To whom it may concern at Revdex.com, The Revdex.com complaint against the International Spy Shop is completely unwarranted. This complaint was written by the partner of one dishonest client, who has been harassing the employees of the International Spy Shop for months regarding a pen she...
purchased from our establishment years ago. Below are the summary of events and facts regarding this individual:Summary -Client [redacted] Garcia purchased a camera pen in 2015. -The camera pen, like all other ISS items, are technician-tested prior to being placed on the sales floor. Client purchased item in 2015. -ISS does not hear from client until well into the summer of 2016, when she comes into the shop in person without proof of purchase demanding free merchandise because her pen is not functional. -Client waited half a year to an entire year to complain about the product.-Client was dealt with politely and professionally by the various ISS staff members she verbally accosts in threatening mannor client [redacted] Garcia realizes after multiple hostile threats to ISS staff will not result in her receiving a free product, leaves behind the pen she purchased and from there, takes to social media alleviating on a smear campaign in continued effort to obtain a free product. -To this end, she has went on [redacted], Revdex.com, and other places with her partner in her ill-contrived attempts to acquire items she is not entitled to. Facts--First off, here is the link to the [redacted] profile of the person on whose behalf the Revdex.com complaint was written on behalf of. As one can easily see from viewing it, her [redacted] profile's sole purpose is to extort businesses by writing negative reviews containing false information against them in dishonest efforts to extort for free services. See for yourselves she has little to no positive reviews written about any business on her account. [redacted]-She did not report the pen was damaged when she purchased it in 2015 until well into the next year in 2016. Per ISS store policy, if her pen was indeed damaged within 7 days of purchase at no fault to herself, she would have been able to return to the shop with her proof of purchase *receipt* and the device. -Upon inspection by an ISS technician, should the claimant of damage had been true, she would have had her device replaced at no cost to her. -She did not report any damage within the first 7 days- on this alone, her claimant is void as per store policy. It is within logical reason to a client experiencing fault with a device of this capacity would immediately report the device as faulty within 7 days. Instead, she waited approximately over half a year before reporting the device as faulty which A., indicates the damage was damaged by her which refutes the warrantee conditions, and B., any damage done after the week of purchase is upheld by the fact all sales are final. -She, instead waited months well into 2016, to report any damage, which indicates that she indeed damaged the item of her own volition. Both the time between time of purchase (over 6 months heading to 1 year) and her inability to provide receipt proof of purchase render her claimants void. -She has been hostile to the International Spy Shop on social media [redacted]!, Revdex.com, and other places alongside her partner in a smear campaign in clearly hostile efforts to coerce us to give her a free product she is not entitled to. -In the summer of 2016, over half a year after her purchase of the pen, this individual comes into the shop in person to verbally accost the staff in belligerent manner demanding free products. During the course of these multiple interactions, she fails to show proof of purchase. She shows the staff faded bank statements she claims are in her name denoting her pen purchase via debit card in 2015. Fact aside waiting approximately a year after time of purchase to report alleged damage negates the time frame of which to request replacement product, bank statements are not a verifiable proof of purchase. She deliberately engaged in hostile destructive behavior in the shop in part of her calculated attempts to request free products she is not entitled to.-ISS does not accept returned merchandise without written contracts between the two parties. The client forced one of the staff members to take it. ISS has this pen and will be glad to return it to when next she returns to the shop. We will not make any repairs for an item acquired over a year ago that the client did not report damaged for months almost a year after the terms of replacement conditions. -If this customer truly had a bad product, they would not wait until 2016 to make contact, write negative reviews, and file complaints to Revdex.com. The fact she waited until the mid-to-late 2016 to engage ISS for a product she bought a year before in 2015 negates all her claimants.
