PensGear Team Store

Hello-The following letter is in response to complaint ID [redacted] . As directed by the notice of the filing, we have not specified our customer by name, rather we have utilized initials. MM is (customer) Mr. Mike M [redacted] LB is Laura B [redacted] (Director, Merchandise Marketing for Aramark at CONSOL... Energy Center). JM is Jessica M [redacted] (E-commerce supervisor, Team Pittsburgh Gear). We are happy to provide any further information that we can and/or do whatever we can to resolve the issue.On Wednesday April 6th, 2016 e-commerce supervisor JM received an email from and spoke to a customer named MM. MM had made a purchase during a 50% off Fan Appreciation Day sale on Sunday 4/3. MM had ordered 4 jerseys, 3 of which he was charged for and received. MM contacted JM on that Wednesday to let her know that a 4th jersey didn't come and to find out when it would be received. The order JM received when the order was generated only had 3 jerseys shown. Those were the three she charged him for and shipped. However, due to a system error with a 3rd party server, MM's order confirmation contained a 4th jersey, a Dupuis jersey, which he wanted but that's currently out of stock. He was understandably upset for not having received the jersey or being notified that part of the order would not be filled. Had we known about the 4th jersey (it didn't display on our end because it was out of stock) we certainly would have notified him. JM and MM exchanged several emails. JM asked MM to forward everything he had received with regards to his order so that she could do some research and get back to him.After some investigating which we were more than happy to do for him to better understand the disconnect, we found that when the 3rd party server crashed back in February an old inventory file was imported in error upon restart which included Dupuis jerseys. This was a glitch with their system which we did not discover until this order became an issue. We immediately called our server company Thursday morning and resolved the glitch. We thanked MM for bringing this to our attention, explained the situation in great detail, and apologized in writing on Thursday morning. He was still very upset about this and got very aggravated with JM on the phone. He screamed at her, called her incompetent and used multiple forms of profane language towards her. He demanded to be directed to her supervisor. At that point, she forwarded all correspondence to LB, and asked her to step in.LB emailed MM on Thursday to address his concerns. LB again explained the issues with his order in detail and offered an apology and to rectify the situation in any way possible. Since a portion of the order was canceled/not fully processed (the jersey in question), MM found a pending, temporary transaction for the cost of the jersey on his card. MM was very upset about having to "waste his time" monitoring his card for due to our error. LB explained that it was a temporary transaction that would fall off in a few business days and that if he had questions about that process to contact his bank/credit card company. He was again very upset about this inconvenience. LB explained that it's how all temporary transactions are processed and assured him that he would not be charged for anything he did not receive. In an attempt to make up for the confusion, error, and inconvenience, LB offered MM 3 choices which she felt were all generous and fair given the circumstances. LB offered 1) a new online discount code so that MM could shop again and 50% off his entire order, 2) a personalized, heat-pressed Dupuis jersey that we'd produce in-house and send to MM that day at BELOW 50% off, or 3) to accept the canceled transaction and enjoy the 3 items that he did purchase and receive. For several more emails, MM ignored these 3 options stating that he wanted the jersey he ordered. LB again reiterated that they are no longer in stock and that if MM still wanted a Dupuis jersey, we'd make him one, although it would be slightly different than the one he ordered as those are discontinued. MM insisted that this was an "inferior product" and accused our group of bait-and-switch and false advertising. LBassured him that there was no intent, that this was simply a technology glitch, and that we'd do whatever we could to come to a satisfactory resolution. MM asked for LB's supervisor, LB stated that she was the department head (for Retail) and that no one else was available and that he'd have to continue to work with her to resolve his issue. MM stated that none of these were satisfactory and that he was going to file a report with the RevDex.com. LB advised him that these offers were fair and generous and in-line with (and actually a bit more