Reputation Management Consultants

In response to the complaint filed by [redacted] , Reputation Management Consultants would like to first extend our apology that Mr [redacted] had an unsatisfactory experience regarding our campaignMr [redacted] entered into an agreement with RMC for a Reputation Management campaign targeting specific search phrases, all permutations of Mr [redacted] ’s full name: [redacted] , [redacted] , [redacted] , [redacted] , [redacted] E [redacted] The stated goal of this campaign was to clear the first page of Google search results for all keytermsRMC recognizes that “***” is not the way Mr [redacted] usually spells his name; RMC only mentions it because it is listed in the signed agreement While some of the negative items remain on the first page for several keyterms, RMC was able to clear the first page for “ [redacted] E [redacted] ”As is the case with all of RMC’s campaign agreements - due to the unpredictable and ever-changing nature of Google’s proprietary algorithms - the agreement with Mr [redacted] contained no explicit guarantees that results would be achieved within the given projected timeframeTo be sure, our staff speaks with great confidence about the power of our Reputation Management platform because it has proven to be highly successful over many years of diverse campaigns Again, RMC certainly regrets when a client is not satisfied with their experienceSeveral members of our senior staff reached out directly to speak with Mr [redacted] to try and reach a resolution including our Chief Operations OfficerHowever, it is RMC’s strong belief that we performed all services that were in the written agreement signed by both partiesIn addition, our team is still in process to find a solution to achieve Mr [redacted] campaign goals

In response to the claims asserted by [redacted] , RMC offers the following rebuttal:RMC fully performed all services promised in the contract to the extent that RMC was permitted, based on the lack of response and cooperation from Mr [redacted] and his primary contactDespite numerous attempts to contact Mr [redacted] to discuss the strategy and branding for his content, Mr [redacted] never responded to our calls or emails until months into the campaign, when he issued his cancelation and demanded a refund for the reasons previously stated As a strict policy, RMC will not engage in content creation & publication for a brand or individual without conducting a thorough consultation with our clients to agree on a content strategyPublishing content without the approval of our clients has been extremely detrimental in the past, and has caused considerable problems with inaccuracy and branding preferenceTherefore, RMC practices a policy of cooperative branding strategy, to ensure that our clients receive only content that they want published, and that all facts and information is accurate RMC completed every step in creating, registering and launching all of the pages submitted in our original response, and RMC ensured that these assets were indexed on Google’s search enginesThese assets were built as comprehensively as possible without approved content from Mr [redacted] Upon review, all of the sites submitted are live and active (with the only exception being Friendfeed, a site which shut down after RMC created a profile on the domain) RMC also fulfilled all other activities pertaining to the assets, including sending unique visitors to each profile and ensuring that third-party web users engaged with every asset For example, a simple review of the Google+ profile we created will show that RMC generated over 1,views for that single page The only aspect of the campaign that was not completed for Mr [redacted] ’s campaign was the publication of original content – which we were prevented from accomplishing because of the lack of response and cooperation by Mr [redacted] and his team All of the sites created and built by RMC fully exist, live and active on the web – they are simply devoid of content because Mr [redacted] did not engage with RMC in the content-creation process / [redacted] Style Definitions */

In response to the complaint by [redacted] , RMC asserts the following points: [redacted] signed up with us for a Link Removal campaign in order to remove a Mugshots.com link from her first page of Google Results and Image ResultsThe guaranteed result of this campaign was for the link to be removed from Mugshots.com’s database, and removed from the search index available to Google and other search enginesThe agreed-upon fee was $2,for the removal of the linkRMC removed the offensive mugshot within one month of the agreement being signed, thus fulfilling the terms of the agreementRMC cannot control whether a site distributes a photo file or a public arrest recordArrest records are publicly searchable and many sites have the ability to purchase & publish official arrest records Some sites pick up off of major mugshot sites like Mugshots.com and re-publish the mugshot recordsTherefore, if you remove the mugshot from Mugshots.com, you can theoretically prevent other sites from getting the informationHowever, if a mugshot site wanted to purchase & view the public arrest record, they are within their legal right to do soRMC is not in the practice of misleading customers or setting unrealistic expectationsTo that end, RMC has conducted a full review of the recorded phone calls between Ms [redacted] and our staff, and there is no evidence of our staff promising that all mugshots replicate from a single site, or that the item would not replicate to any other sitesWe simply cannot promise thisHowever, RMC has submitted removals for any other offensive mugshot that we could findWe believes that this situation is a simple misunderstanding about the capability of our platformFinally, contingent upon Ms [redacted] removing this complaint, RMC will guarantee that for the next days, no additional mugshots will appear on the search results for Ms [redacted] ’s keytermsAs of today, RMC removed all the mugshots for Ms [redacted] and we are trying to get hold of her to go over the search results to prove to her that all the links were cleared from the search engineThanks,

