Seneca One Finance, Inc

Thank you for the notice of the complaint filed by *** *** on or about June I, I certainly apologize for the delay in respondingAs you are aware from our past dealings,
Seneca One takes all complaints seriously, investigates them thoroughly and typically responds within a day or two. Unfortunately, in conducting market research, Ms***'s information was inadvertently provided as a potential structured settlement annuitant, or family member thereof, in our marketing databaseWhile Seneca One strives to ensure that its marketing information is correct, occasionally this type of scenario occurs. From reviewing our records, it appears that one mail piece was sent to Ms***, which is consistent with the information provided in her complaintAccordingly, Seneca One has removed Ms*** from its mailing list so no new mail pieces will go out to herRegarding her request to receive a check for $5,000, the mail piece she received clearly indicated that in order to qualifY for our program, she must be a structured settlement recipientShe states in the complaint that she is not a structured settlement annuitant and is, therefore, ineligible for our program. I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by Ms***'s complaint. Please feel free to call me directly at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matterThank you. Sincerely, Doyle LC*** Associate General Counsel

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response. If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
--Please note that removing a dead person from your contact list and replacing their name with the spouse's is not a good business practice, just in case you happen to ever come across this again
Regards, *** ***

December 4, Dear *** ***:Thank you for the notice oft he complaint filed by *** *** *** on or about December 4, *** *** responded to a marketing piece that contained a callback number to complete a phone surveyIn exchange for completing the survey, the
responder would be entitled to a $checkAs you can imagine, the marketing piece was very popular and effective resulting in a large influx of survey responders*** *** was informed that the check would be activated, but unfortunately, the appropriate follow through was not taken care of on our end and the check was returnedAs a result, *** *** incurred a $fee for the returned check $I am happy to report that a $check is being sent via *** today to *** *** at the address listed on his complaint.I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by *** ***'s complaintPlease feel free to call me directly at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matterThank youSincerely,
Doyle CAssociate General Counsel

July 29, 2014Dear *** ***:
Thank you for the notice of the complaint filed by *** *** *** on or about July 22, *** *** responded to a marketing piece that contained a callback number to complete a phone surveyIn exchange for completing the survey, the
responder would be entitled to a $checkAs you can imagine, the marketing piece was very popular and effective resulting in a large influx of survey respondersAlthough our records indicate that *** *** refused to provide responses to the survey questions, I am happy to report that a $check is being sent via *** today to *** *** at the address listed on bis complaint.I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by *** ***'s complaintPlease feel free to call me directly at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matterThank you.Sincerely,Doyle *C*** Associate General Counsel

December 11, 2014Dear *** ***:Thank you for the notice ofthe complaint filed by MrTimothy Todd on or about December 10, 2014.Seneca One disagrees with *** ***'s characterization of Seneca One's sweepstakes advertising needs to be modified in some waySeneca One had the sweepstakes materials
vetted by outside counsel that specializes in such contestsSeneca One takes exception to the notion that its sweepstakes materials are misleading in any wayFor your reference, I have included copies of both the landing page for the sweepstakes as well as a copy of the official rules.As you can see in the materials, Seneca One has made it abundantly clear that an entrant must be a structured settlement recipient in order to enter and win the sweepstakesHere are a few examples:• Title of the contest - "Structured Settlement Sweepstakes"• Clear qualifying statement on landing page - "If you have a Structured Settlement you could win the $100,Grand Prize!" (emphasis added)• Statement in short rules on landing page - "Open to legal residents of the U.Sand D.Cwho are structured settlement annuitants " (emphasis added)• From the Official Rules o Section I - "ELIGIBILITY: Open to legal residents of the fifty (50) United States and D.C., who are years of age or older, and currently receiving payments from a structured settlement annuity " (emphasis added) o Section - "TO ENTER: You may enter the Sweepstakes during the Sweepstakes Period by submitting documentation that evidences your right to receive structured settlement payments (emphasis added)*** *** seems to have misread the copy associated with the sweepstakes*** *** states that "Company is advertising a sweepstakes that the fine print states no purchase or settlement required for entry, But when entering sweepstakes a structured settlement is required"(emphasis added) The statement that *** *** attempts to quote actually reads "NO PURCHASE OR PAYMENT NECESSARY TO ENTER OR WIN." Perhaps *** *** simply misread the statement and thought it said "settlement" instead of "payment"However, *** *** himself includes the same language further in his complaint - "Here is a copy o[t] the rules: Structured Settlement SweepstakesNO PURCHASE OR PAYMENT NECESSARY TO ENTER OR WIN " In any event, the rules simply do not say what *** *** indicates.Since *** ***'s "complaint" is based on his misreading of the sweepstakes rules and the rules are abundantly clear as to what is necessary to enter, Seneca One requests that *** ***'s "complaint" be stricken from the files of the Revdex.com ("Revdex.com") altogetherSeneca One has worked hard to earn an "A+" rating from the Revdex.comSeneca One understands that one factor in the rating is the number of actual complaints filedBecause *** ***'s "complaint" is based on his own misreading of the clear language, it is not really a complaint at all and should not be treated as such by the Revdex.comPlease confirm in writing that the Revdex.com will strike this "complaint" from its records and that the "complaint" not be factored in Seneca One's rating in any way.I trust that his letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by *** ***Please feel free to call me directly at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matterThank you.Sincerely,Doyle CAssociate General Counsel