Thank you for receiving this response. Should further evidence and or action be needed, we are ready to proceed further in this matter.Sincerely, ISS management
Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because: the pen was not brought back to the store in half the year. The purchaser went back on several occasions and the store agents were unable to locate the pen that purchaser was asked to leave so technician can take a look at it. The purchaser never requested free merchandise, she only requested that if something was purshated it should not be defective. The purchaser kept returning to store because the store could not locate the pen. In fact sometimes when she would go, the store would be closed even even during their business hours. When she would ask for manager she was always giving the round abouts. She was frustrated first, she paid over 100.00 for a defective pen which was a gift to me. The purchaser never demanded free items just that they give her a pen that was working. Even when she located her receipt they found another excuse not to accomodate her in given her something good that worked. The purchased is an honest human being with excellent credit score and a professional who of corse expect honesty in stores that actually promise to sell good working items.
thank you
The complainants’ wife purchased a brand new technician tested product in 2015. This product was not defective and worked as described at the time of purchase.
Again: -She did not report the pen was damaged when she purchased it in 2015 until well into the next year in 2016. Per ISS store policy, if her pen was indeed damaged within 7 days of purchase at no fault to herself, she would have been able to return to the shop with her proof of purchase *receipt* and the device.
-Upon inspection by an ISS technician, should the claimant of damage had been true, she would have had her device replaced at no cost to her.-She did not report any damage within the first 7 days- on this alone, her claimant is void as per store policy. It is within logical reason to a client experiencing fault with a device of this capacity would immediately report the device as faulty within 7 days. Instead, she waited approximately over half a year before reporting the device as faulty which A., indicates the damage was damaged by her which refutes the warrantee conditions, and B., any damage done after the week of purchase is upheld by the fact all sales are final.-She, instead waited months well into 2016, to report any damage, which indicates that she indeed damaged the item of her own volition. Both the time between time of purchase (over 6 months heading to 1 year) and her inability to provide receipt proof of purchase render her claimants void.
Upon inspecting her pen our technician pointed out that the pen was damaged due to customer misuse. In short the customer broke the pen.
This customer has been harassing our staff demanding a new pen from us to replace the pen that she broken. She has had a threatening demeanor towards my staff. Has yelled at my staff causing a scene in our store chasing away potential customers resulting in loss of business on that day. She has bad mouth us on a third party public forum misrepresenting the facts of this case which has harmed our reputation.
I reject the claimants claims.
To whom it may concern at Revdex.com, The Revdex.com complaint against the International Spy Shop is completely unwarranted. This complaint was written by the partner of one dishonest client, who has been harassing the employees of the International Spy Shop for months regarding a pen she...
purchased from our establishment years ago. Below are the summary of events and facts regarding this individual:Summary -Client [redacted] Garcia purchased a camera pen in 2015. -The camera pen, like all other ISS items, are technician-tested prior to being placed on the sales floor. Client purchased item in 2015. -ISS does not hear from client until well into the summer of 2016, when she comes into the shop in person without proof of purchase demanding free merchandise because her pen is not functional. -Client waited half a year to an entire year to complain about the product.-Client was dealt with politely and professionally by the various ISS staff members she verbally accosts in threatening mannor client [redacted] Garcia realizes after multiple hostile threats to ISS staff will not result in her receiving a free product, leaves behind the pen she purchased and from there, takes to social media alleviating on a smear campaign in continued effort to obtain a free product. -To this end, she has went on [redacted], Revdex.com, and other places with her partner in her ill-contrived attempts to acquire items she is not entitled to. Facts--First off, here is the link to the [redacted] profile of the person on whose behalf the Revdex.com complaint was written on behalf of. As one can easily see from viewing it, her [redacted] profile's sole purpose is to extort businesses by writing negative reviews containing false information against them in dishonest efforts to extort for free services. See for yourselves she has little to no positive reviews written about any business on her account. [redacted]-She did not report the pen was damaged when she purchased it in 2015 until well into the next year in 2016. Per ISS store policy, if her pen was indeed damaged within 7 days of purchase at no fault to herself, she would have been able to return to the shop with her proof of purchase *receipt* and the device. -Upon inspection by an ISS technician, should the claimant of damage had been true, she would have had her device replaced at no cost to her. -She did not report any damage within the first 7 days- on this alone, her claimant