Tekna

Some important number need to be verified by the customer please A) If we are to provide the reimbursement for the value of the or months monitoring; ($4/month reimbursement for camera, and cents/month for the taxes), customer understands the monthly bill will not change that is the purpose of this reimbursement to compensate for the camera rate refund and tax rate reimbursement.B) Customer understands that a month agreement was signed and our first obligation is to 1- attempt a repair on the camera 2- Our second obligation is to offer a camera replace, which the customer is refusing and we are okay with that, so 3) offer a reimbursement on the camera value which is $4/month C) Upon signing the paperwork with customer a discount of months monitoring was offered The dollar value of this discount was $ Tekna offered to either not have a bill sent and have the monitoring waived for three months or to discount other equipment purchases Customer opted to have the waived monitoring applied to their up front costs Equipment costs (not related to the camera issue) were $ Again we offered to either waive months monitoring or apply that value to the $ The request was made to apply it to the $ Instead of $140.85, we rounded up to $to compensate for possible taxes on top of the $46.95/month which were not accounted for This left a balance of $which was paid by customer.D) Tekna offered to reimburse full contract length for taxes miscalculated (cens X months= $33.84).E) Because of the camera issues, we then offered to reimburse customer all monitoring that would be paid which is months worth This value totals $ It would not make sense to reimburse the other months because the customer did not pay these months It was discounted off the the up front pricing If the customer would like those months reduced by the $4/month, this would change the value of the months monitoring that we offered This would reduce our up front discount by $ So we can either apply that $differential to the reimbursement we will be providing, or we can eliminate months from the total value, either way, $can not be offered twice.F) If we are to offer this reimbursement, we would require that the customer agree to the terms again and cease compalints on our company We have no intention of providing a reimbursement for a product we cannot replace, if the customer will still be unsatisfied, agree to terms and then later claim an additional amount is owedG) We recently offered to reimburse the full value of the months ($144) in addition to the tax reimbursement ($33.84) if customer would remove Revdex.com complaint Again if we offer customer this or any other reimbursement we will require an agreement that the matter is closed Without that agreement no reimbursement will be offered and our usual second course of action; replacing the camera will be attempted For the third time, if customer intends to receive reimbursement and continue complaints, we have no intention to provide additional assistance beyyond what we are required and what a reasonable arbitrator would expect, which is: allow us to replace the defective product.We ask for a response on any values above miscalculated or if customer might offer another solution, we would be more than happy to discuss

A settlement amount was negotiated with customer and agreed upon by both parties We are asking for clarification from the customer that the reimbursement value agreed to on February 17th is no longer valid

Some important number need to be verified by the customer please A) If we are to provide the reimbursement for the value of the or months monitoring; ($4/month reimbursement for camera, and cents/month for the taxes), customer understands the monthly bill will not change. that is the purpose of this reimbursement to compensate for the camera rate refund and tax rate reimbursement.B) Customer understands that a month agreement was signed and our first obligation is to 1- attempt a repair on the camera. 2- Our second obligation is to offer a camera replace, which the customer is refusing and we are okay with that, so 3) offer a reimbursement on the camera value which is $4/month C) Upon signing the paperwork with customer a discount of months monitoring was offered. The dollar value of this discount was $140.85. Tekna offered to either not have a bill sent and have the monitoring waived for three months or to discount other equipment purchases. Customer opted to have the waived monitoring applied to their up front costs. Equipment costs (not related to the camera issue) were $200. Again we offered to either waive months monitoring or apply that value to the $200. The request was made to apply it to the $200. Instead of $140.85, we rounded up to $to compensate for possible taxes on top of the $46.95/month which were not accounted for. This left a balance of $which was paid by customer.D) Tekna offered to reimburse full contract length for taxes miscalculated (cens X months= $33.84).E) Because of the camera issues, we then offered to reimburse customer all monitoring that would be paid which is months worth. This value totals $133. It would not make sense to reimburse the other months because the customer did not pay these months. It was discounted off the the up front pricing. If the customer would like those months reduced by the $4/month, this would change the value of the months monitoring that we offered. This would reduce our up front discount by $12. So we can either apply that $differential to the reimbursement we will be providing, or we can eliminate months from the total value, either way, $can not be offered twice.F) If we are to offer this reimbursement, we would require that the customer agree to the terms again and cease compalints on our company. We have no intention of providing a reimbursement for a product we cannot replace, if the customer will still be unsatisfied, agree to terms and then later claim an additional amount is owed. G) We recently offered to reimburse the full value of the months ($144) in addition to the tax reimbursement ($33.84) if customer would remove Revdex.com complaint. Again if we offer customer this or any other reimbursement we will require an agreement that the matter is closed. Without that agreement no reimbursement will be offered and our usual second course of action; replacing the camera will be attempted. For the third time, if customer intends to receive reimbursement and continue complaints, we have no intention to provide additional assistance beyyond what we are required and what a reasonable arbitrator would expect, which is: allow us to replace the defective product.We ask for a response on any values above miscalculated or if customer might offer another solution, we would be more than happy to discuss