generous than) the original offer to guests on that Sunday. LB stated that this was the best we could offer after consulting with the other managers on our team and we had hoped that MM would find one of them to his satisfaction. LB stated that he was welcome to take us up on one of these offers, but if not, we understood and are happy to simply consider the matter closed and hoped that he enjoyed the items he did receive. LB did not receive any further correspondence.On Monday 4/11, we received the complaint letter in the mail and are providing the above information as our response.Thank you,Laura B***Director, Merchandise Marketing Aramark, CONSOL Energy Center [redacted] ***###-###-#### ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
I reject the businesses complaint as factually incomplete and partially untrueTo begin the businesses claims I screamed at their customer service representative JM and used profane languageThis is simply an outright lie and an ad hominem attack on my complaint as a means to discredit meWhile I was aggravated at their poor service, I did not raise my voice and did not use any profane languageI can provide a transcript of this conversation as proofLB has also seemingly deliberately blurred the timeline of eventsThis is the true timeline:1) On Sunday April I ordered a Dupuis Jersey for along with of additional merchandise2) On Wednesday April 6th I received shipping confirmation for only the additional items3) On Wednesday April 6th I exchanged emails with the customer service rep JM4) In these emails I was initially told I was wrong about my order and then once it was clear the mistake was on their end I was offered the similar item for $because the $item was out of stock5) The item still showed as in-stock in their store Wednesday afternoon.6) I was asked by JM to call the storeI called, as asked, and while JM offered an apology no resolution or explanation was providedThere was no yelling and no profanityThis was the only phone call and took place before any written apology or explanation of events on their end.7) On the morning of April 7th I sent an email listing my grievances and asking to speak to a supervisorAt the time of the email the item still showed as in-stock in their storeNo further emails were received from JM8) LB began her email chain with me at 10:PM ThursdayIn it I was given an explanation of their error and offered the similar jersey for $Almost times the price I 9) Contrary to her letter to the Revdex.com in her correspondence with me LB states the call to fix the “glitch” will occur later that day.10) After exchanging more emails I am offered the similar item for $9511) 1:PM on April 7th the item is still listed as in stock on their websiteTheir “glitch” has still not be fixed12) After several more exchanges without any progress towards resolution I told LB I would be contacting the Revdex.comLB states she made a “generous” offer to make up for their errorHer offer included options 1) A chance to spend more money at the same discount available days earlier and still not receive the Dupuis Jersey that I had originally ordered.2) The opportunity to pay $instead of the $I was offered on their website for a similar item(I initially believed the item was inferior as stated, but the item offered was actually similar in quality, however, again it carried nearly times the price tag) Further this price was offered only after many complaintsThey originally wanted me to spend $on the item.3) Do nothing and not receive the item that I most wanted and that spurred me to shop at their store in the first placeThe chance to purchase the Dupuis Jersey at the price advertised influenced my decision to purchase the other items LB then states that the offer was in-line with what was offered during the saleThis is untrue as during the sale Sunday I was offered a Dupuis Jersey for $and at no point during our interaction was I offered anything close to this optionInstead I was offered a substantially similar item for approximately $moreThe resolution I wanted from LB was for them to make the jersey that they admit they can produce in-house and honor the original price the substantially similar item was offered atWhile I obviously can’t speak to the businesses intent, offering an item for sale at $and then rejecting the order and instead repeatedly telling the customer that a similar item at various higher prices is a generous offer seems to me to be a classic bait and switch tacticIn closing for the above reasons I am not satisfied with the businesses response and further the response actually makes no offer of resolutionIt instead tries only to muddy the waters in regards to the events and discredit my characterI therefore reject it
Regards,
Michael M***

