ICFX Technologies Reviews (%countItem)
ICFX Technologies Rating
Address: 9011 Chevrolet Dr STE 11, Ellicott City, Maryland, United States, 21042-4024
Phone: |
Show more...
|
Web: |
|
E-mails: |
Sign in to see
|
Add contact information for ICFX Technologies
Add new contacts
ADVERTISEMENT
Hackers Inc broke an IPad Mini while attempting to replace the glass. They admitted their error and promised to replace but have not resolved.
My wife brought my daughters IPad mini to Hackers Inc. in January to replace the glass after which had a hairline fracture. Prior to taking the product to Hackers Inc., the unit was working fine in all respects including internet connectivity and start button. When the product was returned to us by Hackers Inc., the screen glass was repaired but the product would not start as the start button was not functioning. The the start button was now loose and not engaging which was not an issue before the repair. Note: My daughter especially needs this device to keep up with her online studies as a 9th grader during the COVID-19 health crisis. The product was returned to Hackers Inc. in January with the promise by Hackers Inc. to return the devise back to it's functioning status. My wife and I called Hackers Inc. several times per week for the next 4 weeks and had to go into the store before anyone would speak to us directly about the issue. We were told by Hackers Inc. that they subsequently learned that this specific model (IPad Mini) can only be repaired by Apple and attempting to do so by any other means world render the product permanently inoperable. Hackers Inc. charged us and handed the damaged product back to me.I took the product damaged by Hackers Inc. to the local Apple dealer in *** Mall and they ran a diagnostic check and confirmed that the product was damaged as a result of the unauthorized removal of the screen (by Hackers Inc.). I spoke with *** (owner) at Hackers Inc. In February and he agreed to replace the product. Hackers Inc. refunded the cost of the screen replacement and Hackers Inc. and this consumer both agreed that a equal share in the replacement cost would be fair. To date, I have called Hackers Inc. at least once per week for an update and have not received any response by phone or in writing as of this date.
As stated, my 14 year old daughter needs this product to keep up with her online studies during the current healthcare crisis. Additionally. my daughter struggles with a diagnosed learning disability (registered with the school system) which makes this product especially essential as a educational learning tool at this time (and before the healthcare crisis). As my daughter has been without this essential learning tool (the IPad Mini) for over 3 months and 3 weeks as a result of Hackers Inc. lack of resolution to the damage caused by their overt negligence, I am seeking full restitution from Hackers Inc. in the form of a prompt replacement of the product (IPad Mini) or equal cash value which would afford me (as the head of household) the opportunity to quickly replace the product. (Note: If helpful, proof of my daughter's disability will be provided upon request.)
Broke phone's camera, won't fix or replace.
I took my phone in to replace the screen. It was returned to me with the screen not glued down correctly and the replacement screen popped right off and the front-facing camera went blurry. When I went back to the store the staff told me the repair was under warranty and they would fix it for free. After 2 weeks of absolutely no communication (even though I called several times), they told me they were having difficulty repairing the camera and they would call this week (August 20). I was told by the owner that he would refund my money for the repair if they could not fix it. I received no call, and called today, August 23. The staff said the phone screen and camera were fixed and ready for pick up. I picked up my phone verified that the phone was functional, but trusted them that the camera was fixed. I returned home only to discover that the screen was fixed but the camera was not. The front-facing camera was in the same condition as when I dropped it off 2 weeks prior. I then called back to say it wasn't fixed and was told that I had signed off that the camera worked at the store and they would not refund my money. When I asked for the owner's name, the staff hung up on me. I located it (Eric ***) here at Revdex.com
I paid about 180 bucks to get the phone fixed. Since it seems they can't fix it, I'd like my money back and $50 more for the grief.
Once again, let's get something straight. *** DID NOT PICK UP HIS PHONE! His SON picked up the phone. With that being said, we did offer to repair the the phone under our warranty policy and we did. We ALSO informed Mr. that the part would take about 2 weeks to arrive as the vendor was temp out of stock. He said ok. We fixed the device and the camera issue, had HIS SON look at (he is quoted "but trusted them that the camera was fixed). this is an all out lie as HIS SON VERIFIED the camera was working and signed off on the statement that everything was perfectly fine including the camera both Eric & Chris made te son look at.
There will be no refund as we fixed what was suppose to be fixed and was signed off by the customer as fixed. There will also be NO grief money (which just goes to show Mr. is only our for money).
Our conclusion is that the the SON did something to camera after it left our store and is now trying to pass blame onto us. We will not fall for this fraud.
He has already posted a bad review on Yelp and it is this companies policy to no longer work with a customer after a bad review has been made.
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
I've put Eric ***'s response in quotes and added my response below each section.
"Once again, let's get something straight. *** DID NOT PICK UP HIS PHONE! His SON picked up the phone."
This isn't true. *** did pick up his phone. *** is named after his father, ***.
"With that being said, we did offer to repair the the phone under our warranty policy and we did. We ALSO informed Mr. that the part would take about 2 weeks to arrive as the vendor was temp out of stock. He said ok."
This is true. Never said it wasn't. What is also true is that numerous phone calls requesting a status update were not returned.
"We fixed the device and the camera issue, had HIS SON look at (he is quoted "but trusted them that the camera was fixed)."
Yes, *** came in to pick up his phone after his father, ***, called the store (after not receiving the promised return call) and was told the camera had been fixed.
"this is an all out lie as HIS SON VERIFIED the camera was working and signed off on the statement that everything was perfectly fine including the camera both Eric & Chris made te son look at."