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
To address the response filed, I was instructed by MrWright I had to respond to his offer with a written "I agree" I did not do that, since I did not agree with his numbers I stated, however, on Feb17th that I was willing to accept his (incorrect) numbers in an effort to be done with this I stated to him in email that I expected his check within a week - plenty of time with hour mail between our cities I also declined the new addendum that the camera had to be returned (as written, it was implied it was my responsibility to return it although I'll happily let them collect it) I did not receive a check within the day period, nor did I receive any explanatory communication from TEKNA about the delay until March 3rd after they received the complaint from the Revdex.com I had felt that the matter had been dropped by TEKNA again, as it had been previously When I was, however, billed incorrectly again on Feb26th, I determined I needed outside assistance in getting TEKNA's attention focused on fixing this quickly and correctly and so I filed the complaint on March 2nd - almost two weeks after our last communication and almost a week after I'd expected their offer check In fact, I was advised the check had never even been cut, much less mailed, as of March 5th.
*** ***

Some important number need to be verified by the customer please.  A) If we are to provide the reimbursement for the value of the 33 or 36 months monitoring; ($4/month reimbursement for camera, and 94 cents/month for the taxes), customer understands the monthly bill will not change.  that is the purpose of this reimbursement to compensate for the camera rate refund and tax rate reimbursement.B) Customer understands that a 36 month agreement was signed and our first obligation is to 1- attempt a repair on the camera.  2- Our second obligation is to offer a camera replace, which the customer is refusing and we are okay with that, so 3) offer a reimbursement on the camera value which is $4/month.  C) Upon signing the paperwork with customer a discount of 3 months monitoring was offered.  The dollar value of this discount was $140.85.  Tekna offered to either not have a bill sent and have the monitoring waived for three months or to discount other equipment purchases.  Customer opted to have the waived monitoring applied to their up front costs.  Equipment costs (not related to the camera issue) were $200.  Again we offered to either waive 3 months monitoring or apply that value to the $200.  The request was made to apply it to the $200.  Instead of $140.85, we rounded up to $144 to compensate for possible taxes on top of the $46.95/month which were not accounted for.  This left a balance of $56 which was paid by customer.D) Tekna offered to reimburse full contract length for taxes miscalculated (94 cens X 36 months= $33.84).E) Because of the camera issues, we then offered to reimburse customer all monitoring that would be paid which is 33 months worth.  This value totals $133.  It would not make sense to reimburse the other 3 months because the customer did not pay these 3 months.  It was discounted off the the up front pricing.  If the customer would like those 3 months reduced by the $4/month, this would change the value of the 3 months monitoring that we offered.  This would reduce our up front discount by $12.  So we can either apply that $12 differential to the reimbursement we will be providing, or we can eliminate 3 months from the total value, either way, $12 can not be offered twice.F) If we are to offer this reimbursement, we would require that the customer agree to the terms again and cease compalints on our company.  We have no intention of providing a reimbursement for a product we cannot replace, if the customer will still be unsatisfied, agree to terms and then later claim an additional amount is owed. G) We recently offered to reimburse the full value of the 36 months ($144) in addition to the tax reimbursement ($33.84) if customer would remove Revdex.com complaint.  Again if we offer customer this or any other reimbursement we will require an agreement that the matter is closed.  Without that agreement no reimbursement will be offered and our usual second course of action; replacing the camera will be attempted.  For the third time, if customer intends to receive reimbursement and continue complaints, we have no intention to provide additional assistance beyyond what we are required and what a reasonable arbitrator would expect, which is: allow us to replace the defective product.We ask for a response on any values above miscalculated or if customer might offer another solution, we would be more than happy to discuss.

