Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
*** *** ** ** *** *** *** ** * *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ** *** ***
Regards,
*** ***--We will consider the complaint resolved when we have received the remaining refund of $12,and RTF has arranged for removal of the machine from our premises. Here is our response to the business's reply to our complaint: The term “scrap heap” was coined by a third party that was hired by RTF to inspect the machine at our premises as RTF did not believe in what state we have received the non-functioning machine including some potentially serious safety issuesUnfortunately, our original disbelief regarding what we have received was fully confirmed by that third partyA detailed report was provided by the third party to RTF as well as an email was sent by us to RTF detailing everything that was found problematic and concerning during that inspection including that the machine actually does not work (both report and email are attached)Please note that there is absolutely no damage caused by us; the state of the machine described in the third party report and our email is exactly as it was receivedWe declined the offer of a new machine as, based on the results of this inspection, we could not trust RTF anymore to being able to deliver a new machine without all the issues of the machine we have receivedRTF offered to pay the freight expense since they were months late for delivery, which we acceptedThe machine came without a proper manual and with a used, damaged vacuum pump not to required specifications, i.egrossly under dimensioned and not as quotedFurther, the trays, essential part of the machine, were not part of the original delivery and were never delivered despite several promises to do soWe also believe in courtesy and fairness, but the incurred delays in handling this matter leaves as very concernedRTF has not shown any urgency to remove the non-functioning machine from our premises as promised nor issuing the remaining refundSince this has been going on for several months, we are very concerned that we won’t receive the full refund, which is a rather considerable amount for a small business like ours. As said above, we will consider the complaint successfully resolved when we have received the remaining refund of $12,and RTF has successfully arranged for removal of the machine from our premises.--
I am receipt of a letter from the Revdex.com dated 10/17 /17, we are aware of this unpleasant situation and the following is our response. We believe that...
courtesy and fairness are the two most important fundamentals of a successful business today. We have been in business for nearly 40 years, the statement that our machine came from a scrap heap is completely not true and we resent that comment. This machine was a functioning device when we shipped it to Mr. [redacted], it is true that the delivery was late. We had a fire in the factory area which put our production behind schedule, Mr. [redacted] was aware of this (see e mail message to him) . At no time did the customer express intent to cancel the order. A video was made of how to operate the machine before it was crated and shipped. (see e mail) Apparently the customer could not understand how to operate the machine. (see email stating this) It is true that the machine had suffered some damage or customer handling damage (see e mail where customer did not know how to get the machine off the shipping pallet and into the work area)We additionally paid the freight expense to a trucking company to deliver the machine to Mr. [redacted] which was clearly not part of our agreement, (see freight information on our quotation). To try and satisfy the customer we offered to deliver a new machine to Ohio ( a 1500 mile trip) on a factory truck, and show the customer how to use it, on the same trip, pick up the damage machine at no charge, and complete this transaction in a 30-day time frame. The customer declined the offer. We offered a complete refund of the 24,000.00 paid, a normal course of business is to receive the equipment and then issue the refund. Again, we went above and beyond that and issue a check for p,000.00 to the client. We intend to reimburse the additional money also. Starting this letter, I said that we believe in courtesy and fairness, I think we gone beyond that in the way this account has been handled by giving free shipping cost, a replacement machine, training on how use it, picking up of damaged goods or a complete refund. All we are asking for, after all this is for the customer to put the unit back in the box it came in, move it to an area where we can have it picked up by a trucking company and returned to us, freight expense to be paid by us, then we will refund the remaining 12,000.00 dollars
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
First, there was NO check in the envelope I received from RTF Manufacturing. It is correct that the controller did not cause the failure in September. But I believe that we have discovered some other serious deficiencies. The compressor as installed was not appropriate for our use. The freezer and compressor are located outside in an unheated shed. The controllers simply run the fans - but without installing a head master valve and crank case heater we could have experienced failure of the compressor in just a couple years. Furthermore, a pipe was installed through the freezer wall as a drain from the evaporator. Having a pipe without a trap - allows ambient air directly into the freezer. It is possible that water could freeze inside and obstruct the drain - then the only place for water to go would be the inside of the freezer and possibly damaging any product left on the floor. We also have noted condensation on the outside of the freezer - which is due to faulty assembly. We have had to apply silicone caulking to some of the freezer panel seams. In light of all this, I feel $63.79 is far too little.