October 27,2015Dear [redacted]:Thank you for the notice of the complaint filed by [redacted] on or about September 26, 2015.I apologize in the delayed response as [redacted] told us that he was going to withdraw the complaint after he received the money as explained below. Seneca One would...

have responded sooner had it thought otherwise.[redacted] responded to a marketing piece that contained a callback number to update certain information on his file. In exchange, the marketing piece indicated that a $103 check would be activated that he could then deposit. [redacted] called Seneca One and provided the necessary updated information and our representative notified him that the check was activated. Unfortunately, our back end system did not update before he deposited his check the next day, so the check was returned. [redacted] notified Seneca One on September 28,2015 that the check was returned and that he had incurred a $12 charge as a result. Seneca One sent out another check, including the $12 charge, so that [redacted] was made whole. As stated earlier, [redacted] expressed that he was going to withdraw this complaint since Seneca One responded to his problem so promptly and thoroughly.I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by [redacted]'s complaint. Please feel free to call me directly at [redacted] if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matter. Thank you.Sincerely,Doyle CAssociate General Counsel

December 4, 2015Dear [redacted]:Thank you for the notice oft he complaint filed by [redacted] on or about December 4, 2015.[redacted] responded to a marketing piece that contained a callback number to complete a phone survey. In exchange for completing the survey, the responder would be...

entitled to a $40 check. As you can imagine, the marketing piece was very popular and effective resulting in a large influx of survey responders. [redacted] was informed that the check would be activated, but unfortunately, the appropriate follow through was not taken care of on our end and the check was returned. As a result, [redacted] incurred a $25 fee for the returned check $50. I am happy to report that a $65 check is being sent via [redacted] today to [redacted] at the address listed on his complaint.I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by [redacted]'s complaint. Please feel free to call me directly at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matter. Thank you.Sincerely,Doyle C.Associate General Counsel

Thank you for the notice of the complaint filed by [redacted] on or about June I, 2015. I certainly apologize for the delay in responding. As you are aware from our past dealings, Seneca One takes all complaints seriously, investigates them thoroughly and typically responds within...

a day or two. Unfortunately, in conducting market research, Ms. [redacted]'s information was inadvertently provided as a potential structured settlement annuitant, or family member thereof, in our marketing database. While Seneca One strives to ensure that its marketing information is correct, occasionally this type of scenario occurs. From reviewing our records, it appears that one mail piece was sent to Ms. [redacted], which is consistent with the information provided in her complaint. Accordingly, Seneca One has removed Ms. [redacted] from its mailing list so no new mail pieces will go out to her. Regarding her request to receive a check for $5,000, the mail piece she received clearly indicated that in order to qualifY for our program, she must be a structured settlement recipient. She states in the complaint that she is not a structured settlement annuitant and is, therefore, ineligible for our program. I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by Ms. [redacted]'s complaint. Please feel free to call me directly at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matter. Thank you. Sincerely, Doyle L. C[redacted] Associate General Counsel

April 22, 2014Dear **. [redacted]:I write in response to the consumer complaint directed to Seneca One, LLC. Let me start by extending our sympathies to **. [redacted] s family on the news of the passing of her father, [redacted] (“**. [redacted]). Seneca One takes all consumer complaints seriously...

