Authenticate4U.com experiences?

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

#421
Prada Psycho said:
I think it all depends on the policies of the particular service. If one service is OK with giving out that information, fine. If the second has a hard fast rule against it, that's fine also. It's the company's prerogative to set their own policy. If customers like or dislike those policies, they have the option to go elsewhere.
Click to expand...
I get that, but unless the service makes it known ahead of time that clients won't get details as to why the conclusion was made, how does that client know whether they might want to take their business elsewhere?

I know NOW that Fakespotters won't disclose how they came to a conclusion and as such, can now choose not to use them, but that should be disclosed on their site so people like Lindsay know whether they're comfortable with using them.
 
#422
BeenBurned said:
I get that, but unless the service makes it known ahead of time that clients won't get details as to why the conclusion was made, how does that client know whether they might want to take their business elsewhere?

I know NOW that Fakespotters won't disclose how they came to a conclusion and as such, can now choose not to use them, but that should be disclosed on their site so people like Lindsay know whether they're comfortable with using them.
Click to expand...

The fact that a service does or does not disclose wouldn't sway me one way or the other. I'd rather know I'm getting professional service from authenticators that know their stuff. Case in point: ****************** and CarolDiva don't know squat about Prada, so their willingness to explain their decisions means nothing.
 
#423
Sorry I have been AWOL. Back - and interested to read this. Fakespotters don't have any affiliation to Chloe - and I do find it unusual for a Brand to recommend an Authentication Service. Not saying it shouldn't but in general many Brands actually resent Authentication Services. If Lindsay2367 - you want this item rechecked then contact us - and we will do that. Its not a problem, and we will be more than happy to do that.

In general when an item is determined fake - we, as a Service wouldn't advise the reasons for this - and so I do understand FakeSpotters not doing that. However, in the circumstances, I might personally have offered some indication - but again - it is difficult as we all view things differently.

Please remember - that we will always listen to our clients (NO we won't say an item is fake if its authentic, and we won't state an item is authentic if we have any doubt).
 
#424
Prada Psycho said:
I think it all depends on the policies of the particular service. If one service is OK with giving out that information, fine. If the second has a hard fast rule against it, that's fine also. It's the company's prerogative to set their own policy. If customers like or dislike those policies, they have the option to go elsewhere.
Click to expand...

BeenBurned said:
I get that, but unless the service makes it known ahead of time that clients won't get details as to why the conclusion was made, how does that client know whether they might want to take their business elsewhere?

I know NOW that Fakespotters won't disclose how they came to a conclusion and as such, can now choose not to use them, but that should be disclosed on their site so people like Lindsay know whether they're comfortable with using them.
Click to expand...

Lescoy said:
Sorry I have been AWOL. Back - and interested to read this. Fakespotters don't have any affiliation to Chloe - and I do find it unusual for a Brand to recommend an Authentication Service. Not saying it shouldn't but in general many Brands actually resent Authentication Services. If Lindsay2367 - you want this item rechecked then contact us - and we will do that. Its not a problem, and we will be more than happy to do that.

In general when an item is determined fake - we, as a Service wouldn't advise the reasons for this - and so I do understand FakeSpotters not doing that. However, in the circumstances, I might personally have offered some indication - but again - it is difficult as we all view things differently.

Please remember - that we will always listen to our clients (NO we won't say an item is fake if its authentic, and we won't state an item is authentic if we have any doubt).
Click to expand...

I 100% understand why a service wouldn't provide a customer with extensive details as to why they would deem a bag to be a counterfeit when it's a simple authentication. For example, if Lesley had deemed the bag a counterfeit, I certainly wouldn't have asked for details as to why. I just would have thought, in a situation like this, where there are two conflicting opinions, that FS would have been willing, even reluctantly, to provide at least an indication of why they made the decision they did. And I would have been more than happy if FS had said that they would provide the details, but only directly to Lesley (thus eliminating the issue of whether or not I am a scammer).

I don't think it's a bad thing that authentication services don't share explicit details on how a bag is determined to be a counterfeit. I just was hoping that FS would have been willing to work with me a little more, especially given that Lesley is a recognized Chloe expert. I know that FS isn't under any obligation to do anything further than provide their opinion on authenticity, since that's what I paid them for, but their unwillingness to provide any further assistance, given the situation, makes me reluctant to use them again.