Regards,
[redacted]
We are in receipt of a letter dated 10/15/15 regarding a complaint about our company. I am sorry to hear about the trouble with the freezer. Yes, it is true, my brother had a medical issue and the service department became backed up. The control that Ms. [redacted] is referring to is for...
winter time operation, it would have nothing to do with a problem in September. We had every intent to install this, however, since it has already been done, we will refund thecost of the control and one hour labor to perform this work. Enclosed is an invoice/receipt for the cost of the control and the prevailing wage schedule for the labor to in stall the part and a check for 63. 79.Sincerely,Thomas F[redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below
*** *** ** ** *** *** *** ** * *** ** *** *** ** *** *** *** ** *** ***
Regards,
*** ***--We will consider the complaint resolved when we have received the remaining refund of $12,and RTF has arranged for removal of the machine from our premises. Here is our response to the business's reply to our complaint: The term “scrap heap” was coined by a third party that was hired by RTF to inspect the machine at our premises as RTF did not believe in what state we have received the non-functioning machine including some potentially serious safety issuesUnfortunately, our original disbelief regarding what we have received was fully confirmed by that third partyA detailed report was provided by the third party to RTF as well as an email was sent by us to RTF detailing everything that was found problematic and concerning during that inspection including that the machine actually does not work (both report and email are attached)Please note that there is absolutely no damage caused by us; the state of the machine described in the third party report and our email is exactly as it was receivedWe declined the offer of a new machine as, based on the results of this inspection, we could not trust RTF anymore to being able to deliver a new machine without all the issues of the machine we have receivedRTF offered to pay the freight expense since they were months late for delivery, which we acceptedThe machine came without a proper manual and with a used, damaged vacuum pump not to required specifications, i.egrossly under dimensioned and not as quotedFurther, the trays, essential part of the machine, were not part of the original delivery and were never delivered despite several promises to do soWe also believe in courtesy and fairness, but the incurred delays in handling this matter leaves as very concernedRTF has not shown any urgency to remove the non-functioning machine from our premises as promised nor issuing the remaining refundSince this has been going on for several months, we are very concerned that we won’t receive the full refund, which is a rather considerable amount for a small business like ours. As said above, we will consider the complaint successfully resolved when we have received the remaining refund of $12,and RTF has successfully arranged for removal of the machine from our premises.--
The warranty on the machine we purchased from RTF Manufacturing (DBA as Hudson Valley Lyomac) is one yearSee attached quote (page 3) for details
I am receipt of a letter from the Revdex.com dated 10/17 /17, we are aware of this unpleasant situation and the following is our response. We believe that...
courtesy and fairness are the two most important fundamentals of a successful business today. We have been in business for nearly 40 years, the statement that our machine came from a scrap heap is completely not true and we resent that comment. This machine was a functioning device when we shipped it to Mr. [redacted], it is true that the delivery was late. We had a fire in the factory area which put our production behind schedule, Mr. [redacted] was aware of this (see e mail message to him) . At no time did the customer express intent to cancel the order. A video was made of how to operate the machine before it was crated and shipped. (see e mail) Apparently the customer could not understand how to operate the machine. (see email stating this) It is true that the machine had suffered some damage or customer handling damage (see e mail where customer did not know how to get the machine off the shipping pallet and into the work area)We additionally paid the freight expense to a trucking company to deliver the machine to Mr. [redacted] which was clearly not part of our agreement, (see freight information on our quotation). To try and satisfy the customer we offered to deliver a new machine to Ohio ( a 1500 mile trip) on a factory truck, and show the customer how to use it, on the same trip, pick up the damage machine at no charge, and complete this transaction in a 30-day time frame. The customer declined the offer. We offered a complete refund of the 24,000.00 paid, a normal course of business is to receive the equipment and then issue the refund. Again, we went above and beyond that and issue a check for p,000.00 to the client. We intend to reimburse the additional money also. Starting this letter, I said that we believe in courtesy and fairness, I think we gone beyond that in the way this account has been handled by giving free shipping cost, a replacement machine, training on how use it, picking up of damaged goods or a complete refund. All we are asking for, after all this is for the customer to put the unit back in the box it came in, move it to an area where we can have it picked up by a trucking company and returned to us, freight expense to be paid by us, then we will refund the remaining 12,000.00 dollars
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
First, there was NO check in the envelope I received from RTF Manufacturing. It is correct that the controller did not cause the failure in September. But I believe that we have discovered some other serious deficiencies. The compressor as installed was not appropriate for our use. The freezer and compressor are located outside in an unheated shed. The controllers simply run the fans - but without installing a head master valve and crank case heater we could have experienced failure of the compressor in just a couple years. Furthermore, a pipe was installed through the freezer wall as a drain from the evaporator. Having a pipe without a trap - allows ambient air directly into the freezer. It is possible that water could freeze inside and obstruct the drain - then the only place for water to go would be the inside of the freezer and possibly damaging any product left on the floor. We also have noted condensation on the outside of the freezer - which is due to faulty assembly. We have had to apply silicone caulking to some of the freezer panel seams. In light of all this, I feel $63.79 is far too little.
Regards,
[redacted]
We are in receipt of a letter dated 10/15/15 regarding a complaint about our company. I am sorry to hear about the trouble with the freezer. Yes, it is true, my brother had a medical issue and the service department became backed up. The control that Ms. [redacted] is referring to is for...
winter time operation, it would have nothing to do with a problem in September. We had every intent to install this, however, since it has already been done, we will refund thecost of the control and one hour labor to perform this work. Enclosed is an invoice/receipt for the cost of the control and the prevailing wage schedule for the labor to in stall the part and a check for 63. 79.Sincerely,Thomas F[redacted]