In response to the complaint by [redacted] , RMC asserts the following points: [redacted] signed up with us for a Link Removal campaign in order to remove a Mugshots.com link from her first page of Google Results and Image ResultsThe guaranteed result of this campaign was for the link to be removed from Mugshots.com’s database, and removed from the search index available to Google and other search enginesThe agreed-upon fee was $2,for the removal of the linkRMC removed the offensive mugshot within one month of the agreement being signed, thus fulfilling the terms of the agreement RMC cannot control whether a site distributes a photo file or a public arrest recordArrest records are publicly searchable and many sites have the ability to purchase & publish official arrest records.? Some sites pick up off of major mugshot sites like Mugshots.com and re-publish the mugshot recordsTherefore, if you remove the mugshot from Mugshots.com, you can theoretically prevent other sites from getting the informationHowever, if a mugshot site wanted to purchase & view the public arrest record, they are within their legal right to do so RMC is not in the practice of misleading customers or setting unrealistic expectationsTo that end, RMC has conducted a full review of the recorded phone calls between Ms [redacted] and our staff, and there is no evidence of our staff promising that all mugshots replicate from a single site, or that the item would not replicate to any other sitesWe simply cannot promise thisHowever, RMC has submitted removals for any other offensive mugshot that we could findWe believes that this situation is a simple misunderstanding about the capability of our platformFinally, contingent upon Ms [redacted] removing this complaint, RMC will guarantee that for the next days, no additional mugshots will appear on the search results for Ms [redacted] ’s keytermsAs of today, RMC removed all the mugshots for Ms [redacted] and we are trying to get hold of her to go over the search results to prove to her that all the links were cleared from the search engine Thanks,

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 Saying that this venture was a success is not believable The article in question was removed from every major city but Houston when we are a Houston based company is a success? Can any reasonable person consider that to be a successful outcome? Please see a sample email from our CEO B [redacted] as an example of the notifications made to your business early on in our relationship: From: "." < [redacted] > Date: Monday, December 7, at 12:PM To: [redacted] < [redacted] > Subject: Re: [redacted] *** As a follow up to my last email, it doesn’t appear that our searches are having any movement You mentioned that it is making movement in other states but we don’t care because we don’t do business in other states From the beginning this is supposed to focus on local only [redacted] * [redacted] *** * [redacted] | [redacted] This email is representative of at least a half dozen more made to your company to please focus on Houston only I believe that you are misrepresenting the facts here [redacted]

[redacted] hired Reputation Management Consultants on December 19, The agreement was for suppression reputation management for [redacted] ; this was month to month agreement at $per month and a one-time fee of $with a day notice of cancellation [redacted] was reached out to immediately by phone 216- [redacted] and email [redacted] @gmail.com this is the contact information ? provided by [redacted] in the agreementWe were to make all contact regarding this campaign with [redacted] , we were not provided contact information for [redacted] After multiple attempts to reach [redacted] to schedule a campaign strategy call, we proceeded with the campaign, suppression of the negative links in Google by creating multiple assets and content campaignWe continued to work on this ? throughout ? entirely of this campaign until she cancelled via email on August 20th [redacted] received monthly reports with all work our team had done each day periodWe did not guarantee removal or suppression of negatives ? 12/19/?" Introduction left voicemail with all contact information 12/30/?" Follow up left voicemail 02/13/?" Follow up to ensure client received first report left voicemail 06/?" Several attempts by Director to reach client via phone, client never returned calls 07/?" Attempts to reach client, no return call ? Email: 12/19/?" Introduction and Media Kit and Branding Questionnaire (no response) 01/05/?" Initial Report and second attempt at Media Kit and Branding Questionnaire (no response) 02/13/?" First Month Report (no response) 03/12/?" Monthly Report (no response) 04/10/Monthly Report (no response) 05/11/Monthly Report 07/07/Director reached out to [redacted] in detailed email with all the work we have done to date 08/20/Received email from client requesting to cancel service? I also attached all the monthly reports for all the assets and links we created for this campaign, there was a lot of effort put into this account from day one, and it was mostly achieved based on the agreement we have with the client.? Regards,

