The Sentinel Imaging Group

Review: I purchased a refurbished Philips HD 15 Echo/Ultrasound System in early July 2013 that was supposed to be a Demo model from 2011 (with 2 years full warranty, including one year of manufacturer warranty). The purchase price was $30,000.- with $300.- for shipping. I did pay the initial payment by credit card on July 5th for $3600, an additional $5400 credit card payment on July 15th and an additional check dated July 15th for $19,350 which was cashed by the Sentinel imaging on July 22 (total payment of $28,350). I was supposed to pay $1950 after the Ultra Sound system arrival. I waited, but no Echo/Ultrasound machine arrived by late July. I started contacting the company several times and was told that Philips had to turn on a certain feature and excuses etc... Finally on August 20th I got an E-mail from **. [redacted] that the Echo/Ultrasound machine was shipped and another email the next day, August 21st, from **. [redacted], Director of Business Development, apologizing about the delay. The machine arrived on Friday August 23, 2013. After it was unpacked, it turned out to be a 2009 model instead of a 2011 model. I just found it out by the small plaque from Philips next to its serial number at the back side of this machine on Saturday August the 24th after it was unpacked. Neither **. [redacted], nor **. [redacted] apologizing for the delay had told me about this. This was the hidden dishonest surprise. Totally and rightfully frustrated, I emailed the salesperson, [redacted] right away by E-mail on Saturday August 24th. I was called back on Monday August 26 by **. [redacted], who said that it was a mistake, **. [redacted] 's mistake (their sales representative). He also mentioned to me that **. [redacted] is fired. His solution/Sentinel company's solution to this issue has been telling me to send the machine back and get my money as if nothing happened.

I am a physician with a cardiology practice that opened in June this year. An Echo/Ultrasound machine is needed in my office to check my patients' hearts. I paid them what they asked me in order to give me the 2011 machine. After a long delay and the excuses etc..., they sent me the older model without telling me. This has not been an honest business (documented by emails and sales documents for the sale of the 2011 model and nobody from Sentinel imaging had told me that they were changing it to a 2009 model. If you need them, I can provide them to you). Sentinel imaging and their representatives have damaged my business and my PR by their behavior. After a long waiting time, I have to look for another machine or to accept an inferior machine for the same price.

The Sentinel Imaging Director of Business Development, **. [redacted] had the following solutions:

"either to send them the machine and get my money back, or to have a new contract to keep the older model machine with unknown software and different warranty (?) for the same price."

In **. [redacted]'s world as if nothing happened. The Sentinel imaging's response has been irresponsible by taking no responsibility.Desired Settlement: 1. ASAP delivering a 2011 HD15 Echo/Ultrasound System and transducers meeting the manufacturer's specifications at time of delivery with 2 year of full warranty (with one year of manufacturer warranty) with software included as they had offered for the price of 30,000. that we purchased.

2. We are not going to use the 2009 machine they have sent us and they can pick it up at the time they deliver what we purchased and paid for.

3. If the process lasts longer than a week, we are going ahead and lease another HD15 and the Sentinel company will be responsible for the lease costs. This is not a punishment, but the Sentinel Imaging is responsible for the PR damage to my practice; After a long delay, we still have to wait for an echo/ultrasound machine. The effects of such a delay on a new cardiology practice are detrimental. The way this issue has been handled thus far by the Sentinel Imaging Group has been nothing but headache and chaos for us. It is not only damaging us financially, but also costing us time.

4. A good explanation and safety guards that they will not do it again, since in healthcare this type of irresponsible behavior ultimately can damage patients' care and no business should be allowed to hurt patients' care quality for profit. Bait and switch in any business, especially healthcare environment should be unacceptable.

Business

Response:

[redacted],

We would like to address this complaint to insure it is understood how much we value customer service, our reputation and our clean record with the Revdex.com. Please allow me to mention that Dr. [redacted] has returned his equipment and has been given a full refund. As mentioned above we have always taken customer service seriously and our dedication to a “customer first” philosophy is the sole reason why we have such a vast loyal repeat customer base. As you know, we do not have any previous customer complaints documented by the Revdex.com and do everything in our power to insure we maintain this track record.

