Holy crap...a company that actually "cares" about their reputation...what has happened to this country?

That sounds reasonable enough!

nice to see a logical response to a story which doesn't include 'taking it seriously'. If the consumer knew of the amount of insurance and neglected or declined additional coverage what can he expect? If I crash my car tomorrow I know my insurance company will only pay out the value of the car as they determine it. This is why I paid for gap insurance which would pay off any remaining balance of my car loan. Accidents happen and everyone is human. If the damage was so little it makes me think the moving company was not grossly negligent with the consumers belongings (unlike the one who tried to go under an overpass and failed) so I am putting the blame on no one and scolding the consumer for making this web site a means of trying to gain unjust retribution.

@JBlair42081: Just remember that the company's written promises conflict with what Cory says he was told over the phone repeatedly. It's a good lesson for others: make sure what you're being promised matches what you're legally agreeing to.

Wow. That's not exactly a glowing testament to the competency of the company. First, it's full of grammatical errors. I hate it when a company can't even take the time to make sure that statements that it publishes are even remotely intelligible. Second, I like how there is absolutely NO mention of customer satisfaction, etc. The customer is not owed a good experience, only what is required by law. While I do happen to agree with that (one cannot expect more than what the law requires), but one can certainly choose only to businesses with companies that do indeed go above and beyond only what the law requires. It doesn't seem like a good marketing strategy to advertise that "We do what the law requires and nothing more!". That aside, I'm also amused by the companies seemingly solid belief that since the contract says x, that's what a judge would enforce. While I haven't researched it, I have a hard time believing that one couldn't make a somewhat persuasive argument that $.60/lb per item isn't unconscionable. I'm also bothered when companies choose to engage in wars with the customers like this. In my opinion, a short response that just says "the contract said X, we did X" or no response would have been more appropriate. I feel like a response that essentially attacks the customer does nothing but make them look bad. I do somewhat agree that the customer isn't owed anything more than the actual damage that occurred. Compensation for "stress", etc. is complete BS.

@georgi55: Not only does the company care, they actually sound reasonable, and shockingly fair in their response.

This complaint is coming directly out of spite because a customer is not getting what they wants, it is our job to make sure every customer gets everything they deserved by the law and the terms of moving policy."

If the customer isn't getting "what they wants," because the company is hiding behind their interpretation of contract language, I think future customers would like to know this so they can stay away. This kind of crap happens all the time and its nice to know the kind of company you are dealing with before something crappy like this happens.

I believe Cory is taking advantage of this website in order to further his own financial gain. The company coming here and revealing the other side of the story really is an eye opener; I would not be stopped from using these people any more.

While the letter makes some good points, it doesn't address their raising of the estimate by 50% on the day of the move, nor does it address the packing items Cory was charged for but didn't receive (tv box, etc..... ).
Also, it really does take a pro to pack items well - anyone can haul the crap outside and toss it in the truck, but hiring 2 guys off the street in the morning is not professional at all.

@Klaus_Kinsky: I don't think the customer is owed more than the $0.60/lb simply because they DO offer insurance. It remind me of when I worked in retail customers coming in after 1.5 years with a laptop that had broken somehow and expect us to fix/replace it, when the service plan would have covered it. I'm not saying all or even most of the time service plans/insurance are good purchases, I'm just saying they DO fulfill a niche in the market that many customers turn down, and some regret it in the long run.

This letter only guarantees that I will NEVER use Quality Van Line Management to move my belongings.

Very unprofessional response (come on - responding in a post to a blog forum?), and little regard for the customer having his belongings destroyed.

The letter didn't address the fact that Cory had to pay for supplies they did not use, why they used guys off the street instead of hired professionals, that they badly packed the belongings AND smashed into Cory's car.

I understand that people should pay for the insurance, but even with it not paid I'd expect a company to still ATTEMPT to do a fairly decent job when hired to do so.

Btw, Consumerist... when I try to look at the extended replies, it takes me to a new page that says "true". Just thought I'd let you know.