Good afternoon, I hope you're doing wellI wanted to address the concerns that you had with the campaign that we ran for your companyLooking at the results of your campaign, it looks as though the search results are cleared and positive for the "CITOC" keyterm in every state except the city of Houston, TX local search engine resultsThis is a huge success when it comes to the final results, and we are little confused that you don't consider these results as a positive outcome! I am sure all the reports and the assets we shared with you can speak for itself, otherwise, we can further discuss your results over the phone if you wishRMC has performed countless location-specific campaigns and we contract specifically to deal with situations where only certain locations are damagedHowever, this campaign was not contracted with those needs in mind; we found out after the factWe would be happy to discuss a local program with you that will be significantly effective on Houston's Google search resultsMore than anything, we want to make sure that you had a positive experience working with RMC and we would still like to do whatever we can to achieve your desired results Regards,

Good afternoon, I hope you're doing wellI wanted to address the concerns that you had with the campaign that we ran for your companyLooking at the results of your campaign, it looks as though the search results are cleared and positive for the "CITOC" keyterm in every state except the city of
Houston, TX local search engine resultsThis is a huge success when it comes to the final results, and we are little confused that you don't consider these results as a positive outcome! I am sure all the reports and the assets we shared with you can speak for itself, otherwise, we can further discuss your results over the phone if you wishRMC has performed countless location-specific campaigns and we contract specifically to deal with situations where only certain locations are damagedHowever, this campaign was not contracted with those needs in mind; we found out after the factWe would be happy to discuss a local program with you that will be significantly effective on Houston's Google search resultsMore than anything, we want to make sure that you had a positive experience working with RMC and we would still like to do whatever we can to achieve your desired results Regards,

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
Saying that this venture was a success is not believable. The article in question was removed from every major city but Houston when we are a Houston based company is a success? Can any reasonable person consider that to be a successful outcome? Please see a sample email from our CEO B** *** as an example of the notifications made to your business early on in our relationship: From: "." Date: Monday, December 7, at 12:PM To: *** Subject: Re: *** *** * *** *** As a follow up to my last email, it doesn’t appear that our searches are having any movement. You mentioned that it is making movement in other states but we don’t care because we don’t do business in other states. From the beginning this is supposed to focus on local only. ** *** * *** *** * *** *** | ***This email is representative of at least a half dozen more made to your company to please focus on Houston only. I believe that you are misrepresenting the facts here
*** ***

I completely understand your urgent intent to have the search results cleared specifically in the Houston areaAs I mentioned, we found out from ** after we started the campaign that we wanted to focus on the Houston areaHowever, we were performing a standard Reputation Management campaign that is designed to clear the national search result landscape for a given keytermThis stands apart from our Local Reputation Management product that is designed to focus on one specific location at a time -- this requires a far different set of resources and distribution of labor and production I want to make sure that we do what we can to resolve your situation, but in order to fully solve the Houston-specific problem, we would have to pursue a Local Reputation Management campaign directed at the Houston areaWe would be happy to perform a full Local campaign at 50% cost, meaning that RMC would cover half the cost of your Local campaign in recognition of the first campaign not meeting your expectationsIn another way, you only need to cover our cost of service with money back guarantee if we don't resolve your issueWe would like to speak with you further about thisPlease let us know when we can discuss your situation on the phone. Regards,

In response to the complaint filed by *** ***, Reputation Management Consultants would like to first extend our apology that Mr*** had an unsatisfactory experience regarding our campaignMr*** entered into an agreement with RMC for a Reputation Management campaign targeting
specific search phrases, all permutations of Mr***’s full name: *** ***, *** ***, *** ***, *** *** ***, *** E ***The stated goal of this campaign was to clear the first page of Google search results for all keytermsRMC recognizes that “***” is not the way Mr*** usually spells his name; RMC only mentions it because it is listed in the signed agreement While some of the negative items remain on the first page for several keyterms, RMC was able to clear the first page for “*** E ***”As is the case with all of RMC’s campaign agreements - due to the unpredictable and ever-changing nature of Google’s proprietary algorithms - the agreement with Mr*** contained no explicit guarantees that results would be achieved within the given projected timeframeTo be sure, our staff speaks with great confidence about the power of our Reputation Management platform because it has proven to be highly successful over many years of diverse campaigns Again, RMC certainly regrets when a client is not satisfied with their experienceSeveral members of our senior staff reached out directly to speak with Mr*** to try and reach a resolution including our Chief Operations OfficerHowever, it is RMC’s strong belief that we performed all services that were in the written agreement signed by both partiesIn addition, our team is still in process to find a solution to achieve Mr*** campaign goals

