US Tax Recovery Partners, LLC

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response.
The SALT group has misrepresented and sidestepped the main issues in their response. First, the person that signed was not and is not authorized to sign contracts. Again, he did not think he was signing a contract, and was manipulated to...

that end. Although they characterize their actions as professional, the actual facts and manner in which they acted was anything but. There were three attempts to meet but only two visits. The first person very briefly told him generally what SALT did and left. He did not mention or leave a copy of the agreement for review or pass on. That first person never contacted anyone at RenewAire again.
The second person, as already described, called from our lobby phone with no appointment, and asked for “just five minutes of your time” My accountant let him in and briefly met with the representative and signed a document. He was lead to believe that the document presented to me was just to get us on their schedule. The representative didn’t make the point that the document was a contract and also didn’t point out the cancellation fee.
Besides the fact that the agreement was never effective because the employee was not authorized to sign it, SALT representative’s business behavior was outrageous and unethical, and cannot be covered up by saying this is a “business transaction between professionals”. Accordingly we expect SALT to follow reasonable customer satisfaction guidelines and void the contract.
Regards,
Chuck Gates

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: This has not been resolved they are now trying to send a bill for $7500.00. I did NOT set up appointment and didn’t ask them to stop in our shop! I’m not the owner and was never asked that. I do not feel I owe them anything. They are not even a Michigan company this seems like a scam!!!!! [redacted] Mask & Equipment Inc [redacted]
[redacted]
[redacted]
Regards,
[redacted]

Mr. [redacted]’s statement that we misrepresented our fee structure is unfounded.  Our fee structure is clearly stated in the contract that Mr. [redacted]’s boss, Mr. [redacted], read and signed so there can be no misrepresentation.  Mr. [redacted] claims we manipulated the calculation of our fee.  Again, a completely unfounded claim.  Our fee is calculated precisely as it is stated in the contract Mr. [redacted] read and signed. We reject both Mr. [redacted]’s false claims and the Revdex.com’s questionable interference in our business.

US Tax Recovery Partners, LLC (USTRP) has received a copy of the above referenced complaint. Thank you for forwarding to our attention. Please note, in the latest three year period we have performed over 4,000 reviews and satisfaction of our customers is our highest priority.This is a business to...

business transaction in which a written agreement was signed by the complainant (an accounting professional with an extensive background in accounting including a master's degree) allowing USTRP to perform services. Not only was there a pre-scheduled appointment set one week prior to the meeting but, per the complainant, there were two people attending the appointment and apparently, also stated by the complainant, one of them signed a document presented to them for signature without reading it.The agreement is one-page and does allow the complainant to terminate the agreement and pay an administrative fee upon cancellation prior to services being performed. The complainant knew about this fee prior to cancellation yet still chose to cancel and file this Revdex.com complaint rather than satisfy the terms of the agreement. USTRP would prefer to perform its services as agreed in order to recoup expenses already incurred and will reach out to the complainant in an attempt to reschedule.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]

[redacted]Dispute Resolution Specialist via facsimile (512) 445-2096Revdex.com1005 La Posada DriveAustin, Texas 78752RE: Complaint [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:US Tax Recovery Partners, LLC (USTRP) has received a copy of the above referencedcomplaint Thank you for forwarding to our...

attention. Please note, in the latest three year periodwe have performed over 4.000 reviews and satisfaction of our customers is our highest priority.An appointment was scheduled and a valid one page contract is on file between the companiesdated July, 2015. The company has rescheduled several times. USTRP is merely attempting toperform its services.cc: File

USTRP entered into a contract with [redacted], Inc. ([redacted]).  The contract was signed on behalf of [redacted] by [redacted] who listed his title as President.  Mr. [redacted] assured our representative that he read the contract and had the authority to sign it.  The...

contract Mr. [redacted] signed is a simple, one-page contract with no fine print.  Either Mr. [redacted] read it or he fraudulently misrepresented to USTRP that he read it when he did not.  Now comes this complaint from [redacted]’s Controller, Mr. [redacted].  If Mr. [redacted] has a problem with the contract that Mr. [redacted] signed on behalf of [redacted], then his complaint is with Mr. [redacted] not with USTRP.  Further, Mr. [redacted] is complaining about the price USTRP is charging for its services – a complaint that Revdex.com states it does not accept.  Additionally, Mr. [redacted]’s complaint is clearly one regarding payment of our fee which is a ‘business to business complaint for collection purposes’ – a complaint that Revdex.com states it does not accept.  Finally, Mr. [redacted]’s complaint is clearly one of ‘buyer’s remorse’ – again, a complaint that Revdex.com states it does not accept.  Rather than honor the terms of our legally binding contract, Mr. [redacted] is using the Revdex.com website to disparage our company which is unprofessional at best and unethical – if not cowardly – at worst.  Based on Revdex.com’s own criteria, Revdex.com must remove this unfounded complaint from its website.