@hillsrovey: do you think that any of cory's story can be a blatant lie?

Interesting that a company does take the time to read Consumerist!

Pinkbox wrote:

"Very unprofessional response (come on - responding in a post to a blog forum?)"

I can't disagree more. I think it is an extremely professional for them to come and post.

Exactly where else are they supposed to tell thier side of the story?

Whether you would do business with this company or not is up to you--but I for one would like to see more companies reply to postings on Consumerist so we can get a better view of what happened.

@JBlair42081: I don't think it's that it the damage was insignificant--it sounds like their stuff was trashed--but the damage insurance gets paid out at a price-per-pound or price-per-foot rate--NOT at the actual value of the damaged goods. If the guy signed the contract for the stated rate of insurance, he really has no recompense if he's not satisfied with the payout.

Using a moving company is one time where it may actually be very wise to spring for additional insurance coverage of your belongings. Moving is also one of those times where it might be worth the extra cost of going with a known moving service. It's expensive as hell--we packed our own boxes and paid $600 to be moved 12 miles!!!--but it was a worth-while expense to know that our stuff was going to be loaded properly (we watched the whole time) and transported (presumably...) safely.

@CreativeLinks: Agreed. Even though this is a forum tailored to consumers, doesn't the company have the right to address complaints being made against them?

Probably the most frustrating thing about the consumer-company interface is that everything is based on perceptions, and very rarely will the perception of the consumer and the perception of the company align. It leaves us wondering what "really" happened--if we assume that the truth of the matter is somewhere in between--but you can sure get a feel for a lot by the language and care used in the complaints and responses.

@CreativeLinks: I personally think a professional response would have been dealing with the customer directly, or writing to the Consumerist themselves to resolve any problems.

Also, I find the letter itself very unprofessional. It is full of grammatical errors that didn't attempt to explain many of the matters Cory complained about.

What about the car damage?

"Within contracts Cori and Ali signed and were well aware of, we had 7-14 BUSINESS days to deliver the furniture,"

It would be great if they could post an (appropriately redacted) contract showing that they did sign off on this provision.

It certainly seems at least _possible_ that the real story here is the Cori was, in essence, trying to blackmail the company into giving him more money. If so, Consumerist should pull the original story from the site entirely, to ensure that it doesn't end up as a Google hit for the company.

@Pylon83: The last time I moved (intra-city) the contract had a very special big/bold box regarding insurance and it clearly stated the $.60/lb valuation for damages. Both the sales person and the moving people went out of their way to highlight that area and make sure I initialed it. The contract also had really clear information about what to do if you wanted additional insurance for replacement-value.

While .60 is really low it is not something that is hidden in the fine print (I'd call it unconscionable only if it was a hidden gotcha...). Because of issues like this the moving companies generally make people specifically recognize and sign off on this provision.

@Pylon83: They DID offer to go "above and beyond" by offering $350 for the damaged goods. Sure, it's a long way from the $800 Cory asked for, but they're sticking within the lines of the contract. Isn't that the entire purpose of having a contract in the first place?

Would you make the same statement about Amazon? "It's not a glowing statement to the competency of Amazon that they ONLY sent the item you paid for, and shipped it in the manner you specified."

@JustThatGuy3: You do have a point, although they didn't mention how much money Cory was asking for. Perhaps Cory could explain further?

@PinkBox: Ack! I'm wrong - he asked for $800. I wonder if that quote included car damages?

Based on the original post, Cory claimed:

The company raised the fee by 50% on the day of the move;
Cory was charged for special packing supplies that weren't provided;
two of the movers were guys hired that morning off the street;
the agent who worked with the couple to set up the move stopped returning calls, then went on vacation;
the van was late to Chapel Hill by 5 days;
the van's driver smashed into Cory's car and damaged it;
the items arrived badly packed and damaged.

These items weren't addressed in the moving company's response. The indication of his claim for $800.00 seems rather low if the moving quote doubled, his car was damaged, etc.

Something is not adding up and we are not hearing the full story.

