Welcome Home Moving Unpacking & Settling In

It is unfortunate that this customer had a difficult experience; we strive to insure our clients' customers are happy with our service, although making customers happy after having their car repossessed is a lofty goalIn this case, we reduced our fees over 50% and the customer would not pay and would not come to our facility to pick up his belongingsHe hung up on our staff a number of times and never accepted our reductions on priceUnit recovered 4-28-15Our redemption department emailed on 5-1-at 9:29am the following note to Veros Credit: "Good afternoon! Hope you are having a great Friday! Redemption fees per your contract are: per day vehicle storage with one time admin feePersonal property redemption: inventory fee and per day storageUnit recovered 04/28/14:52:and stored at our Salinas facilityThank you!"5-1-we processed all mail and sent NOS (Notice of Seizure) and Personal Property letters as required by law.On 5-22-Sara in our redemption department took a call from the customer demanding prop at no fee—he argued with her for some time over not wanting to pay a dime for personal property; from the notes we can see Sara entered $(days ofstorage at per day and a inventory fee)We then agreed to accept $and entered notes in the property tabHe then demanded a supervisor, again did not want to pay a dime and wanted post mark proof of prop letter that went outGave call to [redacted] who reviewed the acct and let the customer know we have already negotiated the fees as low as we can and to please come and pick up his property—she also advised letter had gone out, but the customer stated did not want to pay a dime and hung up on ***On 5-27-The customer again called in at 13:to inform [redacted] that he contacted a lawyer who advised him to place a claim with Revdex.com since we are charging him for his property [redacted] then spoke with [redacted] who was advised the very first time this customer called that we had we agreed to lower the fees, he just won’t pay anything at all [redacted] reviewed the file and agreed we had already agreed to lower the fees and he would need to pay them5-27-at 13:31(day of prop storage) ***called ro back to advise at [redacted] , she received dead air and then a busysignal—she tried this several times 5-27-at 13:(again day of prop storage) Ro called back to [redacted] directly—she advised fees are butwill go up per day Advised it would be a good idea to pick upproperty sooner rather than later due to costRo at this time argued again buttold [redacted] he would now pay a reasonable feeThis was the first mention by thero that he would agree to pay any fees at all [redacted] advised we have discountedover 50% of the property fees, ro continued to argue saying we did not followprocedure therefore he should not have to pay—this was basically exactly whathe said during our first conversation and this is a week later— [redacted] advisedprice is as of 5-27-and would go up by per day then offered toset him up with an appointment but the ro again hung up on her On 5-29-the customer showed up in our Salinas office and spokewith *** [redacted] says he asked for the and the ro stated he was nevernotified of us storing property and will pay nothingThe ro advised since henever received and signed a property report that he now has to pay nothing[redacted] noticed the fees had already been reduced and advised it will go up byper day and property is only stored for days then disposed ofRostated he had already reported us to the Revdex.com and does not have to payHeattempted to get [redacted] to provide the property for free several times but ***still refused, ro left our facility