July 2, 2015 Ms. [redacted] Resolution Specialist Revdex.com [redacted] Austin, TX [redacted] Re: [redacted] Dear Ms. [redacted]:   The HJH Consulting Group, Inc. dba The SALT Group© ("TSG") has received a copy of the complaint noted above. It is my understanding the...

parties have been in contact with each other than this matter has been resolved. In the event further information is needed, please contact me directly. Most Sincerely,   [redacted] Attorney at Law Cc: The SALT Group®

US Tax Recovery Partners, LLC (USTRP) has received a copy of the above referenced complaint response. It is unfortunate that the customer rejects the response because USTRP identified over $70K in refunds yet they refuse to pay. Please note this is a business to business transaction. The signatory, the Controller, is an educated business professional who undoubtedly signs documents, on behalf of a company that has been around since the 1950's, in her daily functions and asking questions regarding clarification of terms is standard in every negotiation. USTRP is a service based company and their service includes educating the customer on the identified areas of savings they are granted permission to review under the agreement. Once the education is given, the bell cannot be un-rung. The amounts identified, according to the payment terms agreed to prior to the identification, are now due. The signatory received a copy of the one page agreement to review prior to and after signature and subsequent to the review detailed reports of findings were submitted. USTRP contacted the signatory various times, via telephone, to schedule a meeting and a salesman was invited into the company offices at a pre-scheduled time and date to review the records. The signatory controls these meetings as USTRP is a guest on their premises. As early as April, 2016, the complainant was sending emails stating they were pleased with the results. Due in large part to the publication of customer complaints and company responses on the Revdex.com website, the number of customers who complain to the Revdex.com has increased. It is now very easy to search for USTRP and then just copy the prior complaints of others who also copied the complaints of others. This has manifested into a reduced rating for a company that has served over thousands of customers in its 6 year history and has recovered millions of dollars. Salesmen, by definition, present the opportunity to the customer, in writing, and allow them to make an informed decision upon review of the terms as dictated by the document. They do not read the document word for word for the customer and they work within the time frame of the meeting as dictated by the customer. It appears that the signatory may have suffered some form of embarrassment that can result from USTRP's findings of such significant amounts on their watch. When this happens, it is often tempting to try to negotiate a lower rate after the fact, usually because the person in charge of the expenses did not expect USTRP to find anything. Had USTRP performed its services and not found anything then there would be no amounts due. However, USTRP, through its agents and experience identified a rather significant amount for the company. USTRP has contacted the customer numerous times in an attempt to discuss payment terms that fit within the customer's means however the amounts remain due and payable under the terms of the agreement. The customer is free to contact USTRP to discuss payment terms at their convenience.

US Tax Recovery Partners, LLC (USTRP) has received a copy of the above referenced complaint. Thank you for forwarding to our attention. Please note, in the latest three year period we have performed over 4,000 reviews and satisfaction of our customers is our highest priority. USTRP presented a...

one page agreement to the signatory. Although the complainant (not the signatory) states the signatory is a receptionist, professional websites state she is a professional in AR/Administration and her email signature states she is in charge of Accounts Receivable and Accounts Payable, hence she would be in charge of the invoices USTRP would review while performing its services. An executed copy was remitted to the customer who later chose to cancel as is their right under the terms of the agreement however the one page agreement does state the "parties represent and warrant each has read and has the authority to sign this agreement' and it also includes an administrative fee for cancellation.USTRP has repeatedly attempted to contact the customer to reschedule, and the signatory had rescheduled before cancelling again. USTRP is merely attempting to perform its services under the agreement. Should USTRP be allowed to completely perform its services and nothing is found there will be no fee.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]

This is a valid and enforceable business to business transaction in which a writtenagreement was signed by the company allowing USTRP to perform services. Anappointment was pre-scheduled and an agreement was presented for review andsignature. It is an affront to all parties that the complainant (not...

the signatory who hasnever disputed signature) claims the agreement is not legal. Services were performedand expense reductions in the thousands of dollars were found, under the terms of theagreement. Only when paperwork was presented for signature to continue to performdid the complainant (not the original signatory) file this complaint.It must be noted, the expense reductions found by USTRP as stated in the customizedreport presented to the complaint are found money. The company overpaid expensesand now that these mistakes were brought to their attention did they decide to notcontinue the agreement. It is our opinion that, for whatever reason including possiblyembarrassment, they wish to sweep our services under the rug in an attempt to not payper the terms of the agreement.The agreement is one-page and does allow the complainant to terminate the agreementand pay an administrative fee upon cancellation prior to services being performedhowever subsequent to USTRP's presentation of the work product showing exactly theareas of savings to be obtained, cancellation without compensation would give an unfairadvantage to the complainant.