@SkokieGuy: That is the same way I'm looking at the story. There are too many questions left unanswered, and in my own opinion, the company's response really isn't addressing these issues.

Is anyone else having issues with their replies? Two of mine have shown up in the wrong place, and I was careful with the second one to try and make sure I didn't make a mistake.

@PinkBox: I'm using FF3 and if I click on a thread I simply get a plain page with the text 'True' in the upper left corner (yes, I know this is the return of an eval function but I'm trying to make this plain for non-technical people to understand as well). There is something wrong with the comment threading feature.

I'm hardly an unbiassed subject -- I know Cory (not Cori -- the least they can do is remember how to write his name) personally from college. But to respond to the comments that attack his character as using the website to unfairly gain profit --- that's about as far from the truth as possible. I asked him to write his experience on Consumerist (though he might have mulled the idea around in his head before my mention) because this is the best place to get a lot of eyes to look at the issue. Cory isn't the type to try and blackmail a company by threatening their image to the online community. But he's not the type to ignore such blatant ignorances of anything resembling "quality".

This doesn't say anything about the car they damaged, among many other things. Frankly, I think it is a whitewash.

I have to agree with this comment. It's OK to hire people off the street to haul packed boxes, but not to pack the boxes.

In addition, if the moving company did not choose to come to the location to view it before giving their estimate, but rather chose to give an estimate over the phone, then the company should be bound by the estimate unless it's clear that the customer deliberately lied.

I moved from California to upstate NY some years ago. The moving company did the estimate over the phone, at their choice. They asked "how many beds? how many chairs? etc." and gave me a figure. I kept saying "Are you SURE? I have LOTS of books."

They honored their estimate, even though my belongings went over. Cory should not have agreed to those charges, but I understand why he did because moving is stressful, and I'm sure he felt he couldn't really cancel and start all over at that point.

I'm glad the company responded -- but I wouldn't use that company or recommend it to others.

@PinkBox: I'm having trouble too, I can't even see any replies, just the original comment...

Well I think its the problem of pushing the insurance costs onto the end user that is the real issue. That kind of cost really should be covered by the movers. How does a customer know what to insure for? How do they know QualityVanLines won't just hire 2 guys off the street to dump your boxes onto the truck? Only Quality has this kind of control so should be responsible for buying the insurance policy.

$0.60/lb is pretty darn low anyway. So your saying if you broke a $5000 plasma TV in moving you would pay out about $10 bucks?

@Synth3t1c: It's possible, surely. I'd prefer to not believe anyone is a blatant liar from the get-go.

It's true that the comment doesn't address the verbal promises/changes but most likely, the person writing the comment wasn't a witness to those verbal exchanges, so it would be difficult to comment on such a manner.

I think this is simply a lose-lose here. *sigh*

I am never impressed when a company responds by blaming the customer. Not only did he have a poor customer service experience, he is now having a horrible customer service response. Oh, Quality, you just lost another customer, and his name is me.

It seems to me, having read Cory's original complaint, and their response, that Quality Van Lines thinks this website is a ratings-type website.

Poorly written responses that don't address all the complaints may fly on those sites, but readers here have a clue (and an opinion).

Nice try, Quality. Peddle your story elsewhere.

I'd love to hear from Cori/y again to see if Quality Van Lines actually responded to him personally before posting the comment. I do hope that's the case.

Um, if the article is blaming the OP, is it allowed to blame the OP in the comments?

Oh-- PS so the people with issues with expanding comments and getting the javascript "True" page thing coming up....

When you open the comments, just hit "expand all" at the top. It's not a permanent fix, but it works for now.

The company says a lot when it dodges the worst parts of the complaint - that the quality of service provided was grossly inadequate, as was hitting Cory's car, and being charged for workers off the street.

Further, a spell-check and grammar check when writing on behalf of the company goes a long way. I definitely think less of Quality Moving that they wrote a hasty response riddled with grammatical errors. If they planned on using the comments section as their forum, at least take the time to make it look professional. Or better yet, formulate a real response, and e-mail it to the consumerist itself.