We have reviewed the complaint and we would like to add some supporting details and our time line of the events, as well as, how the initial complaint was handled. The doctor originally ordered a different system than the one mentioned in this complaint. This explains the reason for the time line between his initial deposit and his receipt of the Philips HD 15. The original system order was for an ultrasound system, remanufactured by Philips in 2011, the Philips Envisor. The sales person offered the customer a higher end system for a discounted rate of $25,000, which was the Philips HD11XE. This system was an ultrasound system that was refurbished by Philips in 2011, however was manufactured in 2009. This point is important because when the sales person further offered the doctor an additional upgraded system, The Philips HD 15, this system was also a refurbished system by Philips in 2011 and had a date of manufacture of 2009. An email trail between the sales person and the doctor did take place where the sales person mentions that “it is also a 2011 like the other HD11XE”. The doctor strongly assumed that by the sales person’s verbiage in the email to the doctor and a lack of detailed specifics in regards to the how the purchase agreement was written, that it was a date of manufactured 2011 unit.

We completely understand the doctor’s frustration and surprise if he was anticipating a 2011 refurbished model and received a 2009 unit

refurbished in 2011.

Upon the doctors receipt of the system on Saturday, August 24 2013 he sent an email titled:

It seems you sent the wrong echo machine.

Below is the email to the sales person:

“ From: [redacted]mailto:[redacted]]

Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2013 10:44 PM

To: [redacted]

Subject: It seems you have sent the wrong echo machine

Dear [redacted]

The echo machine finally arrived yesterday. We have had quite a surprise after opening the box. What you have sent me is not what we talked about. This is a 2009 machine, while what you told me was supposed to be a 2011 demo model!

Please arrange to pay all my money back right away as soon as you receive this email and also arrange to pick up the echo machine.

You can well understand that this has caused my new cardiology practice enormous damages. The patients, after already waiting, will need to be rescheduled for their echocardiograms to be done elsewhere. It has been at its least very inconvenient for the patients. It also does have a lot of negative PR effect on my new practice. And last but not the least, it is dishonest.

[redacted], MD”

On Monday morning, August 26th which was the first business day we were open to receive the customer complaint, Our sales manager, contacted the doctor and told him we would make arrangements to retrieve the system from his facility and give him a full refund which is exactly what he had requested. The doctor proceeded to ask if we would offer him a large discount if he kept the ultrasound system. We could not discount any further on the system because the system was a $40,000 system which the sales person sold for $30,000. The sales manager then sent the doctor an email to further clarify on Monday, August 26 2013 at 3:42 PM:

“From: [redacted] <[redacted]>

To: '[redacted]' <[redacted]>

Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 3:42 PM

Subject: RE: It seems you have sent the wrong echo machine

Hi Dr and Dr. [redacted],

I want to apologize once again. We would like to move forward with your original request in the email and refund your money inasmuch we cannot come down on the pricing. I would need your bank information to wire the money. We have someone who

can be there by tomorrow, no later than Thursday to re-crate.

Please advise.

Best,

[redacted]”

We firmly believe that upon realizing he would not be able to purchase the same system anywhere else and realizing we were 100% going to completely honor his initial request, he sent another email on Tuesday morning, August 27 2013 at 9:44 Am:

From: [redacted] [mailto:d[redacted] Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 9:44 AM To: [redacted]

Subject: Re: It seems you have sent the wrong echo machine Dear [redacted],

The preliminary advice to me has been:

1. Your company has sold me a 2011 HD 15 and is responsible for such a delivery.

2. You can pickup the 2009 machine at the time delivering a 2011 HD 15 by your company.

3. We are not going to use the 2009 machine you have sent us.

4. Awaiting delivery of a 2011 HD 15 from your company with 2 years full warranty, we are going ahead and lease another HD 15 and you and your company are responsible for the lease costs.

5. You and your company are also responsible for the PR damage to my practice; You are well aware that after a long delay, we still have to wait for an echo machine. The effects of such a delay on a new cardiology practice are detrimental.

6. The way this issue has been handled thus far by your company has been nothing but headache and chaos for us. It is not only damaging us financially, but also costing us time.

7. You as director of sales for the company with information access to what happened, should have known better the buyer's rights and

advised us better.

Official advice from our counsel will follow.

Sincerely,

[redacted], MD

The email request made from the doctor to satisfy him was beyond the normal course of business. Dr [redacted] was asking the Sentinel Imaging Group in request #4, to pay the rent on another Philips HD 15 when in fact that we were willing to allow him to use a fully operational HD 15 until we could source one for him. He also was implying that we should, as addressed in request #, 4, #5 & #6, cover additional costs to his practice for loss of usage, time and damages to his practice. Dr. [redacted] was fully able to generate revenue, use our equipment until a new unit was found and was verbally explained that if we could not source the equipment we would issue a full refund.