US Tax Recovery Partners, LLC (USTRP) has received a copy of the above referenced complaint. Thank you for forwarding to our attention. Please note, in the latest three year period we have performed over 4,000 reviews and satisfaction of our customers is our highest priority. USTRP presented a...

one page agreement to the signatory. Although the complainant is not the signatory, she states the signatory is the Accounting Manager, hence she would be in charge of the invoices USTRP would review while performing its services. An executed copy was remitted to the customer who later chose to cancel as is their right under the terms of the agreement however the one page agreement does state the "parties represent and warrant each has read and has the authority to sign this agreement" and it also includes an administrative fee for cancellation. USTRP is merely attempting to perform its services under the agreement. Should USTRP be allowed to completely perform its services and nothing is found there will be no fee. USTRP will contact the customer to discuss a mutually acceptable conclusion.

[redacted] Re: Complaint [redacted]Dear Ms. [redacted]:US Tax Recovery Partners, LLC (USTRP has received a copy of the above referenced complaint. Thank you for forwarding to our attention....

Please note, in the latest three year period we have performed over 4,000 reviews and satisfaction of our customer is our highest priority. It is USTRP's desire to perform the contracted services and has even offered additional services to the company. USTRP has rached out to the other party to resolve the matter.  Respectfully,  [redacted]Vice Presidentcc:File

US Tax Recovery Partners, LLC (USTRP) has received a copy of the above referencedcomplaint. Thank you for forwarding to our attention. Please note, in the latest threeyear period we have performed over 4,000 reviews and satisfaction of our customers isour highest priority.This is a business to...

business transaction in which a written agreement was signed bythe complainant allowing USTRP to perform services. An appointment was prescheduledappointment and an agreement was presented for signature.The agreement is one-page and does allow the complainant to terminate the agreementand pay an administrative fee upon cancellation prior to services being performed. Thecomplainant knew about this fee prior to cancellation yet still chose to cancel and filethis 888 complaint rather than satisfy the terms of the agreement. USTRP would preferto perform its services as agreed in order to recoup expenses already incurred and willreach out to the complainant in an attempt to reschedule.

January 4, 2016Ms. [redacted]Dispute Resolution SpecialistRevdex.com[redacted]
[redacted]via facsimile [redacted]RE: Complaint [redacted], 2" responseDear Ms. [redacted]:US Tax Recovery Partners, LLC (USTRP) has received a copy of the latest communicationrelated to the above referenced complaint. Thank you for forwarding to our attention. Pleasenote, in the latest three year period we have performed over 4,000 reviews and satisfaction ofour customers is our highest priority.As previously stated, a valid contract is on file between the companies. The agreementexpressly states savings from the types of services complainant mentioned are included. Thecompany has willingly allowed USTRP to enter their premises and perform its services. Again, itis only after an invoice was received that the signatory disputed the terms of the agreement.Respectfully,fVW[redacted], Esq.Vice Presidentcc: File

We stand behind our first response.  I have responded to the complainant's concerns. The one page agreement stands on its own.    The work was performed, the monies were found; the complainant will not allow us to continue to perform.  The fees are due.   Respectfully,   [redacted]
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: The one page agreement was signed under false pretenses. The USTRP Representative guaranteed the signer that this binder was only to reserve the date and that we could cancel at any time. The postponing of the appointments was in lieu of being allowed to cancel. The individual that signed did not have signing authority which was explained to the representative.   The only people with signing authority would be the controller or owners. The representative was very misleading during the entire conversation and when I tried to contact him again to discuss cancelling, he does not answer his phone nor return phone calls. Standard Tool and Die is not interested in any service that USTRP is offering.
Regards,
[redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because, as before, USTRP is ignoring the fact that this contract was outrageously mis-sold. No mention was made of telecoms and waste management savings was included in the USTRP presentation to my colleague. In addition, someone from USTRP forged the fictitious job title on the contract - it is plain to see that the handwriting does not match my colleague's. I have also indicated to USTRP that their sales approach was unfortunately directed at someone in our organization who did not have the authority to bind the company to any expenditure at all, never mind the tens of thousands of dollars which USTRP is claiming. The cost savings identified in certain areas are entirely spurious, and were not substantiated in any way. This whole affair is a total scam, in our opinion.
Regards,
[redacted]