I am rejecting this response because: Its not accurate information, and I can not believe how far this company is willing to go; so they do not have to take responsibility for their actionsThey have slandered my name, and called the police lying saying I made threats to employeesNow they are just telling more liesStating that I was drunk; is a poor attempt to justify there actions and make my character be in questionIt was around 6:30A.M and I just woke upI did provide them pictures of the broken chainThe chain is an older chain, but it secured my driveway gate just fineI offered to have my lady friend who stayed the night to write a letter confirming that I shut and locked the gate after she arrived at my house the night before the unlawful repossession took placeI also was told by a neighbor they saw the driver out of the tow truck by the gateIf the gate was open there would be no need for the driver to get out his truckI wasn't even close to the car to touch it let alone do something to the brakesThis lie isn't as bad as the one digital dog told the lien holderThey told the lender that I shot the car with an air rifleI was told to contact a gentlemen named [redacted] from digital dog and he would be handling the claim processHe stated 'the driver knows better then to do that" when I told him about the chain being broken that locked the driveway gateThe driver was fully aware because of the classes and training provided by digital dog, but did it any waysWhen I told [redacted] about the damage to the driveway; stating that it was probably caused by the weight of both the car and tow truckHe said "now I could see that happening" The person who job is to handle the claim and wrote the letter that denied my claim told quote "I could see that happening" when the cracks were first brought to their attentionThere are many different cracks in my driveway and they were not there until the unlawful repossession happenedI provided pictures of these cracksI also provided pictures of a crack in a different location that was there before the unlawful repossession occurredI did this to show them that a crack that was there already would have some type of vegetation growing in it.I spoke to the VP of digital dog regarding the damage to real property and he stated "You have no rights' and "rights are to protect people from government." I feel that employees at digital dog feel and treat people that have their car repossessed like second class citizens because they missed a car paymentI know that this is the the way I was treatedWhen I first talked to the VP regarding the claim he said he would have a decisions in hoursAfter two weeks I got a call from him and he stated my claim was denied and the claim I submitted with American Recovery Service will be denied as wellI was trying to discuss the facts with him in a professional manner, and he hung up on meI called him back with no answer and text him after thatSomeone called the police on me stating that I was harassing him and threaten himWhich was a total lie and no charges where filedSimilar to how digital do stated I was drunk; an unethical attempt to prevent them from taking responsibility for there actions.I received a letter with a list of inventory that was in the car days after the unlawful repossession took place and an item was missingIt was a gift that my sister gave meI was under the impression that the law stated I should have been provided this document within two days after a car was repossessedThere was an item missing and I was first told I should just go check see it may have been looked overWhen I went and got my car back the item was not in the carI mention something to the gentlemen who was there and he said it will be resolved with the claim I submittedHe also asked me to sign something digitally on a tabletI denied that request and he had a paper document; he wanted me to signI told him I was not comfortable signing itHe told me that I would not get my car back unless I signed itI did sign the paper document because I was forced tooI put to get car back and plus addendum next to where I signedI still have yet to receive my gold cross or been compensated for it.Digital dog is a unethical company that is willing to do whatever the see fit in order to not take responsibility for there unlawful actionsThey have slandered my name and lied about me and what they have doneI feel all there actions and the way I have been treated has something to do with when I was wrongly placed under citizens arrest by a repossession tow company's driver; who came to my house a 130A.Myears ago looking for the old home owners vehicleI am not positive but I feel it was the same driver that placed me under citizens arrestOf course nothing ever cam from the citizens arrest because it was a lieJust like digital dog is lying nowDigital dog has not only been unethical; they have broke laws that are made to protect consumers like myselfThey damaged my property and took my propertyThey are willing to do anything not to take responsibilitySomething needs to be done about there actionsI want a formal complete with the Revdex.com and they shouldn't be recognized by the Revdex.comThey need to repair the damages they causedThey would not tell me their insurance company wasI offered them to have someone from there company to come investigate and put a value of the damagesThey said that they didn't need tooNo business should treat anyone the way digital dog treated meI hope the Revdex.com will put a stop to this and make them accountable

We received an assignment [redacted] from the lienholder, [redacted] to repossess [redacted] TRAX [redacted] @ 11/16/12:58pmOn 12/28/2017, which lead to the agent spotting the unit in an unsecured driveway of a residential address [redacted] ***The recovery was completed without incidentThe customer contacted our agent after the recovery was completed per Business and Professions Code Effecting a recovery on private property that is unsecured would not be considered trespassing as the unit was accessible: A repossession licensee or its agent has the authority to repossess a vehicle in public areas with no restricted accessThe customer was then permitted to remove any personal propertyThe customer returned our fairness, assaulting the driver with a cup off coffee by throwing and hitting our agentWe removed the coffee cup from the rear of our truck and placed the now empty cup of coffee upon the driveway in which he customer in an ultimate sense of irony accused us of littering *Business and Professions Code (b)“Assignment” means any written authorization by the legal owner, lienholder, lessor, lessee, registered owner, or the agent of any of them, to repossess any collateral, including, but not limited to, collateral registered under the Vehicle Code that is subject to a security agreement that contains a repossession clause