Hello-The following letter is in response to complaint ID [redacted]. As directed by the notice of the filing, we have not specified our customer by name, rather we have utilized initials. MM is (customer) Mr. Mike M[redacted] LB is Laura B[redacted] (Director, Merchandise Marketing for Aramark at CONSOL...

Energy Center). JM is Jessica M[redacted] (E-commerce supervisor, Team Pittsburgh Gear). We are happy to provide any further information that we can and/or do whatever we can to resolve the issue.On Wednesday April 6th, 2016 e-commerce supervisor JM received an email from and spoke to a customer named MM. MM had made a purchase during a 50% off Fan Appreciation Day sale on Sunday 4/3. MM had ordered 4 jerseys, 3 of which he was charged for and received. MM contacted JM on that Wednesday to let her know that a 4th jersey didn't come and to find out when it would be received. The order JM received when the order was generated only had 3 jerseys shown. Those were the three she charged him for and shipped. However, due to a system error with a 3rd party server, MM's order confirmation contained a 4th jersey, a Dupuis jersey, which he wanted but that's currently out of stock. He was understandably upset for not having received the jersey or being notified that part of the order would not be filled. Had we known about the 4th jersey (it didn't display on our end because it was out of stock) we certainly would have notified him. JM and MM exchanged several emails. JM asked MM to forward everything he had received with regards to his order so that she could do some research and get back to him.After some investigating which we were more than happy to do for him to better understand the disconnect, we found that when the 3rd party server crashed back in February an old inventory file was imported in error upon restart which included Dupuis jerseys. This was a glitch with their system which we did not discover until this order became an issue. We immediately called our server company Thursday morning and resolved the glitch. We thanked MM for bringing this to our attention, explained the situation in great detail, and apologized in writing on Thursday morning. He was still very upset about this and got very aggravated with JM on the phone. He screamed at her, called her incompetent and used multiple forms of profane language towards her. He demanded to be directed to her supervisor. At that point, she forwarded all correspondence to LB, and asked her to step in.LB emailed MM on Thursday to address his concerns. LB again explained the issues with his order in detail and offered an apology and to rectify the situation in any way possible. Since a portion of the order was canceled/not fully processed (the jersey in question), MM found a pending, temporary transaction for the cost of the jersey on his card. MM was very upset about having to "waste his time" monitoring his card for due to our error. LB explained that it was a temporary transaction that would fall off in a few business days and that if he had questions about that process to contact his bank/credit card company. He was again very upset about this inconvenience. LB explained that it's how all temporary transactions are processed and assured him that he would not be charged for anything he did not receive. In an attempt to make up for the confusion, error, and inconvenience, LB offered MM 3 choices which she felt were all generous and fair given the circumstances. LB offered 1) a new online discount code so that MM could shop again and 50% off his entire order, 2) a personalized, heat-pressed Dupuis jersey that we'd produce in-house and send to MM that day at BELOW 50% off, or 3) to accept the canceled transaction and enjoy the 3 items that he did purchase and receive. For several more emails, MM ignored these 3 options stating that he wanted the jersey he ordered. LB again reiterated that they are no longer in stock and that if MM still wanted a Dupuis jersey, we'd make him one, although it would be slightly different than the one he ordered as those are discontinued. MM insisted that this was an "inferior product" and accused our group of bait-and-switch and false advertising. LBassured him that there was no intent, that this was simply a technology glitch, and that we'd do whatever we could to come to a satisfactory resolution. MM asked for LB's supervisor, LB stated that she was the department head (for Retail) and that no one else was available and that he'd have to continue to work with her to resolve his issue. MM stated that none of these were satisfactory and that he was going to file a report with the Revdex.com. LB advised him that these offers were fair and generous and in-line with (and actually a bit more generous than) the original offer to guests on that Sunday. LB stated that this was the best we could offer after consulting with the other managers on our team and we had hoped that MM would find one of them to his satisfaction. LB stated that he was welcome to take us up on one of these offers, but if not, we understood and are happy to simply consider the matter closed and hoped that he enjoyed the items he did receive. LB did not receive any further correspondence.On Monday 4/11, we received the complaint letter in the mail and are providing the above information as our response.Thank you,Laura B[redacted]Director, Merchandise Marketing Aramark, CONSOL Energy Center [redacted]###-###-#### [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.