is void as per store policy. It is within logical reason to a client experiencing fault with a device of this capacity would immediately report the device as faulty within 7 days. Instead, she waited approximately over half a year before reporting the device as faulty which A., indicates the damage was damaged by her which refutes the warrantee conditions, and B., any damage done after the week of purchase is upheld by the fact all sales are final. -She, instead waited months well into 2016, to report any damage, which indicates that she indeed damaged the item of her own volition. Both the time between time of purchase (over 6 months heading to 1 year) and her inability to provide receipt proof of purchase render her claimants void. -She has been hostile to the International Spy Shop on social media [redacted]!, Revdex.com, and other places alongside her partner in a smear campaign in clearly hostile efforts to coerce us to give her a free product she is not entitled to. -In the summer of 2016, over half a year after her purchase of the pen, this individual comes into the shop in person to verbally accost the staff in belligerent manner demanding free products. During the course of these multiple interactions, she fails to show proof of purchase. She shows the staff faded bank statements she claims are in her name denoting her pen purchase via debit card in 2015. Fact aside waiting approximately a year after time of purchase to report alleged damage negates the time frame of which to request replacement product, bank statements are not a verifiable proof of purchase. She deliberately engaged in hostile destructive behavior in the shop in part of her calculated attempts to request free products she is not entitled to.-ISS does not accept returned merchandise without written contracts between the two parties. The client forced one of the staff members to take it. ISS has this pen and will be glad to return it to when next she returns to the shop. We will not make any repairs for an item acquired over a year ago that the client did not report damaged for months almost a year after the terms of replacement conditions. -If this customer truly had a bad product, they would not wait until 2016 to make contact, write negative reviews, and file complaints to Revdex.com. The fact she waited until the mid-to-late 2016 to engage ISS for a product she bought a year before in 2015 negates all her claimants.
Thank you for receiving this response. Should further evidence and or action be needed, we are ready to proceed further in this matter.Sincerely, ISS management
Complaint: [redacted]I am rejecting this response because: the pen was not brought back to the store in half the year. The purchaser went back on several occasions and the store agents were unable to locate the pen that purchaser was asked to leave so technician can take a look at it. The purchaser never requested free merchandise, she only requested that if something was purshated it should not be defective. The purchaser kept returning to store because the store could not locate the pen. In fact sometimes when she would go, the store would be closed even even during their business hours. When she would ask for manager she was always giving the round abouts. She was frustrated first, she paid over 100.00 for a defective pen which was a gift to me. The purchaser never demanded free items just that they give her a pen that was working. Even when she located her receipt they found another excuse not to accomodate her in given her something good that worked. The purchased is an honest human being with excellent credit score and a professional who of corse expect honesty in stores that actually promise to sell good working items.
thank you
Sincerely,[redacted]
The complainants’ wife purchased a brand new technician tested product in 2015. This product was not defective and worked as described at the time of purchase.
Again: -She did not report the pen was damaged when she purchased it in 2015 until well into the next year in 2016. Per ISS store policy, if her pen was indeed damaged within 7 days of purchase at no fault to herself, she would have been able to return to the shop with her proof of purchase *receipt* and the device.
-Upon inspection by an ISS technician, should the claimant of damage had been true, she would have had her device replaced at no cost to her.-She did not report any damage within the first 7 days- on this alone, her claimant is void as per store policy. It is within logical reason to a client experiencing fault with a device of this capacity would immediately report the device as faulty within 7 days. Instead, she waited approximately over half a year before reporting the device as faulty which A., indicates the damage was damaged by her which refutes the warrantee conditions, and B., any damage done after the week of purchase is upheld by the fact all sales are final.-She, instead waited months well into 2016, to report any damage, which indicates that she indeed damaged the item of her own volition. Both the time between time of purchase (over 6 months heading to 1 year) and her inability to provide receipt proof of purchase render her claimants void.
Upon inspecting her pen our technician pointed out that the pen was damaged due to customer misuse. In short the customer broke the pen.
This customer has been harassing our staff demanding a new pen from us to replace the pen that she broken. She has had a threatening demeanor towards my staff. Has yelled at my staff causing a scene in our store chasing away potential customers resulting in loss of business on that day. She has bad mouth us on a third party public forum misrepresenting the facts of this case which has harmed our reputation.
I reject the claimants claims.