And Lesley, no need to recheck. I trust your opinion! :)
 
#425
Lindsay2367 said:
I 100% understand why a service wouldn't provide a customer with extensive details as to why they would deem a bag to be a counterfeit when it's a simple authentication. For example, if Lesley had deemed the bag a counterfeit, I certainly wouldn't have asked for details as to why. I just would have thought, in a situation like this, where there are two conflicting opinions, that FS would have been willing, even reluctantly, to provide at least an indication of why they made the decision they did. And I would have been more than happy if FS had said that they would provide the details, but only directly to Lesley (thus eliminating the issue of whether or not I am a scammer).

I don't think it's a bad thing that authentication services don't share explicit details on how a bag is determined to be a counterfeit. I just was hoping that FS would have been willing to work with me a little more, especially given that Lesley is a recognized Chloe expert. I know that FS isn't under any obligation to do anything further than provide their opinion on authenticity, since that's what I paid them for, but their unwillingness to provide any further assistance, given the situation, makes me reluctant to use them again.

And Lesley, no need to recheck. I trust your opinion! :)
Click to expand...

But if FS had been willing to tell Lesley why they thought it was fake, they would have been, in their opinion, educating their competition.
 
#426
acrowcounted said:
But if FS had been willing to tell Lesley why they thought it was fake, they would have been, in their opinion, educating their competition.
Click to expand...
Sometimes, with "good" close fakes or items where authenticity isn't easily determined, a second set of eyes from more than one expert is often the difference it takes to come to a conclusion. A second set of eyes can see a difference that the first set might have missed or a second set of eyes might have misinterpreted something they saw as something else.
 
#427
BeenBurned said:
Sometimes, with "good" close fakes or items where authenticity isn't easily determined, a second set of eyes from more than one expert is often the difference it takes to come to a conclusion. A second set of eyes can see a difference that the first set might have missed or a second set of eyes might have misinterpreted something they saw as something else.
Click to expand...

That's all well and good but all I'm saying is that if I am Company A, I'm not calling a competing Company B to give them insight as to how to perform our shared specialty better if I believe that I've gotten it right and they've gotten it wrong.
 
#428
acrowcounted said:
But if FS had been willing to tell Lesley why they thought it was fake, they would have been, in their opinion, educating their competition.
Click to expand...

BeenBurned said:
Sometimes, with "good" close fakes or items where authenticity isn't easily determined, a second set of eyes from more than one expert is often the difference it takes to come to a conclusion. A second set of eyes can see a difference that the first set might have missed or a second set of eyes might have misinterpreted something they saw as something else.
Click to expand...

I think both of you are correct. Clearly, FS has no incentive to help out their competition. But, in the same vein, it may be somewhat of an educational experience for both parties (for lack of a better word). Maybe FS was misinterpreting something as being off when it was not, or perhaps my photos to Lesley were unclear and FS was better able to spot something amiss.

I know, as a business, you wouldn't really want to help out your competition, but wouldn't you also want to ensure that you would as accurate as possible? If it had been someone like ****************** who had offered a differing opinion, I get that FS probably wouldn't care because they trust their own opinion, but A4u is well-respected regarding their authentication services. If I were FS, knowing that A4u had made a different determination, it would make me at least wonder what caused the difference in opinion.

And, for what it's worth, I'm not trying to be argumentative towards anyone who stands behind FS's refusal to share any details. I see it from both sides. Perhaps, since I'm an attorney, I'm just used to being able to questions experts on their opinions when their opinions differ. :smile1:
 
#431
I send a request in early February. Just had the automated email! They never replied. Very disappointed with the service. I don't see whey I should be chasing and following up on a service you've paid for. Will never use them again.
 
#432
So I need an item on ebay authenticated and paid with Paypal last Sunday, how long before I receive any acknowledgement from A4U? How to proceed next?
Their procedure is not really clear to me on their website, ie the process flow illustration. Only directions where to pay and who they are, what brands etc, but to me the process flow needs to be illustrated in a easy summarized way.
I have sent an email before but never received anything. I thought their website is up and going by now?
 
#433
anitalilac said:
So I need an item on ebay authenticated and paid with Paypal last Sunday, how long before I receive any acknowledgement from A4U? How to proceed next?
Their procedure is not really clear to me on their website, ie the process flow illustration. Only directions where to pay and who they are, what brands etc, but to me the process flow needs to be illustrated in a easy summarized way.
I have sent an email before but never received anything. I thought their website is up and going by now?
Click to expand...
After sending payment, send pictures to the email address. If your email address and paypal name and email aren't the same, refer to both so they know which payment goes with your pictures.
 
#434
I wanted an item on ebay authenticated and paid thru paypa yesterday, Sunday March 15. I did not receive any acknowledgement email from them. The auction is ending soon, if I do not receive any response from them by when the auction ends, I will ask for a refund. Not sure how to do that, maybe thru Paypal Dispute.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top