I reject the businesses complaint as factually incomplete and partially untrue.
To begin the businesses claims I screamed at their customer service representative JM and used profane language. This is simply an outright lie and an ad hominem attack on my complaint as a means to discredit me. While I was aggravated at their poor service, I did not raise my voice and did not use any profane language. I can provide a transcript of this conversation as proof.
LB has also seemingly deliberately blurred the timeline of events. This is the true timeline:
1)      On Sunday April 3 I ordered a Dupuis Jersey for 37.50 along with 189.00 of additional merchandise
2)      On Wednesday April 6th I received shipping confirmation for only the additional items
3)      On Wednesday April 6th I exchanged emails with the customer service rep JM
4)      In these emails I was initially told I was wrong about my order and then once it was clear the mistake was on their end I was offered the similar item for $215 because the $37.50 item was out of stock.
5)      The item still showed as in-stock in their store Wednesday afternoon.
6)      I was asked by JM to call the store. I called, as asked, and while JM offered an apology no resolution or explanation was provided. There was no yelling and no profanity. This was the only phone call and took place before any written apology or explanation of events on their end.
7)      On the morning of April 7th I sent an email listing my grievances and asking to speak to a supervisor. At the time of the email the item still showed as in-stock in their store. No further emails were received from JM
8)      LB began her email chain with me at 10:54 PM Thursday. In it I was given an explanation of their error and offered the similar jersey for $107.50. Almost 3 times the price I
9)      Contrary to her letter to the Revdex.com in her correspondence with me LB states the call to fix the “glitch” will occur later that day.
10)   After exchanging more emails I am offered the similar item for $95
11)   1:34 PM on April 7th the item is still listed as in stock on their website. Their “glitch” has still not be fixed
12)   After several more exchanges without any progress towards resolution I told LB I would be contacting the Revdex.com
LB states she made a “generous” offer to make up for their error. Her offer included 3 options
1)      A chance to spend more money at the same discount available 3 days earlier and still not receive the Dupuis Jersey that I had originally ordered.
2)      The opportunity to pay $95 instead of the $37.50 I was offered on their website for a similar item. (I initially believed the item was inferior as stated, but the item offered was actually similar in quality, however, again it carried nearly 3 times the price tag) Further this price was offered only after many complaints. They originally wanted me to spend $215 on the item.
3)      Do nothing and not receive the item that I most wanted and that spurred me to shop at their store in the first place. The chance to purchase the Dupuis Jersey at the 37.50 price advertised influenced my decision to purchase the 3 other items
LB then states that the offer was in-line with what was offered during the sale. This is untrue as during the sale Sunday I was offered a Dupuis Jersey for $37.50 and at no point during our interaction was I offered anything close to this option. Instead I was offered a substantially similar item for approximately $60 more.
The resolution I wanted from LB was for them to make the jersey that they admit they can produce in-house and honor the original price the substantially similar item was offered at. While I obviously can’t speak to the businesses intent, offering an item for sale at $37.50 and then rejecting the order and instead repeatedly telling the customer that a similar item at various higher prices is a generous offer seems to me to be a classic bait and switch tactic.
In closing for the above reasons I am not satisfied with the businesses response and further the response actually makes no offer of resolution. It instead tries only to muddy the waters in regards to the events and discredit my character. I therefore reject it.
Regards,
Michael M[redacted]

