Royal Design Studio

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 I do not accept the assumptions and beliefs presented in the most recent correspondence from Royal Design Studios as fact or proof - and I do not accept that "wear and tear" or "use" explains or excuses the faulty construction of this product and then subsequent refusal to review my claim with seriousness and logic Based on this company's unprofessionalism, I am led to the inference that my correspondence was received and reviewed with haste and little effort That the respondent assumes the photos I presented (attached here) prove extensive use is an assumption with no basis in truth - I have never communicated the number of projects I have completed with this product, or without it Regarding my order history, again the assumption is illogical - the respondent has no basis to assume that the prior products I ordered were for my use; further, there is no basis to establish that any of my products ordered were used in conjunction with each other For the respondent to suggest that I had not followed the cleaning and care instructions provided with this faulty item is lazy at best and offensive at worst It is evident that my correspondence was dismissed as inconsequential and that it was not taken with seriousness In practical application (and not in error), paint does not go on the handle of a brush - it is to be applied to the bristles: evidenced in these attached photos is proof that the bristles are clean, conditioned, and in very good shape - in the respondent's words from the last communication, "the bristles are still in good working condition," which would not be the case had this brush been abused in any way Paint on the handle of a brush does not prove frequency or extent of use - it might guide or misguide an assumption, but it is proof of nothing Royal Design Studios may have established their own return policy that they "only replace defective products within days of purchase", but this establishment is questionable and is not always in the best interest of fairness to the consumer: this respondent may be used to their defective products showing their quality before days; it just so happens that in this instance, it took a little longer for me The respondent provides a solution or proposed action of me purchasing another product ("LOctite") to resolve my claim - conferring the action upon the consumer instead of themselves They propose me using it to reattach the handle to their product that proved faulty I do not believe it to be any consumer's position to take the proposed action to repair a product purchased at a cost to him or her, with another product purchased at a cost to him/her This proposal is unsatisfactory and dismissive, and the product sold to me should be replaced - or the cost ($plus sales tax) should be refunded so that I may purchase a similar, more high-quality item from a company who regards their consumers differently Regards, [redacted]

We are sorry you are not satisfied with our productAs explained in the first email, the life of the brush is determined by "time and use"Your attached photos prove extensive use of the brush, and perhaps your cleaning process caused the glue to fail dislodging the handle from the brush headOur
brushes do not carry a lifetime guaranteeAs stated in our Return Policy, we do not accept returns on products, and only replace defective products within days of purchasehttp:/WWW.Igyaltiesignstudio.com/pags/glistOEller-service.This purchase was over months ago, and based on your other purchases and the photos provided, it is apparent this brush has performed for a variety of projectsAs a gesture of good faith, we offered a reduced price for a replacement brushWe are sorry if this fails to meet your expectations, but we believe our product performed as expected, and the issue was due to wear and tear.Finally, after further inspection of your photos, a simple solution would be to apply some common household glue such as "LOctite" http://www.legititeproductsQIY/product advisor/Laterials/iridex.plAnd reattach the handle to the brush head, as the bristles are still in good working condition.Best 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.
I do not accept the assumptions and beliefs presented in the most recent correspondence from Royal Design Studios as fact or proof - and I do not accept that "wear and tear" or "use" explains or excuses the faulty construction of this product and then subsequent refusal to review my claim with seriousness and logic.  Based on this company's unprofessionalism, I am led to the inference that my correspondence was received and reviewed with haste and little effort.   That the respondent assumes the photos I presented (attached here) prove extensive use is an assumption with no basis in truth - I have never communicated the number of projects I have completed with this product, or without it.  Regarding my order history, again the assumption is illogical - the respondent has no basis to assume that the prior products I ordered were for my use; further, there is no basis to establish that any of my products ordered were used in conjunction with each other.    For the respondent to suggest that I had not followed the cleaning and care instructions provided with this faulty item is lazy at best and offensive at worst.  It is evident that my correspondence was dismissed as inconsequential and that it was not taken with seriousness.  In practical application (and not in error), paint does not go on the handle of a brush - it is to be applied to the bristles: evidenced in these attached photos is proof that the bristles are clean, conditioned, and in very good shape - in the respondent's words from the last communication, "the bristles are still in good working condition," which would not be the case had this brush been abused in any way.  Paint on the handle of a brush does not prove frequency or extent of use - it might guide or misguide an assumption, but it is proof of nothing.    Royal Design Studios may have established their own return policy that they "only replace defective products within 30 days of purchase", but this establishment is questionable and is not always in the best interest of fairness to the consumer: this respondent may be used to their defective products showing their quality before 30 days; it just so happens that in this instance, it took a little longer for me.  The respondent provides a solution or proposed action of me purchasing another product ("LOctite") to resolve my claim - conferring the action upon the consumer instead of themselves.  They propose me using it to reattach the handle to their product that proved faulty.  I do not believe it to be any consumer's position to take the proposed action to repair a product purchased at a cost to him or her, with another product purchased at a cost to him/her.  This proposal is unsatisfactory and dismissive, and the product sold to me should be replaced - or the cost ($34.95 plus sales tax) should be refunded so that I may purchase a similar, more high-quality item from a company who regards their consumers differently.  
Regards,
[redacted]