Yes, Chris did call *** a "liar" multiple times on the phone in the call made after he returned home. That part is true. In the store, *** was asked to verify the phone worked. He turned it on and verified its functionality, but he did not check the camera. If he had known Hackers would not stand behind its work, he would have been well advised to verify that the assurance received on the phone about the camera was correct.
"There will be no refund as we fixed what was suppose to be fixed and was signed off by the customer as fixed. There will also be NO grief money (which just goes to show Mr. is only our for money)."
Um, yes, this is a financial transaction. This is how it works: Please fix my phone, and I will pay you money. If you don't fix it and make the phone worse in some way, you should give me my money back and compensate me for the damage. Pretty obvious, no?
"Our conclusion is that the the SON did something to camera after it left our store and is now trying to pass *** onto us. We will not fall for this fraud."
This "fraud" claim is a little hard to sustain. We have to believe that the phone's owner, who lives a one hour drive from Hackers, got the phone back after the first failed repair and broke the camera (Hackers doesn't even claim this. They took responsibility for breaking the camera the first time). *** then drove an hour to drop off the phone and waited three weeks for a repair. What Hackers wants us to believe is that *** picked up the phone after Hackers said it was fixed the second time. He then verified it was fixed, and on the way home, *** was talented enough to break the phone's camera in exactly the same way it was broken the first time (the front facing camera no longer focusessame as the first time).
Why would *** do that? More to the point, HOW could anyone do that? Find me someone who knows how to break their phone camera so that it stays permanently unfocused. Twice! I can't. This was the hypothesis offered by Chris on the phone after calling *** a liar, and it seems that Eric, the owner, is sticking with this story.
"He has already posted a bad review on Yelp and it is this companies policy to no longer work with a customer after a bad review has been made."
Eric might want to consider that being called a liar by a store employee is likely to result in a bad review. Chris also made it clear in that call that Hackers was not going to fix the problem. This all happened before the review on Yelp was posted. The Yelp review was a reaction to the store breaking off contact with ***, not the other way around. BTW, Revdex.com might want to ask Eric why he seems to be posting reviews of his own store online.
Eric ***, owner of Hackers, can run his business any way he wants. The *** family has brought him phones to be fixed about four times. This is how regular customers are treated?
Sincerely
The contract issues also involved billing. Calling prior to coming in I was informed by technician *** that my cost was $69 to replace a swollen battery in my Xperia cell phone. Whether battery in stock or ordered cost would be the same. Upon arrival I signed an agreement with owner for the $69 charge.(copy) After removal of battery I was told battery would need to be ordered. Tech asked for $40 deposit and processed on my credit card. When given receipt, balance owing shows $39 instead of $29. I inquire informing tech and owner that any change in cost should have been addressed with me PRIOR to charging my credit card. Owner threatens to cancel order. I politely say this is business and by law I'm entitled to full disclosure prior to any charge on my credit card. While talking privately with tech, I suggested in future any changed amt be disclosed prior to charging on customers credit card because it could be construed as deceptive and misleading. The owner runs out from behind work area irate and nasty telling tech to give my phone back, he had the power to cancel my order because he thought I said they were being deceptive. When both I and the tech said he was misinformed, he didnt care. Stated he had it recorded and I suggested he review his tape. Said I couldnt use that word in his store. I informed him we are all entitled to freedom of speach. He says not in his store. He then demanded I leave his store saying "dont let the door hit you...". I said "excuse me is that how you speak to all your customers when you dont like what they say". When leaving imformed both techs I had no problems with them and asked them to pray for the owner. He was very rude and unprofessional. I informed him I would be filling a complaint.
I also notice receipt has another name and address different from location I visited:HackersManCaveSales 6420 Dobbin Rd Ste B, Columbia MD 21045. All the more reason full disclosure is necessary prior to charging a customer's credit card.NOTE: Only able to upload one picture
Product_Or_Service: Cell phone repair
Order_Number:
Other (requires explanation) Full investigation of business operations and procedures by attorney general. Review of other complaints thru Yelp and other services to examine extent of complaints by other consumers and possibly criminal charges against owner. It appears in other complaints as well quoted information has been misleading. If every customer is charged an additional $3-10 above quoted amt, how much of that excess is being reported on the books or even being taxed?
The statement from this customer is misleading. The facts are as follows:
1. She was told that price "could be" $69 but might be more depending on the battery type, model and size. e told her that we would put the $69 as a charge right now, but might change once we diagnose the issue. Once diagnosed she was informed that the price was going to be $79. she was told the price prior to repair, not after repair. This lead into the conversation about us being "misleading and being deceptive", in which when we told her the price BEFORE repair is NOT misleading or deceptive. If we told her that the amount was different AFTER repair, then I can see her point. She began to make accusations against my staff and my company over the price. it was at this point in which I asked her to leave.
2. We refused service on her device as we have had issues with customers like this in the past and it has never ended well. I, as the owner, refunded the deposit she made, immediately, issued her a copy of the voided ticket and POLITELY said she could take her business elsewhere.
3. Freedom is speech is her right, but there are civil consequences for using the word DECEPTIVE in my shop and that is refusal of service.
4. Her deposit was fully refunded and she was asked to leave by me and never return. This company WILL NOT do business with people who call us MISLEADING & DECEPTIVE...end of story.
5. I did NOT say "dont let the door hit you" I am not that kind of person."
6. Our service reputation is impeccable through Yelp and Google reviews.
Please inform this customer that freedom of speech is her right, but she will be refused service in the future by other companies when she uses words like "Misleading and deceptive" when dealing with a business....this is the business' right.