Claimant Statement: “Digitalgog unlawfully repossessed my car and in that process; I have suffered damages, damage was done to real property, and items are missing from my car.” Rebuttal: Our agency is one of the most trusted in the nation, these claims that Mr*** has made have
been taken very seriously review by not only our internal staff but our legal counsel, our client and the Lien Holder of Mr***’s loan Mr*** has set a new standard for difficulty calling us upwards of 20-times prepay and looking up the personnel information of our Vice President and others involved in the claimHe has made vague threats and as a result has been spoken to by local law enforcementHis statements are untrue Claimant Statement: “June Digitialgog broke the chain that locked my drivewaygate, and illegally seized my car.” Rebuttal: This statement has specifically been investigated at length by both our client and our management team and determined to be falseMr*** provided a picture of the cut lockWhich was rusted and appeared to be cut in the pastOur employee states that Mr***’s gate was open, unsecured when he arrived, as such he was able to drive on to the property without issue In addition the employee that completed the repossession had been working for us a number of years and has completed multiple state and federal law trainings with our management team and fully understands that cutting a lock to enter a property is unlawful and would constitute a crime Claimant Statement: “In the processes of taking the care the weight of both the tow truck and the car caused the asphalt to crack in several different places.” Rebuttal: This statement is untrue, the cracks in Mr***’s driveway are old enough to have grass and weeds growing through them as well as to have been cut in the past by whom ever maintenances Mr***’s property Claimant Statement: “When I got the car back there were items missing from the car.” Rebuttal: We do not find this statement to be true, all items are inventoried to the best of our ability considering the shear amount of itemsMr *** was intoxicated at the time of recovery and stated he had nothing he wanted in his vehicleRegardless we completed the inventory and made it available to Mr *** for his pick up Claimant Statement: “I asked the driver not to take the car and when I refused to give him the keys he called me a "dumbass fk" which violates the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.” Rebuttal: This has been investigated by our management, our client, and and Mr*** ban Our employee denies this accusation and our findings support his statementsOur employee does admitted becoming agitated with Mr***, as Mr*** was intoxicated and belligerent at the time of our interaction and was brandishing and and discharging a pellet gun in the general direction of our employee as the driver was trying to leave the property In addition, Mr*** got in to the vehicle after the recovery was complete and rather than removing his property as offered by our employee he pulled the E-Brake in what appeared to be an attempt to cause an accident or damage to the unit when the driver left the property with the unit in tow Claimant Statement: “I first brought these issues up with *** *** and he said the driver knows better to break a lock to gain assess, but could see the damage being done to the driveway because of the weightWhen I was forced to sign document to get my car back I found out I had missing items from my carI reseved a list of what was in the car ten days after it was unlawfully repossessedI mention that items were missing and was told they probably are not on the listI spoke to the VP about this matter and he told me I had no rights because I missed car payments and rights are to protect people from governmentHe said he will look into it and get back to me in hoursI never heard from him until a week laterHe called me and said because they haven't had problems in the past and I am a liar who cant pay his billsThey aren't going to do anything about damages done or missing itemsI was also informed that the company they hired would not take care of these things eitherI requested all documentation regarding the car and me and he said he will look in to what is required to send and that he might get it to meHe then contact the police and said I was harassing him and threating himNo charges were filled.” Rebuttal: Addressed in prior statementsWe explicitly respect and strive to protect consumers through our processesAny complaint is throughly review and even when unfounded is reviewed to explore how we could improve the experience of a very difficult and intrusive process in a consumers otherwise difficult financial time Best, *** * *** Vice President DigitalDog Auto Recovery DigitalDog.us ***

Tell us why here...Good morning! This customer is correct as far as our business hours in the Rancho Cordova area, they are 9AM-3PM Monday-FridayUnfortunately I believe this customer has confused us with a tow companyRepossession Agencies and Tow Companies are governed by different laws and
codesTow companies are required to offer after hour pick up's for additional fee's, repossession agencies are usually open during business hours such as oursWe have signed contracts with our clients stating in advance any fees that are changed to customers, this account was no exceptionThis customer did redeem unit on 3-8-with no out of pocket money at the lot (release received from lien holder stated to bill them all fees) but did advise while in our office that if he did see our agent he would have shot himOur warehousemen then allowed this customer to view this vehicle before signing any documents, after he was satisfied the unit was in good condition he signed our release documents and left our facilityWe offer no scams as accused and operate an honest repossession agency which complies with all California State Laws at each of our offices across CaliforniaThank you!