In response to the complaint by *** ***, RMC asserts the following points: *** *** signed up with us for a Link Removal campaign in order to remove a Mugshots.com link from her first page of Google Results and Image ResultsThe guaranteed result of this campaign was for the
link to be removed from Mugshots.com’s database, and removed from the search index available to Google and other search enginesThe agreed-upon fee was $2,for the removal of the linkRMC removed the offensive mugshot within one month of the agreement being signed, thus fulfilling the terms of the agreement RMC cannot control whether a site distributes a photo file or a public arrest recordArrest records are publicly searchable and many sites have the ability to purchase & publish official arrest records. Some sites pick up off of major mugshot sites like Mugshots.com and re-publish the mugshot recordsTherefore, if you remove the mugshot from Mugshots.com, you can theoretically prevent other sites from getting the informationHowever, if a mugshot site wanted to purchase & view the public arrest record, they are within their legal right to do so RMC is not in the practice of misleading customers or setting unrealistic expectationsTo that end, RMC has conducted a full review of the recorded phone calls between Ms*** and our staff, and there is no evidence of our staff promising that all mugshots replicate from a single site, or that the item would not replicate to any other sitesWe simply cannot promise thisHowever, RMC has submitted removals for any other offensive mugshot that we could findWe believes that this situation is a simple misunderstanding about the capability of our platformFinally, contingent upon Ms*** removing this complaint, RMC will guarantee that for the next days, no additional mugshots will appear on the search results for Ms***’s keytermsAs of today, RMC removed all the mugshots for Ms*** and we are trying to get hold of her to go over the search results to prove to her that all the links were cleared from the search engine Thanks,

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
The response provided by Reputation Management Consultants completely dodges the claim I am making, which is that they did not perform the services promisedLet me give you some more backstory, after I complained about to Reputation Management Consultants to my credit card company, they provided us a list of the website which they "created and launched"These websites were the companies attempt to claim that they actually did perform servicesI was surprised to see such an extensive list of work, and so I took the time to visit the sites they claimed to have "created and launched" as part of my campaign and the VAST MAJORITY DID NOT ACTUALLY EXIST! IAs proof of my above claims, I have attached Reputation Management Consultants response to American Express, where they claimed to have "created and launched" (their words), the list of websites which in fact DO NOT EXIST. I firmly believe that Reputation Management Consultants DID NOT PERFORM THE SERVICES PROMISED IN THE CONTRACT and even falsified information which they provided to American Express in an attempt to cover up the fact that they never performed said servicesI also want to make one thing clear, I totally understand that there was no guarantee that these websites would rank high on Google, as I understand Reputation Management Consultants does NOT control Google's algorithm, but the fact is, they never actually launched the websites, so they had NO CHANCE of ever ranking at all, because they didn't exist!Please see the supporting documentation, where you will clearly see that Reputation Management Consultants wrote to American Express a list of websites which they used as justification that they actually performed the services promisedIn addition to this, you will see my research, where I took several hours to visit each website individually and was shocked to see that the vast majority actually did not existI have even provided screenshots of each website, so you can see the error messages for yourself.
Regards,
*** ***

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
The response provided by Reputation Management Consultants completely dodges the claim I am making, which is that they did not perform the services promisedLet me give you some more backstory, after I complained about to Reputation Management Consultants to my credit card company, they provided us a list of the website which they "created and launched"These websites were the companies attempt to claim that they actually did perform servicesI was surprised to see such an extensive list of work, and so I took the time to visit the sites they claimed to have "created and launched" as part of my campaign and the VAST MAJORITY DID NOT ACTUALLY EXIST! IAs proof of my above claims, I have attached Reputation Management Consultants response to American Express, where they claimed to have "created and launched" (their words), the list of websites which in fact DO NOT EXIST. I firmly believe that Reputation Management Consultants DID NOT PERFORM THE SERVICES PROMISED IN THE CONTRACT and even falsified information which they provided to American Express in an attempt to cover up the fact that they never performed said servicesI also want to make one thing clear, I totally understand that there was no guarantee that these websites would rank high on Google, as I understand Reputation Management Consultants does NOT control Google's algorithm, but the fact is, they never actually launched the websites, so they had NO CHANCE of ever ranking at all, because they didn't exist!Please see the supporting documentation, where you will clearly see that Reputation Management Consultants wrote to American Express a list of websites which they used as justification that they actually performed the services promisedIn addition to this, you will see my research, where I took several hours to visit each website individually and was shocked to see that the vast majority actually did not existI have even provided screenshots of each website, so you can see the error messages for yourself.
Regards,
*** ***

