and we have nothing to show for itThe only honorable thing he could do, at this point, is to refund our money, so we can start fresh elsewhere.Sincerely, [redacted] ***
My name is Henry *N [redacted] , PhD/MBA, president and senior scientist for PACS Activated Carbon Services (PACS)PACS is very dedicated to satisfying client needs by providing activated carbon services for three decadesPACS has some 3,clients related to activated carbonsMany clients do repeat business with PACS.I personally made a good faith effort on the client's job order and provided the Activated Carbon Market Survey ReportIt was promptly delivered after a verbal discussion about product delivery and a few telephone calls I initiated to see what they wantedI was never given a copy of the proposal said to be submitted to [redacted] for the fundingPACS policy is that new clients pay in advance for servicesFollowing three weeks of work and prompt delivery of the product, Activated Carbon Market Survey Report, the client expressed unhappiness with the product and requested I refund their moneyI had several conversations with the client group and made several recommendations to them to permit the work to go forward, and provided an additional Power Point document on activated carbon markets and sourcingThese efforts were my attempt to satisfy the client after the project was completedThis additional work by PACS was undertaken voluntarily and without compensation and was not charged to the client.After exhausting my additional pro bono work for the client, I informed them the agreed to project was completed and additional work would require a new work order agreement with PACS providing a discount on regular client servicesThey did not entertain my offer to continue the work under a new agreementThe client group only wanted their money returnedI cannot comply with their request because of the time and efforts spent on the product, Activated Carbon Market Survey Report, and extra work I have already provided for this clientPersonally, I believe the root cause of the problem is not the PACS product delivered, but poor validation and specification of the Maine Technology Institute in the funding agreement and the expected results.In conclusion, PACS will not refund money it rightfully earned from the clientPACS would consider a new work order under a new working agreement.Respectfully,Henry N [redacted] , PhD/MBA