The estimates given are far outside the scope of the actual damageOur staff incorrectly offered a settlement without repair in conflict with the contract we have with the claimants leasing companyThe leasing company is the owner of the auto and would require the unit to be fixed as this
car is not owned by the claimant rather is a weekly lease. This is now being handled by insurance so further response is not appropriate

We understand the frustration the customer has. We have already reduced the charges by 60%. At this time no further reduction in fees can be applied as the customer has cashed the check. A few details: *The customers car was secured @ 3:56pm 5/18 and got to our yard after hours....

*Customer showed up without making an appointment @ 10:51am 5/19 and that is the reason the prop had not been completely processed yet. *Our home office set up the release while the customer waited ……. normal fees for 2 day @ $30 pull fee and 2 days @ $10 for storage=$50 *Customer spoke to me and I advised we would reimburse for services not provided, which would be the $30 pull fee. *Issued a check and customer received and then called in because they were expecting full $50 back. *I advised they were still charged the storage as it was still stored on our lot, whether in the storage locker or still in the car. *Customer is also claiming we did not itemize or store properly per state laws, but as far as I can see there is no time limit for when the unit needs to be processed, only time limits for notifying customers. Again, due to the customer just showing up, [redacted] was unable to provide a fully itemized list.

We received an assignment* from the lienholder, [redacted] to repossess 2015 [redacted] TRAX [redacted] @ 11/16/2017 12:58pm. On 12/28/2017,  which lead to the agent spotting the unit in an unsecured driveway of a residential address [redacted]. The recovery was...

completed without incident. The customer contacted our agent after the recovery was completed per Business and Professions Code 7507.12. Effecting a recovery on private property that is unsecured would not be considered trespassing as the unit was accessible: A repossession licensee or its agent has the authority to repossess a vehicle in public areas with no restricted access. The customer was then permitted to remove any personal property. The customer returned our fairness, assaulting the driver with a cup off coffee by throwing and hitting our agent. We removed the coffee cup from the rear of our truck and placed the now empty cup of coffee upon the driveway in which he customer in an ultimate sense of irony accused us of littering.  *Business and Professions Code 7500.1 (b)“Assignment” means any written authorization by the legal owner, lienholder, lessor, lessee, registered owner, or the agent of any of them, to repossess any collateral, including, but not limited to, collateral registered under the Vehicle Code that is subject to a security agreement that contains a repossession clause.