and has investigated the matter at hand.As means of background, Seneca One purchases lottery receivables from individuals in exchange for lump sum payments. **. [redacted] s information was included in our marketing database because he won a state lottery prize. From the notes in our database, it appears that Seneca One had some limited telephone contacts with **. [redacted] prior to his passing. Seneca One sincerely apologizes to **. [redacted] and her entire family.Pursuant to **. [redacted] s request, Seneca One has removed the names of **. [redacted] and **. [redacted] from its telephone lists so that no further telephone contact will be initiated by Seneca One. Additionally, Seneca One has removed the names of **. [redacted] and **. [redacted] from its mailing list so no new mail pieces will go out to their attention. However, it is possible that a few additional marketing pieces are currently in circulation and may be delivered to their attention in the next 30 days or so, but thereafter, no more marketing pieces will be sent from Seneca One or its affiliates.We trust that this letter fully resolves the matter. Please contact me at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the complaint.Sincerely,

RE: [redacted]Complaint ID: [redacted]
Dear [redacted]:
Thank you for the notice of the complaint filed by [redacted] on or about November 17,2015.[redacted] responded to a marketing piece that contained a callback number to complete a phone survey....

In exchange for completing the survey, the responder would be entitled to a $50 check. As you can imagine, the marketing piece was very popular and effective resulting in a large influx of survey responders. [redacted] was inadvertently marked as not eligible for the $50. I am happy to report that a $50 check is being sent via [redacted] today to [redacted] at the address listed on his complaint.I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by [redacted]'s complaint. Please feel free to call me directly at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matter.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Doyle *. C[redacted] Associate General Counsel[redacted] Bethesda, MD [redacted] wwwsenecaone.com

RE: [redacted]Complaint ID: [redacted]Dear [redacted]:Thank you for the notice of the complaint filed by [redacted] on or about May 31, 2016.[redacted] responded to a marketing piece that contained a callback number to complete a phone survey. In exchange for completing the survey, the responder...

would be entitled to a $40 check. As you can imagine, the marketing piece was very popular and effective resulting in a large influx of survey responders. [redacted] was informed that the check would be activated, but unfortunately, the appropriate follow through was not taken care of on our end and the check was returned. As a result, [redacted] incurred a $30 fee for the returned check. I am happy to report that a $70 check is being sent via [redacted] today to [redacted] at the address listed on his complaint.I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by [redacted]’s complaint. Please feel free to call me directly at [redacted] if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matter. Thank you.

August 14,2014Dear [redacted]:Thank you for the notice of the complaint filed by [redacted] on or about July 8, 2014.[redacted] responded to a marketing piece that contained a bonus check that could be activated upon his entering into a new business transaction with...

Seneca One. On or about May 19,2014, [redacted] called and spoke to a representative named Sarah. During this call, [redacted] notified Sarah that he did not wish to enter into a new business transaction with Seneca One. As a result, Sarah notified [redacted] that he did not qualify to have the check activated. Nonetheless, [redacted] chose to deposit the check into his account. Because the check was not activated prior to deposit, it was returned and his account was charged a fee. Although our records indicate that [redacted] refused to enter into a new business transaction with Seneca One that would have qualified him to have the check activated, I am happy to report that a check in the amount of$266.99 is being sent via [redacted] to [redacted] at the address listed on his complaint.I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by [redacted]s's complaint. Please feel free to call me directly at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matter. Thank you.Sincerely,Doyle *. C[redacted] Associate General Counsel

October 27,2015Dear [redacted]:
Thank you for the notice of the complaint filed by [redacted] on or about September 26, 2015.
I apologize in the delayed response as [redacted] told us that he was going to withdraw the complaint after he received the money as...

explained below. Seneca One would have responded sooner had it thought otherwise.[redacted] responded to a marketing piece that contained a callback number to update certain information on his file. In exchange, the marketing piece indicated that a $103 check would be activated that he could then deposit. [redacted] called Seneca One and provided the necessary updated information and our representative notified him that the check was activated. Unfortunately, our back end system did not update before he deposited his check the next day, so the check was returned. [redacted] notified Seneca One on September 28,2015 that the check was returned and that he had incurred a $12 charge as a result. Seneca One sent out another check, including the $12 charge, so that [redacted] was made whole. As stated earlier, [redacted] expressed that he was going to withdraw this complaint since Seneca One responded to his problem so promptly and thoroughly.
I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by [redacted]'s complaint. Please feel free to call me directly at [redacted] if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matter. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Doyle C
Associate General Counsel