Hello-The following letter is in response to complaint ID [redacted]. As directed by the notice of the filing, we have not specified our customer by name, rather we have utilized initials. MM is (customer) Mr. Mike M[redacted] LB is Laura B[redacted] (Director, Merchandise Marketing for Aramark...

at CONSOL Energy Center). JM is Jessica M[redacted] (E-commerce supervisor, Team Pittsburgh Gear). We are happy to provide any further information that we can and/or do whatever we can to resolve the issue.On Wednesday April 6th, 2016 e-commerce supervisor JM received an email from and spoke to a customer named MM. MM had made a purchase during a 50% off Fan Appreciation Day sale on Sunday 4/3. MM had ordered 4 jerseys, 3 of which he was charged for and received. MM contacted JM on that Wednesday to let her know that a 4th jersey didn't come and to find out when it would be received. The order JM received when the order was generated only had 3 jerseys shown. Those were the three she charged him for and shipped. However, due to a system error with a 3rd party server, MM's order confirmation contained a 4th jersey, a Dupuis jersey, which he wanted but that's currently out of stock. He was understandably upset for not having received the jersey or being notified that part of the order would not be filled. Had we known about the 4th jersey (it didn't display on our end because it was out of stock) we certainly would have notified him. JM and MM exchanged several emails. JM asked MM to forward everything he had received with regards to his order so that she could do some research and get back to him.After some investigating which we were more than happy to do for him to better understand the disconnect, we found that when the 3rd party server crashed back in February an old inventory file was imported in error upon restart which included Dupuis jerseys. This was a glitch with their system which we did not discover until this order became an issue. We immediately called our server company Thursday morning and resolved the glitch. We thanked MM for bringing this to our attention, explained the situation in great detail, and apologized in writing on Thursday morning. He was still very upset about this and got very aggravated with JM on the phone. He screamed at her, called her incompetent and used multiple forms of profane language towards her. He demanded to be directed to her supervisor. At that point, she forwarded all correspondence to LB, and asked her to step in.LB emailed MM on Thursday to address his concerns. LB again explained the issues with his order in detail and offered an apology and to rectify the situation in any way possible. Since a portion of the order was canceled/not fully processed (the jersey in question), MM found a pending, temporary transaction for the cost of the jersey on his card. MM was very upset about having to "waste his time" monitoring his card for due to our error. LB explained that it was a temporary transaction that would fall off in a few business days and that if he had questions about that process to contact his bank/credit card company. He was again very upset about this inconvenience. LB explained that it's how all temporary transactions are processed and assured him that he would not be charged for anything he did not receive. In an attempt to make up for the confusion, error, and inconvenience, LB offered MM 3 choices which she felt were all generous and fair given the circumstances. LB offered 1) a new online discount code so that MM could shop again and 50% off his entire order, 2) a personalized, heat-pressed Dupuis jersey that we'd produce in-house and send to MM that day at BELOW 50% off, or 3) to accept the canceled transaction and enjoy the 3 items that he did purchase and receive. For several more emails, MM ignored these 3 options stating that he wanted the jersey he ordered. LB again reiterated that they are no longer in stock and that if MM still wanted a Dupuis jersey, we'd make him one, although it would be slightly different than the one he ordered as those are discontinued. MM insisted that this was an "inferior product" and accused our group of bait-and-switch and false advertising. LBassured him that there was no intent, that this was simply a technology glitch, and that we'd do whatever we could to come to a satisfactory resolution. MM asked for LB's supervisor, LB stated that she was the department head (for Retail) and that no one else was available and that he'd have to continue to work with her to resolve his issue. MM stated that none of these were satisfactory and that he was going to file a report with the Revdex.com. LB advised him that these offers were fair and generous and in-line with (and actually a bit more generous than) the original offer to guests on that Sunday. LB stated that this was the best we could offer after consulting with the other managers on our team and we had hoped that MM would find one of them to his satisfaction. LB stated that he was welcome to take us up on one of these offers, but if not, we understood and are happy to simply consider the matter closed and hoped that he enjoyed the items he did receive. LB did not receive any further correspondence.On Monday 4/11, we received the complaint letter in the mail and are providing the above information as our response.
Thank you,
Laura B[redacted]Director, Merchandise Marketing A
ramark, CONSOL Energy Center
[redacted]###-###-#### [redacted]

Review: Advertised 50% off sale.

Had Penguins Jersey listed as in stock (stocking system showed certain sizes in stock, others out of stock) for $75 before discount. Checked out through their website and was sent confirmation of my order at $37.50(50% off $75) and credit card showed charge pending in the correct amount. Several other items ordered at the same time.

Received an email that all other items had shipped except for the most heavily discounted ($37.50) jersey. Was then told that the the discounted item was not available and it had merely been a "glitch" in their computer system. To remedy the situation I was offered (by Lauren B[redacted], their director of merchandising) my choice of similar jersey's at $95!! More than two and a half times the price of the original advertised item. This was presented to me as a wonderful deal a full 50% off the regular price! (Completely ignoring the fact that everything had been the same 50% off days earlier when my order had been placed)

I'm not sure I could cite a more classic example of a bait and switch routine.