I completely understand your urgent intent to have the search results cleared specifically in the Houston areaAs I mentioned, we found out from ** after we started the campaign that we wanted to focus on the Houston areaHowever, we were performing a standard Reputation Management campaign that is designed to clear the national search result landscape for a given keytermThis stands apart from our Local Reputation Management product that is designed to focus on one specific location at a time -- this requires a far different set of resources and distribution of labor and production I want to make sure that we do what we can to resolve your situation, but in order to fully solve the Houston-specific problem, we would have to pursue a Local Reputation Management campaign directed at the Houston areaWe would be happy to perform a full Local campaign at 50% cost, meaning that RMC would cover half the cost of your Local campaign in recognition of the first campaign not meeting your expectationsIn another way, you only need to cover our cost of service with money back guarantee if we don't resolve your issueWe would like to speak with you further about thisPlease let us know when we can discuss your situation on the phone. Regards,

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
I received a phone call from a person who claimed to be an officer of the companyHe was sympathetic to my complaint and promised to "analyze" and "look at the costs" of my complaint and get back to me in a "couple of days"To date , now a week later, I have received no response from said officer of the company nor anyone else associated with this companyThis person stated in the response that ONE of my formal names *** E *** has been removed from the front page of a google searchIn point of fact, I am not aware that a search of my name, *** E *** in google prior to this service ever yielded the information that is still presentA search of *** or *** or *** followed by my last name still yields the negative information in the number ONE position from a google searchIn fact this company has done more harm to my reputation than good because now the common misspelling of my name - *** - is now LINKED in a search to *** or ***! The officer of the company whom I spoke to also indicated that the changing algorithms of Google are responsible for the lack of accomplishment of the promised resultsThis is exactly why I hired this companyThey advertise themselves as having "years of knowledge and experience, not trial and error guesswork" and "the end goal is always to create sustained results that will last for years to come"This company through *** *** sent me an online advertisement on March of titled "KEY DIFFERENCES THAT SEPARATE RMC FROM OTHER COMPANIES" that contained promises of "We Guarantee Our Performance 100%", "SPEED- Our Solution Is The Fastest In The Industry", " We Are The Only Firm With Our Own Comprehensive And Unique Proprietary Technology Called SearchKnight" and "Unlike other firms that stop working when the project is finished, RMC Will Continue To Strengthen The Authority Of Positive Assets We Put On The First Few Pages With Our Advanced Technology Called Clear Control".I believe that RMC has violated the US Supreme Court Settled Ruling barring Fraudulent MisrepresentationThis is in common language called bait and switchI do not want to pursue this matter further unless forced to do so by RMC ignoring my legitimate complaint that even the officer of the company agreed was validIt is a huge expenditure of time and assets but I am personally unrelenting when I feel I have been wrongedI am only starting with Revdex.com because it is the least effort generally most effective way to achieve a resolutionI will also complain to the Attorney General for the State of California and as a last resort to the Court SystemI personally believe it is in everyones best interest to 1) reimburse me for my expenditure for this failed campaign or 2) remove my negative content from the first page of a google search as promised no matter how long it takes
Regards,
*** ***

