Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:16/01/2023

  Type:Order Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  After looking at December's invoice, I have realized there are more confusing errors. The contract states a 3% increase per year for front end waste, but to go from $254 to $266.75 is way more than a 3% increase, and from $266.75 to $280 is also way more than a 3% increase. If you take a closer look from January 2022, until November 2022, they have overcharged us and caused us to overpay by at least $69.56 (incl. tax). We expect December's invoice to be corrected for front end waste, it is to say $261.62, and a credit of at least $69.56 given. The 3% increase is to begin for January's invoice. A 3% increase from $254 was to be $261.62, but they have had it at $266.75 for many months. I have also inquired about the total for December's invoice (inv. 12458). Also, their stipulation of 10 days is misleading as that is not customary. It has been over a week since I inquired about December's invoice, and nearly a week since I inquired about their accounting error. I have yet to receive a response. It appears as if my concern is being ignored. Please look into this.

  Business Response

  Date: 23/01/2023

  Good afternoon ********,

  I appreciate the opportunity to discuss his claim. At the end of the day, we did do the assessment and

  it was being looked over by our accounting department who has been out of the office in a training program. She returned today which is

  why this letter is timely. We do owe Mr. ******** $38.53 which will be applied on his next invoice.

  He also brought to light that we have under charged a few items based on the contract so we will be rectifying that as well.

  Please see the breakdown below.

  ************************************************************************************************

  ** ** **** ** ***** ** *** **** **** ** *** ******** ** *** *** ******** *** ******* **** ******** ** *** ** ******* *** **** ** ****** * **** ***** *********** *** ** *** *** ******* ******* ********* ** * ******* ******** ******** ******* ********* **** ******* *** ***** ******** **** ********* ******   *** ********* ** * ******* ******** ******* ** ****** ******* ******* ******* ****** ***** ******** **** ********* ******   **** ****** *** ******* ***** ****** ** *********** ******** *********** *** *** ****** ****** **** ******* ******** ********** *** ** ** *******   ********** *******   * **** ******** * *** ** *** ************** ** ** ********** ** ** **** ** ***** ***** *** ******* * ****** ************ **** ** *********** ** ***** ** ********* *** ***** ***** ****** *** ********** *** ****** **** ** **** **** *** ********* *** ******* *********** ******** ** *** **** ******* *********** ****** ** *** ******** ** ******* *** * **** ** **** **** *** ******** ** **** ** * ******* *** *********

  Customer Answer

  Date: 24/01/2023

  
  Complaint: ********
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  
  In addition to their Front End Waste miscalculation, the call-in (extra lift) calculation is still incorrect. The contract was signed on December 31, 2020. We believe you may have a copy of the contract. We understand they have admitted an error of overcharging us in some key area. Instead of 3%, it appears they were charging us far more than that.
  
  The call-in (extra lift) portion of the contract was $65 for 2021. $65 + 3% for 2022 is $66.95, and $66.95 + 3% for 2023 is $68.96. What they still show is far more than that. $70 call-in (extra lift) is not in accordance with any calculation.
  
  There was no way of us knowing that they were on vacation. Multiple inquiries were ignored by them. Most companies of this size are known for having someone else respond to concerns, and if they are away there is usually an auto-response of some sort.
  

  
  We are certain that anyone can agree that overcharging and delayed response can be confusing.
  There is another confusing part of the contract. On the signed portion, page 1 it says it is a 5 year contract. On the unsigned/non-initialled page, they drafted a term and condition that states it is a 3 year contract.
  
  We are still hopeful that we will be on the same page when there's proper calculation, and clarity about the length of the contract.
  
  Sincerely,
  N.E

  Business Response

  Date: 15/02/2023

  Good Afternoon,

  In response to ********, we will go through the account thoroughly next week when my accountant returns from

  vacation. I can assure you that we take this very seriously and will ensure this vendor is reimbursed the $38.53 and anything

  I missed in the calculations. The agreement was signed as a 5 year term and the 2^nd sheet which reflected 3 years-Terms and Conditions was never signed.

  We are disheartened that a long term customer that calls regularly and just came into our office on Jan 31, 2023 to pay their invoice could not

  discuss this with our staff while on site. We will make every effort to correct this moving forward.

  I hope this satisfies the vendor and we can work together moving forward.

  Any credits will be applied to his next invoice.

   

  Sincerely,

  **********

  Customer Answer

  Date: 15/02/2023

  
  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is somewhat fair, pending calculation. As you can see, they have admitted that the person in charge of accounts was on vacation and therefore the issue couldn't have possibly be resolved in person, and now they have admitted that their accountant is on vacation. There was no way of knowing who was and/or is on vacation which is why written format is vital to this resolve. Off-topic scenarios aren't part of this concern, as the focus is resolving the confusion. I believe we are now getting closer to a resolution, and that the confusion will be cleared.
  
  Sincerely,
  N. E