CONSUMERIST!!! ask them about the stuff they ignored!

Based on Cory's experience, I doubt I'd ever use Quality Van Lines to move, but at the same time, I'm the kind of person who's more likely to rent a Penske and do it myself anyway.

That said, QVL's reply doesn't seem unreasonable at all to me. Their choice of words, as far as providing the amount of service required by law is concerned, was a bit poor; instead I think it would've been a better choice of words to indicate that Cory received exactly what he agreed to and paid for, merits of value notwithstanding. What surprises me is that the charges that could probably be best disputed--such as TV crates and mattress bags--seemed to be the least pursued.

Lack of foresight and failure to carefully read the terms of your agreement does not make for justified refund-extortion.

Hey everyone, Cory here. Reading these comments, I feel like I should make a few clarifications.

1) I never "threatened" the company in any way (I never used the words they attribute to me in their reply). I had several discussions (obviously) with Quality, and once it was clear that they were not going to stick to their word, I pursued all of the avenues (Better Business Bureau, movingscams.org, Consumerist) that were at my disposal, just like many consumers who feel they have been treated badly.

2) I am not looking for a free ride here. I understand the complexities involved with running a business like that, and I don't expect perfection. I just feel that the treatment I received was improper and unprofessional, and that the experience entitled me to a refund which would result in my paying (in full) the original amount quoted. Quality has no legal obligation to agree with me, and given their service up to this point, I don't expect them to acquiesce out of a desire to do ethical business.

3) Most importantly, my complaint with Quality is not relating to damaged property or delayed delivery. It is a failure on their part to properly manage our expectations and to communicate with us during the process. There were obvious attempts to deceive us in order to get our business, and then a reluctance to update us or to help us out in any way once they had our things (and our money). I am more displeased with the process as a whole than I am with any one aspect of the experience.

Anyway, thanks to everyone for giving us your thoughts, and to Consumerist for telling our story.

The response doesn't address the fact the driver backed into the customer's car.

@Rhayader:
So you think you are owed extra money simply because they made you mad and didn't provide exemplary customer service? I can back you up 100% on the desire to get 100% of the damage they caused, but I think it's totally wrong to make demands above and beyond that. If they truly were late, that's one thing, but you get no compensation for "stress" or any other non-material BS.

@mrsultana: Whoa there, we're not taking Quality's side in this story. Just posting their response. In my opinion, this is of the "give them enough rope to hang themselves" variety. As several eagle-eyed readers have pointed out, Quality did not address most of the things Cory has mentioned.

This is crazy, I used to work as additional labor for my father who works for United Van Lines. We had our fair share of crazy people who wanted to claim every little thing, even though everything we did for a shipment made sure the belongings were in pristine condition when we loaded it and unloaded it at the new home.

I can see where Cori is coming from and where the Company is coming from, but really I still wouldn't use a company called Quality Van Lines, Allied, Mayflower, United Van Lines, stick with those and you should be ok.

@Ms. Pants: No, they did not personally respond to me in any way (and still have not). I sent them a personal email notifying them of the original story on Consumerist a few days ago, and invited them to respond personally.

By the way, my full story in the original post is almost exactly the email I sent to Quality directly, long before I reported the incident to anybody.

I went back and re-read Cory's original post.

If you like...
- Having your car demolished
- Getting charged extra for special packing materials that aren't provided
- Bait-and-switch pricing
- Getting a four-day delivery estimate, and then having the move take twice as long
- Having the company pat themselves on the back because they only delivered four days later than the estimate, instead of the sixteen days their contract gives them (14 business days is roughly 20 calendar days)
- Having someone say they can't deliver your stuff because they lost the keys
- Having someone say they can't deliver your stuff because they lost the delivery address
- Trying to find out where your stuff is, and having people be rude, not call back as promised, have no idea when you'll get it, and be suddenly unavailable when you call

Hey, I'm down with that! Go get your move done by these "Quality" folks who provide a "logical" response and "reveal... the other side of the story."

@zerj: Your $5000 plasma wights 16 pounds?