February 24, 2016Dear [redacted]:Thank you for the notice of the complaint filed by [redacted] on or about February 22, 2016.[redacted] is not a customer of Seneca One, nor any of its related entities. Seneca One has no record of any contact with [redacted], either under the married name or...

maiden name ([redacted]). Further, Seneca One has no record of any contact with [redacted]'s mother, [redacted]. We have searched our records for all name variations mentioned in [redacted]'s complaint as well as the address and phone number listed.I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by [redacted]'s complaint. Please feel free to call me directly at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matter. Thank you.Sincerely,Doyle C[redacted]Associate General Counsel

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:I accept the check but the response they gave about what the conversation was about is completely incorrect. Never once was I informed that the check was only under the condition of entering into a contract. As a matter of fact I made sure to ask to clarify that specific detail. I believe you record the phone conversations. I challenge you to provide a copy of the recorded call where myself or Sarah spoke about this detail. I was told the check would be active in 48 hrs and when I called back after 72 hrs I was told by Sarah it was active. Why else would I deposit a check into my account and take the chance of costing myself money? I guess the lying employee and the lie in this response is indicative of the type of business they run.
Regards,
[redacted]

About nine years ago I sold a large portion of my guaranteed annuity to senecaone but more than I realized at the time...verbally no more than 12 guaranteed years were supposed to be sold, but as a kid with no attorney nor appointed one, I signed the contract. Assuming only 12 years were being sold I was swindled and all 20 guaranteed years were taken from me. I will never do business with these crooks again nor recommend anyone to them.

RE: [redacted]Complaint ID: [redacted]Dear [redacted]:Thank you for the notice of the complaint filed by [redacted] on or about November 17,2015.[redacted] responded to a marketing piece that contained a callback number to complete a phone survey. In exchange for completing...

the survey, the responder would be entitled to a $50 check. As you can imagine, the marketing piece was very popular and effective resulting in a large influx of survey responders. [redacted] was inadvertently marked as not eligible for the $50. I am happy to report that a $50 check is being sent via [redacted] today to [redacted] at the address listed on his complaint.I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by [redacted]'s complaint. Please feel free to call me directly at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matter. Thank you.Sincerely, Doyle *. C[redacted] Associate General Counsel[redacted] Bethesda, MD [redacted] 3[redacted] wwwsenecaone.com

[A default letter is provided here which indicates your acceptance of the business's response.  If you wish, you may update it before sending it.]
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]

December 11, 2014Dear [redacted]:
Thank you for the notice ofthe complaint filed by Mr. Timothy Todd on or about December 10, 2014.
Seneca One disagrees with [redacted]'s characterization of Seneca One's sweepstakes advertising needs to be modified in some way. Seneca One...

had the sweepstakes materials vetted by outside counsel that specializes in such contests. Seneca One takes exception to the notion that its sweepstakes materials are misleading in any way. For your reference, I have included copies of both the landing page for the sweepstakes as well as a copy of the official rules.As you can see in the materials, Seneca One has made it abundantly clear that an entrant must be a structured settlement recipient in order to enter and win the sweepstakes. Here are a few examples:
• Title of the contest - "Structured Settlement Sweepstakes"
• Clear qualifying statement on landing page - "If  you have a Structured Settlement you could win the $100,000 Grand Prize!" (emphasis added)
• Statement in short rules on landing page - "Open to legal residents of the 50 U.S. and D.C. who are structured settlement annuitants ... " (emphasis added)• From the Official Rules   o Section I - "ELIGIBILITY: Open to legal residents of the fifty (50) United States and D.C., who are 18 years of age or older, and       currently receiving payments from a structured settlement annuity ... " (emphasis added)  o Section 3 - "TO ENTER: You may enter the Sweepstakes during the Sweepstakes Period by submitting documentation that evidences your right to receive structured settlement payments ... (emphasis added)
[redacted] seems to have misread the copy associated with the sweepstakes. [redacted] states that "Company is advertising a sweepstakes that the fine print states no purchase or settlement required for entry, But when entering sweepstakes a structured settlement is required". (emphasis added) The statement that [redacted] attempts to quote actually reads "NO PURCHASE OR PAYMENT NECESSARY TO ENTER OR WIN." Perhaps [redacted] simply misread the statement and thought it said "settlement" instead of "payment". However, [redacted] himself includes the same language further in his complaint - "Here is a copy o[t] the rules: Structured Settlement Sweepstakes. NO PURCHASE OR PAYMENT NECESSARY TO ENTER OR WIN ... " In any event, the rules simply do not say what [redacted] indicates.
Since [redacted]'s "complaint" is based on his misreading of the sweepstakes rules and the rules are abundantly clear as to what is necessary to enter, Seneca One requests that [redacted]'s "complaint" be stricken from the files of the Revdex.com ("Revdex.com") altogether. Seneca One has worked hard to earn an "A+" rating from the Revdex.com. Seneca One understands that one factor in the rating is the number of actual complaints filed. Because [redacted]'s "complaint" is based on his own misreading of the clear language, it is not really a complaint at all and should not be treated as such by the Revdex.com. Please confirm in writing that the Revdex.com will strike this "complaint" from its records and that the "complaint" not be factored in Seneca One's rating in any way.
I trust that his letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by [redacted]. Please feel free to call me directly at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matter. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Doyle C
Associate General Counsel