The executed agreement between the parties did, in fact, state that “no warranties expressed or implied” and that loss of “usage of trade” was not Sentinel Imaging’s responsibility. A copy of the executed purchase agreement form faxed from Dr. [redacted] is attached. We did, however, proceed to try and find a 2011 unit and because we are a 3 rd party to the manufacture we do not have absolute control over supply and demand of the market and we needed time to try and find one quickly. We contact a multitude of vendors across the country, as well as, Philips directly with no success. As we were still trying to offer him an immediate solution we again offered to refund his money:

“From: [redacted]>

To: [redacted]

Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 10:40 AM

Subject: The Sentinel Imaging Group

Dr. [redacted],

Your situation and requests have been forwarded to Sr. Management, as well as our advisors, and we are reviewing all of the information to come to some form of a resolution. Your initial request made on Saturday, August 24 for a full and complete refund with the return of

the system, transducers, and peripherals, is an immediate resolution that we would again be more than happy to honor as was mentioned on Monday, August 26th 2013.

Sincerely,

As mentioned before we were trying to source a 2011 system to satisfy our obligation. We were unsuccessful in securing one within a 1 week time frame. The doctor then sent a final request on Wednesday, September 4 2013. The email is below:

Dear [redacted],

Please wire all the money you received back to my bank account ([redacted], phone number:

###-###-####; account number: [redacted]; routing number: [redacted]) immediately and arrange for pickup after we receive the money. The

credit card company is Capitol One, phone number ###-###-####.

Sincerely,

[redacted], MD

The Sentinel Imaging Group, 100% tried to honor his original request in regards to how he wanted us to handle his situation, we apologized profusely, We reacted quickly, maintained contact and also took the event serious enough to terminate the sales person to insure nothing similar to this ever happens to another customer.

We also issued him a bank wire transfer payment of $28,350.00 on Thursday, September 5 2013 to complete his request and arranged for an affiliate to remove the system from his premises as soon as he would allow our representative on site. I would also like to add that the

reason the wire was not cut on the Tuesday September 4 2013 was due to the doctor not verifying our outgoing bank wire form. Upon the request he accused us of further stalling the situation, and it was due to our due diligence to insure a correct wire was issued that were able to verify the correct ABA/ routing information, which was incorrect on his email wire instructions to our company. His financial institution would not verify his account information. The doctor has not, as to date, completed his obligation to our firm, in which he verbally promised to execute a mutual release form. Upon multiple requests from our company he has yet to honor his obligation to our company to finalize the transaction.

I hope you understand that not every business transaction can run completely smooth and things that are out of our control have to be

accounted for. We do, however, on every and all transactions place the highest value on trying to insure 100% customer satisfaction. We would like to go on record and to insure it is understand that our reaction time/sensitivity to our customers and the time frames of their needs is paramount to the Sentinel Imaging Group.

Regards,

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:

1. It was not "just because of the verbiage" from the

Sentinel Imaging group’s sales person in an email that I trusted the Sentinel

Imaging group was supposed to sell me a “Phillips HD 15, demo model 2011”. It was not only based on the above and phone conversations with the sales person,

but also because of the contract sent from the Sentinel Imaging group dated

July 10, 2013 that the Sentinel Imaging group was supposed to sell me a Philips

HD15, Demo model 2011 for the price of $ 30,000 plus shipping charges. I was

supposed to pay $ 28,000 plus shipping costs prior to the shipping and $ 2,000 after the delivery. Please

find a copy of this sale document enclosed with this email.

2.

After the Sentinel Imaging Group cashed my

money, a total of $ 28,000 plus $ 350 shipping costs by July 22, 2013, it took more

than a month (with excuse after excuse brought up by the Sentinel Imaging Group

regarding their delay in shipping the machine), and at the end they did send me

a switched machine, and not the one I had paid for.

3.

None of the representatives of the Sentinel

Imaging Group had ever told me that they would switch the ultrasound machine

that I was supposed to receive. It was me who found out that the machine they

delivered, was not what I had paid for, after we opened the box that was

delivered. What they had sent me was neither a demo, nor a 2011 model but a

2009 model.

4.

[redacted]’s response is not only continuation of

handling this case by showing no responsibility for his company’s acts, but

also his language is offensive to me.

5.

**. [redacted] has sent you a copy of the contract that

I had signed on July 10, 2013, in his response to Revdex.com (under the title “Sentinel

Imaging” WARRANTY…).

Enclosed please find the first page of that same contract. It clearly explains

what I was buying which was supposed to be a Philips HD15 2011 Demo model.

Please ask **. [redacted] why he has left out the first page of the same contract. After

all it was just a 2 page contract, with the first page enclosed by me in this

email, and the second page already sent to you in **. [redacted]’s email!

Regards,