I am rejecting this response because: Its not accurate information, and I can not believe how far this company is willing to go; so they do not have to take responsibility for their actions. They have slandered my name, and called the police lying saying I made threats to employees. Now they are just telling more lies. Stating that I was drunk; is a poor attempt to justify there actions and make my character be in question. It was around 6:30A.M and I just woke up. I did provide them pictures of the broken chain. The chain is an older chain, but it secured my driveway gate just fine. I offered to have my lady friend who stayed the night to write a letter confirming that I shut and locked the gate after she arrived at my house the night before the unlawful repossession took place. I also was told by a neighbor they saw the driver out of the tow truck by the gate. If the gate was open there would be no need for the driver to get out his truck. I wasn't even close to the car to touch it let alone do something to the brakes. This lie isn't as bad as the one digital dog told the lien holder. They told the lender that I shot the car with an air rifle. I was told to contact a gentlemen named [redacted] from digital dog and he would be handling the claim process. He stated 'the driver knows better then to do that" when I told him about the chain being broken that locked the  driveway gate. The driver was fully aware because of the classes and training provided by digital dog, but did it any ways. When I told [redacted] about the damage to the driveway; stating that it was probably caused by the weight of both the car and tow truck. He said "now I could see that happening" The person who job is to handle the claim and wrote the letter that denied my claim told quote "I could see that happening" when the cracks were first brought to their attention. There are many different cracks in my driveway and they were not there until the unlawful repossession happened. I provided pictures of these cracks. I also provided pictures of a crack in a different location that was there before the unlawful repossession occurred. I did this to show them that a crack that was there already would have some type of vegetation growing in it.I spoke to the VP of digital dog regarding the damage to real property and he stated "You have no rights' and "rights are to protect people from government." I feel that employees at digital dog feel and treat people that have their car repossessed like second class citizens because they missed a car payment. I know that this is the the way I was treated. When I first talked to the VP regarding the claim he said he would have a decisions in 24 hours. After two weeks I got a call from him and he stated my claim was denied and the claim I submitted with American Recovery Service will be denied as well. I was trying to discuss the facts with him in a professional manner, and he hung up on me. I called him back with no answer and text him after that. Someone called the police on me stating that I was harassing him and threaten him. Which was a total lie and no charges where filed. Similar to how digital do stated I was drunk; an unethical attempt to prevent them from taking responsibility for there actions.I received a letter with a list of inventory that was in the car 8 days after the unlawful repossession took place and an item was missing. It was a gift that my sister gave me. I was under the impression that the law stated I should have been provided this document within two days after a car was repossessed. There was an item missing and I was first told I should just go check see it may have been looked over. When I went and got my car back the item was not in the car. I mention something to the gentlemen who was there and he said it will be resolved with the claim I submitted. He also asked me to sign something digitally on a tablet. I denied that request and he had a paper document; he wanted me to sign. I told him I was not comfortable signing it. He told me that I would not get my car back unless I signed it. I did sign the paper document because I was forced too. I put to get car back and plus addendum next to where I signed. I still have yet to receive my gold cross or been compensated for it.Digital dog is a unethical company that is willing to do whatever the see fit in order to not take responsibility for there unlawful actions. They have slandered my name and lied about me and what they have done. I feel all there actions and the way I have been treated has something to do with when I was wrongly placed under citizens arrest by a repossession tow company's driver; who came to my house a 130A.M. years ago looking for the old home owners vehicle. I am not positive but I feel it was the same driver that placed me under citizens arrest. Of course nothing ever cam from the citizens arrest because it was a lie. Just like digital dog is lying now. Digital dog has not only been unethical; they have broke laws that are made to protect consumers like myself. They damaged my property and took my property. They are willing to do anything not to take responsibility. Something needs to be done about there actions. I want a formal complete with the Revdex.com and they shouldn't be recognized by the Revdex.com. They need to repair the damages they caused. They would not tell me their insurance company was. I offered them to have someone from there company to come investigate and put a value of the damages. They said that they didn't need too. No business should treat anyone the way digital dog treated me. I hope the Revdex.com will put a stop to this and make them accountable.

Message:Good afternoon~ We have received the complaint and estimate from [redacted] requesting a total of $1331.48 for repairs to both front and rearbumpers on her 2010 Mitsubishi Lancer. The complaint states we damaged thefront and rear bumpers of this unit during the repossession process....

We havespoken to the recovery agent who has advised this vehicle was sitting on thestreet so he was able to hook this unit from the front and secure fortransport, he at no time touched the rear of this vehicle. The agent hasalso stated he was not aware of causing any damage to the front bumper.Through further investigation of all pictures and condition report we agreethe damage to the front end of this vehicle does indicate tow damage. Wehave also reviewed all pictures of the rear of this same unit both from ourlot and from this customer but this area does not indicate tow damage. We doaccept responsibility for the front bumper damage but again as we did nottouch the rear of this unit with our equipment we do not believe any damageto this area was caused by our company.  As we agree this process has takenmore time than we would like, we will agree to pay the entire estimateamount of $1331.48 to compensate for our lack of response for this amount oftime. We will be happy to issue a check to the customer in the totalrequested amount of $1331.48 along with a settlement agreement. Thank you![redacted]Digital Dog Auto RecoveryClaims Specialist/Redemptions[redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:The information in the response is inaccurate. I called and spoke to an agent at the company otherwise I would have not known where to pick up my items or the timeframe in which I could do so. Prior to cashing the check I spoke to this manager who advised me that he would not authorize any other refund and laughed at me when I explained that my items were not safely stored. Also when I picked my car up after it left the yard there were still items in the car. Nothing was done with my belongings. California state law says the items must be stored in a secure designated area. I do not believe an unlocked can on an unlocked yard is considered secure. I also called numerous times regarding damages to my car and never received a response from the manager. There was no attempt to do anything with my belongings so there should be no fee. Charging for services that weren't provided is wrong. How many people is this company charging for services that aren't provided?