Some important number need to be verified by the customer please.  A) If we are to provide the reimbursement for the value of the 33 or 36 months monitoring; ($4/month reimbursement for camera, and 94 cents/month for the taxes), customer understands the monthly bill will not change.  that is the purpose of this reimbursement to compensate for the camera rate refund and tax rate reimbursement.B) Customer understands that a 36 month agreement was signed and our first obligation is to 1- attempt a repair on the camera.  2- Our second obligation is to offer a camera replace, which the customer is refusing and we are okay with that, so 3) offer a reimbursement on the camera value which is $4/month.  C) Upon signing the paperwork with customer a discount of 3 months monitoring was offered.  The dollar value of this discount was $140.85.  Tekna offered to either not have a bill sent and have the monitoring waived for three months or to discount other equipment purchases.  Customer opted to have the waived monitoring applied to their up front costs.  Equipment costs (not related to the camera issue) were $200.  Again we offered to either waive 3 months monitoring or apply that value to the $200.  The request was made to apply it to the $200.  Instead of $140.85, we rounded up to $144 to compensate for possible taxes on top of the $46.95/month which were not accounted for.  This left a balance of $56 which was paid by customer.D) Tekna offered to reimburse full contract length for taxes miscalculated (94 cens X 36 months= $33.84).E) Because of the camera issues, we then offered to reimburse customer all monitoring that would be paid which is 33 months worth.  This value totals $133.  It would not make sense to reimburse the other 3 months because the customer did not pay these 3 months.  It was discounted off the the up front pricing.  If the customer would like those 3 months reduced by the $4/month, this would change the value of the 3 months monitoring that we offered.  This would reduce our up front discount by $12.  So we can either apply that $12 differential to the reimbursement we will be providing, or we can eliminate 3 months from the total value, either way, $12 can not be offered twice.F) If we are to offer this reimbursement, we would require that the customer agree to the terms again and cease compalints on our company.  We have no intention of providing a reimbursement for a product we cannot replace, if the customer will still be unsatisfied, agree to terms and then later claim an additional amount is owed. G) We recently offered to reimburse the full value of the 36 months ($144) in addition to the tax reimbursement ($33.84) if customer would remove Revdex.com complaint.  Again if we offer customer this or any other reimbursement we will require an agreement that the matter is closed.  Without that agreement no reimbursement will be offered and our usual second course of action; replacing the camera will be attempted.  For the third time, if customer intends to receive reimbursement and continue complaints, we have no intention to provide additional assistance beyyond what we are required and what a reasonable arbitrator would expect, which is: allow us to replace the defective product.We ask for a response on any values above miscalculated or if customer might offer another solution, we would be more than happy to discuss.

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.To address the response filed, I was instructed by Mr. Wright I had to respond to his offer with a written "I agree".  I did not do that, since I did not agree with his numbers.  I stated, however, on Feb. 17th that I was willing to accept his (incorrect) numbers in an effort to be done with this.  I stated to him in email that I expected his check within a week - plenty of time with 24 hour mail between our cities.  I also declined the new addendum that the camera had to be returned (as written, it was implied it was my responsibility to return it although I'll happily let them collect it).  I did not receive a check within the 7 day period, nor did I receive any explanatory communication from TEKNA about the delay until March 3rd after they received the complaint from the Revdex.com.  I had felt that the matter had been dropped by TEKNA again, as it had been previously.   When I was, however, billed incorrectly again on Feb. 26th, I determined I needed outside assistance in getting TEKNA's attention focused on fixing this quickly and correctly and so I filed the complaint on March 2nd - almost two weeks after our last communication and almost a week after I'd expected their offer check.  In fact, I was advised the check had never even been cut, much less mailed, as of March 5th. 

A settlement amount was negotiated with customer and agreed upon by both parties.  We are asking for clarification from the customer that the reimbursement value agreed to on February 17th is no longer valid.

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.To address the response filed, I was instructed by Mr. Wright I had to respond to his offer with a written "I agree".  I did not do that, since I did not agree with his numbers.  I stated, however, on Feb. 17th that I was willing to accept his (incorrect) numbers in an effort to be done with this.  I stated to him in email that I expected his check within a week - plenty of time with 24 hour mail between our cities.  I also declined the new addendum that the camera had to be returned (as written, it was implied it was my responsibility to return it although I'll happily let them collect it).  I did not receive a check within the 7 day period, nor did I receive any explanatory communication from TEKNA about the delay until March 3rd after they received the complaint from the Revdex.com.  I had felt that the matter had been dropped by TEKNA again, as it had been previously.   When I was, however, billed incorrectly again on Feb. 26th, I determined I needed outside assistance in getting TEKNA's attention focused on fixing this quickly and correctly and so I filed the complaint on March 2nd - almost two weeks after our last communication and almost a week after I'd expected their offer check.  In fact, I was advised the check had never even been cut, much less mailed, as of March 5th. 