1. Advertised an outstanding price for an item they weren't able to provide

2. Lured me in with this advertisement which led to the purchase of several other items

3. Failed to send me the discounted item because of a "glitch"

4. Offered to remedy the situation by having me purchase a much more expensive item.Desired Settlement: The business is capable of producing a comparable item to the "out of stock" item on my original order. I would like my original order fulfilled at the agreed upon price (37.50) to the best of their ability. (comparable item)

Business

Response:

Hello-The following letter is in response to complaint ID [redacted]. As directed by the notice of the filing, we have not specified our customer by name, rather we have utilized initials. MM is (customer) Mr. Mike M[redacted] LB is Laura B[redacted] (Director, Merchandise Marketing for Aramark at CONSOL Energy Center). JM is Jessica M[redacted] (E-commerce supervisor, Team Pittsburgh Gear). We are happy to provide any further information that we can and/or do whatever we can to resolve the issue.On Wednesday April 6th, 2016 e-commerce supervisor JM received an email from and spoke to a customer named MM. MM had made a purchase during a 50% off Fan Appreciation Day sale on Sunday 4/3. MM had ordered 4 jerseys, 3 of which he was charged for and received. MM contacted JM on that Wednesday to let her know that a 4th jersey didn't come and to find out when it would be received. The order JM received when the order was generated only had 3 jerseys shown. Those were the three she charged him for and shipped. However, due to a system error with a 3rd party server, MM's order confirmation contained a 4th jersey, a Dupuis jersey, which he wanted but that's currently out of stock. He was understandably upset for not having received the jersey or being notified that part of the order would not be filled. Had we known about the 4th jersey (it didn't display on our end because it was out of stock) we certainly would have notified him. JM and MM exchanged several emails. JM asked MM to forward everything he had received with regards to his order so that she could do some research and get back to him.After some investigating which we were more than happy to do for him to better understand the disconnect, we found that when the 3rd party server crashed back in February an old inventory file was imported in error upon restart which included Dupuis jerseys. This was a glitch with their system which we did not discover until this order became an issue. We immediately called our server company Thursday morning and resolved the glitch. We thanked MM for bringing this to our attention, explained the situation in great detail, and apologized in writing on Thursday morning. He was still very upset about this and got very aggravated with JM on the phone. He screamed at her, called her incompetent and used multiple forms of profane language towards her. He demanded to be directed to her supervisor. At that point, she forwarded all correspondence to LB, and asked her to step in.LB emailed MM on Thursday to address his concerns. LB again explained the issues with his order in detail and offered an apology and to rectify the situation in any way possible. Since a portion of the order was canceled/not fully processed (the jersey in question), MM found a pending, temporary transaction for the cost of the jersey on his card. MM was very upset about having to "waste his time" monitoring his card for due to our error. LB explained that it was a temporary transaction that would fall off in a few business days and that if he had questions about that process to contact his bank/credit card company. He was again very upset about this inconvenience. LB explained that it's how all temporary transactions are processed and assured him that he would not be charged for anything he did not receive. In an attempt to make up for the confusion, error, and inconvenience, LB offered MM 3 choices which she felt were all generous and fair given the circumstances. LB offered 1) a new online discount code so that MM could shop again and 50% off his entire order, 2) a personalized, heat-pressed Dupuis jersey that we'd produce in-house and send to MM that day at BELOW 50% off, or 3) to accept the canceled transaction and enjoy the 3 items that he did purchase and receive. For several more emails, MM ignored these 3 options stating that he wanted the jersey he ordered. LB again reiterated that they are no longer in stock and that if MM still wanted a Dupuis jersey, we'd make him one, although it would be slightly different than the one he ordered as those are discontinued. MM insisted that this was an "inferior product" and accused our group of bait-and-switch and false advertising. LBassured him that there was no intent, that this was simply a technology glitch, and that we'd do whatever we could to come to a satisfactory resolution. MM asked for LB's supervisor, LB stated that she was the department head (for Retail) and that no one else was available and that he'd have to continue to work with her to resolve his issue. MM stated that none of these were satisfactory and that he was going to file a report with the Revdex.com. LB advised him that these offers were fair and generous and in-line with (and actually a bit more generous than) the original offer to guests on that Sunday. LB stated that this was the best we could offer after consulting with the other managers on our team and we had hoped that MM would find one of them to his satisfaction. LB stated that he was welcome to take us up on one of these offers, but if not, we understood and are happy to simply consider the matter closed and hoped that he enjoyed the items he did receive. LB did not receive any further correspondence.On Monday 4/11, we received the complaint letter in the mail and are providing the above information as our response.Thank you,Laura B[redacted]Director, Merchandise Marketing Aramark, CONSOL Energy Center [redacted]###-###-#### [redacted]