Review: I received a letter on May 16 and a check from this company in the amount of 249.99 stating it was a bonus check and I had to call to activate. I called the 800 number and spoke with Sarah and answered her questions and was told to give it 48 hrs before cashing the check and to call back to ensure it was activated. I called back after 72 hrs and spoke with Sarah again and was told the check was activated and to go ahead and cash it. I deposited it into my account and was given the money. After two days I was notified by my bank that the check had bounced and they withdrew the amount out of my account and charged me a service fee of 17.00. I tried to reach Sarah several times and was told that she was looking into it. I waited one week before trying again to contact her and she told me that they would be sending me a new check and this one would be activated and ready to go. She advised me they could not do anything about the service fee and that was my problem. I waited a week and a half and nothing came. I called and spoke with a supervisor named Ari who informed me that everything Sarah told me was wrong and that it was my banks fault for cashing the check not theirs. I spoke with my bank and they told me it was an active check and they were doing their normal procedures. I spoke again with Ari who told me that he could not refund my money and the best he could do was provide me a 0% loan worth the amount of the check. He also told me he would need personal information about my annuity from a car accident to even process it. I told him that was unacceptable and I would not provide this information because a loan was not the original agreement in the letter I received. No where in it does it say I need to provide this info. I still have the letter and a copy of the check from my bank and will provide you with it if you would like it.Desired Settlement: I want 249.99 and the 17.00 bank fee replaced because I do not feel this is mine nor the banks fault.

Business

Response:

August 14,2014Dear [redacted]:Thank you for the notice of the complaint filed by [redacted] on or about July 8, 2014.[redacted] responded to a marketing piece that contained a bonus check that could be activated upon his entering into a new business transaction with Seneca One. On or about May 19,2014, [redacted] called and spoke to a representative named Sarah. During this call, [redacted] notified Sarah that he did not wish to enter into a new business transaction with Seneca One. As a result, Sarah notified [redacted] that he did not qualify to have the check activated. Nonetheless, [redacted] chose to deposit the check into his account. Because the check was not activated prior to deposit, it was returned and his account was charged a fee. Although our records indicate that [redacted] refused to enter into a new business transaction with Seneca One that would have qualified him to have the check activated, I am happy to report that a check in the amount of$266.99 is being sent via [redacted] to [redacted] at the address listed on his complaint.I trust that this letter has adequately addressed the concerns raised by [redacted]s's complaint. Please feel free to call me directly at ###-###-#### if you have any questions or need any additional information about this matter. Thank you.Sincerely,Doyle *. C[redacted] Associate General Counsel

Consumer

Response:

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]

Review: [redacted]

I am rejecting this response because:

I accept the check but the response they gave about what the conversation was about is completely incorrect. Never once was I informed that the check was only under the condition of entering into a contract. As a matter of fact I made sure to ask to clarify that specific detail. I believe you record the phone conversations. I challenge you to provide a copy of the recorded call where myself or Sarah spoke about this detail. I was told the check would be active in 48 hrs and when I called back after 72 hrs I was told by Sarah it was active. Why else would I deposit a check into my account and take the chance of costing myself money? I guess the lying employee and the lie in this response is indicative of the type of business they run.

Regards,