Review: We had an alarm system and camera installed 10/29/2014. The contract specified a monthly price of $46.95 including all taxes. There would be no charge for any and all service calls for the contract (36 months). The sales rep was [redacted]. We received a discount on some of the equipment we purchased, but no discount on the camera, which was provided free as part of their Home Show promotion. The only cost for the camera was the $4 monthly service. Tekna's installer installed everything on the 29th. Within a couple days I knew I had a problem with the camera and called [redacted].

I sent the first written email on November 10th, regarding the camera's recording of 2-3 motion triggered clips a minute - I was getting a hundred clips recorded and sent to my cell phone over a couple hours. In daytime, the camera was triggering each time our tree branches moved - all the time. I asked him about returning the unit since there was a problem and I hadn't heard back. He said it was too late already. The camera, though, came with a warranty. But he said the camera was working properly. The camera then started to do the same thing at night - recording around 650 clips at night. Since our service only provided for 1000 clips a month, we then lost use of the camera for the rest of the month. To cut to the chase, and skip a lot of back and forth, [redacted] eventually came out December 18th and adjusted the camera, which he said would get rid of the motion-triggered problems. We still were only getting one day's camera service a month - during which time it would binge record about 650 motion activated clips - at this point at night. The camera didn't work during the day anymore, and didn't record any of the workmen walking past it multiple times on multiple days. It would activate and deactivate at will. The clips it recorded all night were of nothing - there was no motion, other than passing cars (not 650). [redacted] said the camera worked fine - we just needed to move it indoors. We didn't want it pointed at the door indoors because of the set-up of our house - it would be invasive. We ended up doing it anyway after his visit. Same result. The camera didn't motion activate to record any clips of us walking in front of it 20-30 times a day, but it would record roughly 650 motion activated clips at night - of nothing. Same issue continued - because we only had 1000 clips a month, we would exceed our allotment in a 24 hour period each month. We had also been contacting SAFE Security, the monitoring service, through this. [redacted] and I spoke with a SAFE Technical Service Rep, who said if the adjustments [redacted] made on December 18 didn't fix it, the camera was a dud.

Around the same time, I realized I was being billed $47.89 per month not the $46.95 on the contract by SAFE. I contacted Annette and Margie at Safe Security and they opened tickets on both the camera and the billing issue. We had written to [redacted] multiple times. He said we needed to move the camera to point at the door from the indoor location. My husband wrote to him January 24th, 2015, and included multiple clips that recorded the one night the camera was functional subsequent to [redacted]'s December visit. [redacted] finally agreed that the camera was motion activating at night over nothing and that there was a problem with the camera. I contacted SAFE again and they had a different tech guy come out. He verified that the settings were set correctly. He changed the parameters. The camera worked then that night and recorded another 650 clips.

So, [redacted] told me SAFE couldn't fix the billing issue - he had to put it through. So everything had to go through him. We agreed I was done with the camera and wanted it, and the service for the camera, gone. He agreed to credit out the camera service so it would cost us nothing, and he would simply come pick up the camera. He sent an offer, but suddenly he was saying we'd gotten 3 months of monitoring for free, so he wouldn't credit us the $4/month for those months. His offer was to credit for 33 months. Then he said he needed to subtract ANOTHER $12 for the camera monitoring. His offer did, at least, cover the billing overage on the tax issue. He required me to sign an agreement that we were agreed on the numbers and I would be responsible for returning the camera to him. My last email to him was that his numbers continued to be wrong - we never got free monitoring and he couldn't change an equipment credit to a monitoring credit at his whim - but I was willing to be done with it at his numbers to be done with the 5 months of hassle I've been through over this and because the billing was continuing at erroneous numbers.

I have received no confirmation or response from him in the 13 days since that email. Nor have I received a check, which would take only 24 hours to arrive from Phoenix. Instead, I've been billed again, on Feb. 26th, for both the camera service, and the erroneous service amount, plus had a service charge added in for the "2nd opinion" tech SAFE Security sent out on January 30th, despite the fact that I contacted them on Feb. 3rd (since our plan includes service calls) and they agreed on Feb. 3rd to credit it out. Three weeks later they automatically debited it from my credit card.