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
I received a phone call from a person who claimed to be an officer of the companyHe was sympathetic to my complaint and promised to "analyze" and "look at the costs" of my complaint and get back to me in a "couple of days"To date , now a week later, I have received no response from said officer of the company nor anyone else associated with this companyThis person stated in the response that ONE of my formal names *** E *** has been removed from the front page of a google searchIn point of fact, I am not aware that a search of my name, *** E *** in google prior to this service ever yielded the information that is still presentA search of *** or *** or *** followed by my last name still yields the negative information in the number ONE position from a google searchIn fact this company has done more harm to my reputation than good because now the common misspelling of my name - *** - is now LINKED in a search to *** or ***! The officer of the company whom I spoke to also indicated that the changing algorithms of Google are responsible for the lack of accomplishment of the promised resultsThis is exactly why I hired this companyThey advertise themselves as having "years of knowledge and experience, not trial and error guesswork" and "the end goal is always to create sustained results that will last for years to come"This company through *** *** sent me an online advertisement on March of titled "KEY DIFFERENCES THAT SEPARATE RMC FROM OTHER COMPANIES" that contained promises of "We Guarantee Our Performance 100%", "SPEED- Our Solution Is The Fastest In The Industry", " We Are The Only Firm With Our Own Comprehensive And Unique Proprietary Technology Called SearchKnight" and "Unlike other firms that stop working when the project is finished, RMC Will Continue To Strengthen The Authority Of Positive Assets We Put On The First Few Pages With Our Advanced Technology Called Clear Control".I believe that RMC has violated the US Supreme Court Settled Ruling barring Fraudulent MisrepresentationThis is in common language called bait and switchI do not want to pursue this matter further unless forced to do so by RMC ignoring my legitimate complaint that even the officer of the company agreed was validIt is a huge expenditure of time and assets but I am personally unrelenting when I feel I have been wrongedI am only starting with Revdex.com because it is the least effort generally most effective way to achieve a resolutionI will also complain to the Attorney General for the State of California and as a last resort to the Court SystemI personally believe it is in everyones best interest to 1) reimburse me for my expenditure for this failed campaign or 2) remove my negative content from the first page of a google search as promised no matter how long it takes
Regards,
*** ***

*** *** hired Reputation Management
Consultants
on December 19, The agreement was for suppression reputation management
for *** ***; this was month to month agreement at $per
month and a one-time fee of $with a day notice of cancellation***
was reached out to immediately by phone 216-*** and email ***@gmail.com this is the contact
information ? provided by *** in the agreementWe were to make all
contact regarding this campaign with ***, we were not provided contact
information for ***
After multiple attempts to reach *** to schedule a
campaign strategy call, we proceeded with the campaign, suppression of the
negative links in Google by creating multiple assets and content
campaignWe continued to work on this ? throughout ? entirely of this
campaign until she cancelled via email on August 20th***
received monthly reports with all work our team had done each day periodWe
did not guarantee removal or suppression of negatives
?
12/19/??" Introduction left voicemail with all contact
information
12/30/??" Follow up left voicemail
02/13/??" Follow up to ensure client received first
report left voicemail
06/??" Several attempts by Director to reach client via
phone, client never returned calls
07/??" Attempts to reach client, no return call
?
Email:
12/19/??" Introduction and Media Kit and Branding
Questionnaire (no response)
01/05/??" Initial Report and second attempt at Media Kit
and Branding Questionnaire (no response)
02/13/??" First Month Report (no response)
03/12/??" Monthly Report (no response)
04/10/Monthly Report (no response)
05/11/Monthly Report
07/07/Director reached out to *** in detailed
email with all the work we have done to date
08/20/Received email from client requesting to cancel
service? I also attached all the monthly reports for all the assets and links we created for this campaign, there was a lot of effort put into this account from day one, and it was mostly achieved based on the agreement we have with the client.? Regards,

Good afternoon, I hope you're doing wellI wanted to address the concerns that you had with the campaign that we ran for your companyLooking at the results of your campaign, it looks as though the search results are cleared and positive for the "CITOC" keyterm in every state except the city of
Houston, TX local search engine resultsThis is a huge success when it comes to the final results, and we are little confused that you don't consider these results as a positive outcome! I am sure all the reports and the assets we shared with you can speak for itself, otherwise, we can further discuss your results over the phone if you wishRMC has performed countless location-specific campaigns and we contract specifically to deal with situations where only certain locations are damagedHowever, this campaign was not contracted with those needs in mind; we found out after the factWe would be happy to discuss a local program with you that will be significantly effective on Houston's Google search resultsMore than anything, we want to make sure that you had a positive experience working with RMC and we would still like to do whatever we can to achieve your desired results? Regards,

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.
Saying that this venture was a success is not believable.  The article in question was removed from every major city but Houston when we are a Houston based company is a success?  Can any reasonable person consider that to be a successful outcome?  Please see a sample email from our CEO B. [redacted] as an example of the notifications made to your business early on in our relationship:  From: "." <[redacted]> Date: Monday, December 7, 2015 at 12:10 PM To: [redacted] <[redacted]> Subject: Re: [redacted] As a follow up to my last email, it doesn’t appear that our searches are having any movement.  You mentioned that it is making movement in other states but we don’t care because we don’t do business in other states.  From the beginning this is supposed to focus on local only. [redacted] * [redacted] * [redacted] | [redacted]This email is representative of at least a half dozen more made to your company to please focus on Houston only.  I believe that you are misrepresenting the facts here.
[redacted]