It is unfortunate that this customer had a difficult experience; we strive to insure our clients' customers are happy with our service, although making customers happy after having their car repossessed is a lofty goal. In this case, we reduced our fees...

over 50% and the customer would not pay and would not come to our facility to pick up his belongings. He hung up on our staff a number of times and never accepted our reductions on price. Unit recovered 4-28-15Our redemption department emailed on 5-1-15 at 9:29am the following note to Veros Credit: "Good afternoon! Hope you are having a great Friday! Redemption fees per your contract are: 45.00 per day vehicle storage with 50.00 one time admin fee. Personal property redemption: 30.00 inventory fee and 10.00 per day storage. Unit recovered 04/28/2015 14:52:16 and stored at our Salinas facility. Thank you!"5-1-2015 we processed all mail and sent NOS (Notice of Seizure) and Personal Property letters as required by law.On 5-22-15 Sara in our redemption department took a call from the customer demanding prop at no fee—he argued with her for some time over not wanting to pay a dime for personal property; from the notes we can see Sara entered $280.00 (25 days ofstorage at 10.00 per day and a 30.00 inventory fee). We then agreed to accept $150.00 and entered notes in the property tab. He then demanded a supervisor, again did not want to pay a dime and wanted post mark proof of prop letter that went out. Gave call to [redacted] who reviewed the acct and let the customer know we have already negotiated the fees as low as we can and to please come and pick up his property—she also advised letter had gone out, but the customer stated did not want to pay a dime and hung up on [redacted]. On 5-27-15 The customer again called in at 13:02 to inform [redacted] that he contacted a lawyer who advised him to place a claim with Revdex.com since we are charging him for his property. [redacted] then spoke with [redacted] who was advised the very first time this customer called that we had we agreed to lower the fees, he just won’t pay anything at all. [redacted] reviewed the file and agreed we had already agreed to lower the fees and he would need to pay them. 5-27-15 at 13:31(day 30 of prop storage) [redacted]called ro back to advise at [redacted], she received dead air and then a busysignal—she tried this several times.  5-27-15 at 13:54 (again day 30 of prop storage) Ro called back  to [redacted] directly—she advised fees are 150.00 butwill go up 10.00 per day.  Advised it would be a good idea to pick upproperty sooner rather than later due to cost. Ro at this time argued again buttold [redacted] he would now pay a reasonable fee. This was the first mention by thero that he would agree to pay any fees at all. [redacted] advised we have discountedover 50% of the property fees, ro continued to argue saying we did not followprocedure therefore he should not have to pay—this was basically exactly whathe said during our first conversation and this is a week later. —[redacted] advisedprice is 150.00 as of 5-27-15 and would go up by 10.00 per day then offered toset him up with an appointment but the ro again hung up on her.  On 5-29-15 the customer showed up in our Salinas office and spokewith [redacted] says he asked for the 150.00 and the ro stated he was nevernotified of us storing property and will pay nothing. The ro advised since henever received and signed a property report that he now has to pay nothing.[redacted] noticed the fees had already been reduced and advised it will go up by10.00 per day and property is only stored for 60 days then disposed of. Rostated he had already reported us to the Revdex.com and does not have to pay. Heattempted to get [redacted] to provide the property for free several times but [redacted]still refused, ro left our facility.