SAFE still has open tickets, and they tell me they're working on it (as they have been since December),but according to [redacted] it all has to go though him.Desired Settlement: I would expect restitution - a refund for the camera service that has already been billed to me (5 months at $4 each) and correct the billing so it stops happening going forward. I also want the taxes to be credited for the months already billed, and then corrected on the automatic debits going forward. I shouldn't have to pay extra each month for the next 2 1/2 years - in this day and age billing can be corrected, it doesn't have to stay wrong. I know I won't get an apology for the runaround I've been given since November. I'm happy to provide documentation.

Business

Response:

A settlement amount was negotiated with customer and agreed upon by both parties. We are asking for clarification from the customer that the reimbursement value agreed to on February 17th is no longer valid.

Consumer

Response:

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.

To address the response filed, I was instructed by Mr. Wright I had to respond to his offer with a written "I agree". I did not do that, since I did not agree with his numbers. I stated, however, on Feb. 17th that I was willing to accept his (incorrect) numbers in an effort to be done with this. I stated to him in email that I expected his check within a week - plenty of time with 24 hour mail between our cities. I also declined the new addendum that the camera had to be returned (as written, it was implied it was my responsibility to return it although I'll happily let them collect it). I did not receive a check within the 7 day period, nor did I receive any explanatory communication from TEKNA about the delay until March 3rd after they received the complaint from the Revdex.com. I had felt that the matter had been dropped by TEKNA again, as it had been previously. When I was, however, billed incorrectly again on Feb. 26th, I determined I needed outside assistance in getting TEKNA's attention focused on fixing this quickly and correctly and so I filed the complaint on March 2nd - almost two weeks after our last communication and almost a week after I'd expected their offer check. In fact, I was advised the check had never even been cut, much less mailed, as of March 5th.

Business

Response:

Some important number need to be verified by the customer please. A) If we are to provide the reimbursement for the value of the 33 or 36 months monitoring; ($4/month reimbursement for camera, and 94 cents/month for the taxes), customer understands the monthly bill will not change. that is the purpose of this reimbursement to compensate for the camera rate refund and tax rate reimbursement.B) Customer understands that a 36 month agreement was signed and our first obligation is to 1- attempt a repair on the camera. 2- Our second obligation is to offer a camera replace, which the customer is refusing and we are okay with that, so 3) offer a reimbursement on the camera value which is $4/month. C) Upon signing the paperwork with customer a discount of 3 months monitoring was offered. The dollar value of this discount was $140.85. Tekna offered to either not have a bill sent and have the monitoring waived for three months or to discount other equipment purchases. Customer opted to have the waived monitoring applied to their up front costs. Equipment costs (not related to the camera issue) were $200. Again we offered to either waive 3 months monitoring or apply that value to the $200. The request was made to apply it to the $200. Instead of $140.85, we rounded up to $144 to compensate for possible taxes on top of the $46.95/month which were not accounted for. This left a balance of $56 which was paid by customer.D) Tekna offered to reimburse full contract length for taxes miscalculated (94 cens X 36 months= $33.84).E) Because of the camera issues, we then offered to reimburse customer all monitoring that would be paid which is 33 months worth. This value totals $133. It would not make sense to reimburse the other 3 months because the customer did not pay these 3 months. It was discounted off the the up front pricing. If the customer would like those 3 months reduced by the $4/month, this would change the value of the 3 months monitoring that we offered. This would reduce our up front discount by $12. So we can either apply that $12 differential to the reimbursement we will be providing, or we can eliminate 3 months from the total value, either way, $12 can not be offered twice.F) If we are to offer this reimbursement, we would require that the customer agree to the terms again and cease compalints on our company. We have no intention of providing a reimbursement for a product we cannot replace, if the customer will still be unsatisfied, agree to terms and then later claim an additional amount is owed. G) We recently offered to reimburse the full value of the 36 months ($144) in addition to the tax reimbursement ($33.84) if customer would remove Revdex.com complaint. Again if we offer customer this or any other reimbursement we will require an agreement that the matter is closed. Without that agreement no reimbursement will be offered and our usual second course of action; replacing the camera will be attempted. For the third time, if customer intends to receive reimbursement and continue complaints, we have no intention to provide additional assistance beyyond what we are required and what a reasonable arbitrator would expect, which is: allow us to replace the defective product.We ask for a response on any values above miscalculated or if customer might offer another solution, we would be more than happy to discuss.