Customer Service/Quality Control issues post here.

[Lexie2000]

As far as lurkers coming to this thread to gawk....Well....it certainly is something to gawk at. I am not a true lurker. I Have read the BE forum for a long time and have owned over a dozen BE's. This thread is really an eye opener in the sense that relationships that Designers have with TPF boards can have a love/hate response.

I am wondering if at this point Jackie regrets starting this thread. You ask questions and it turns into a free for all.

It's of my opinion that Jackie participated in this group to
a) Gain your Insight
and
B) Gain your business

I find the thread is not much about quality issues as it is who is Jackie's BFF with everyone picking sides (Team Jackie or Team Gingey). I found it very odd that Jackie herself had discussed a Customers "resolution" to another TPFer before the customer posted it herself (re: Zebra Bag). So for Jackie to ask a person not to discuss a resolution with the board is a little bit of a double standard.

Just as with the RM board, when a designer makes themselves so available, it's bound to have some backlash. If someway there could be a happy medium and maybe a professional distance from the designer that these problems would be less. People could make choices based on black and white factual issues discussed by the consumers.

 

[Tash1]

No not really Tash.

I agree that some are taking it personal, but I don't think it's BE, and certainly not me.

If I have a problem with a bag, I deal with it and move on. Another bag, ditto. Two, three, four, or five bags.....well.......then you might start to ask me, if I'm having such problems with a particular designer receiving one defective bag after another, then why do I keep buying from them??

Nice to see you btw.

Contessa - I'm posting here in response to the other thread. Agreed, but from what I've read on this and the other QC thread, no-one has bought repeatedly eg; like 10+ bags only to encounter disappointment on a continuous basis, and then keep coming back for more, that would be handbag suicide!

Basically, to put it in a nutshell, 'Why cut off your nose to spite your face'.....if there was anything personal against BE, then why return and purchase another bag? Despite some previous disappointment, obviously there is something about BE bags for some to have returned for whatever reason, whether it be the leather, style and price point that suits them.

Sillykitty, pretty much summed it up ALOT more eloquently than I ever could when it comes to purchasing decisions. I'm continually using impartial sites, mostly for electronic goods, cars, hotels, restaurants, and running gear.....and feel very assured when I get a good mix of reviews.

With regards to the other comment about positive/negative reviews affecting sales/business, that's the thing that baffles me. I've never read a single comment on this forum where anyone has actually stated anything derogatory against BE, to imply their business will tank or go under because of their C/S and Q/C issues, or how they handle it. Maybe I've missed something, but as this is the internet, some words so often are misinterpreted, or some may think the tone leads one to think otherwise. But I think that feeling is what contributes towards the perceived drama, and then that completely takes away those with genuine concerns in the first place, when that is what we should be focusing on. That's all!

Ditto, to your last point!

Gingeybear........I hope you get the resolution that meets to your satisfaction.

 

[Tash1]

In any case, there's no question that a customer is within her rights to raise objections if a bag did not meet expectations set by the seller, particularly if it's defective like the MMS with a crooked zipper. Opinions and experiences, whether on the positive or negative side, are precisely what these forums are about--right?

Something I find a bit alarming, however, is the possibility that a bag maker would censor what a customer can or cannot post here about a bag or transaction. IMO, whether we're dealing with a long-established brand like Chanel or a new player like BE, it shouldn't matter: a customer should be able to share her experience with the company--positive, neutral or negative--without fear of some sort of retribution because of a pending return/refund.

These 2 points I strongly agree with. When I read nothing but glowing reviews, on ANY site about any product, I think to myself.....Hang about, something's amiss here, and makes me slightly cautious, but then again, I'm that type of person!

 

[lovebags2]

Maybe the reason there seems to be more of a mix of happy and unhappy or undecided customers here is because this is a new brand and the jury is still out for some of those who have been disappointed by troubled transactions but still like that bags and, therefore, are on the fence about BE.

In any case, there's no question that a customer is within her rights to raise objections if a bag did not meet expectations set by the seller, particularly if it's defective like the MMS with a crooked zipper. Opinions and experiences, whether on the positive or negative side, are precisely what these forums are about--right?

Something I find a bit alarming, however, is the possibility that a bag maker would censor what a customer can or cannot post here about a bag or transaction. IMO, whether we're dealing with a long-established brand like Chanel or a new player like BE, it shouldn't matter: a customer should be able to share her experience with the company--positive, neutral or negative--without fear of some sort of retribution because of a pending return/refund.

I'm not claiming that this is taking place or not or how...as I'm not in a position to know the details. I'm only making an observation based on several posts on this and other threads.

To you GB and any others with pending resolutions: I wish you good luck. I truly hope the issues will be resolved fairly and to your satisfaction.

I agree with you about being alarmed re censorship. I recently have spoken to a couple PF members who posted their negative experiences with BE here and then received emails from Jackie. They immediately knew the message she was asking so they modified their original posts in order to receive her support. This doesn't sit right with me either. But, if I needed help I understand and respect why they are staying quiet.

GB - I"m really sorry to hear about your BE ordeal.

I think there have been quite a lot of good points raised these past few days on both sides. It's been a very informative thread and I'm glad it was created. I agree with the PF member who said knowledge is power. I feel the same way. It just sometimes takes awhile to obtain!

Ladies, Happy Thanksgiving. I also agree with the member that said it is just a bag (I realize a lot of principle too). Certainly we can all just agree to respectfully disagree in a nice way?

A big thanks to Suzi and Swanky for being great mods!!!!

 

[K.Z.]

sgreg, bonnie: Hi! I think I need to clarify that I wasn't referring to anyone's objection to emails being posted on the board. I remember posts addressing that particular issue and totally agree that private emails should remain private. There's nothing to stop anyone from posting what are assumed to be private emails unless there's some sort of confidentiality agreement in place, but posting emails is something I personally reject kuz I happen to put a high value on privacy (which is all but extinct these days...).

One thing is to copy an email and paste it in a public forum, and another thing is to share some of the contents of the emails, that is, refer back to what either person said in them when discussing a QC/CS issue. That's what I'm talking about. I would have a problem if a designer told me she/he will take care of my issue if I don't tell anybody about my defective bag. I can't say whether or not that's happening here and/or to what extent. I was just making an observation about that possibility based on info I've read in this s/f.

I think there's a lot of truth to what someone said about the problems that can arise from a designer having this much access to the forum. It's a double-edged sword, isn't it? With it, a new designer has a tremendous opportunity to promote his/her brand--probably for free, as posts aren't ads...unless the forum owners charge for this kind of access--but by the same token, when something goes wrong...well...that, too, is promoted in this public medium. It's two sides of the same coin.

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!

 

[lovebags2]

Hi Ladies,

this will be my last post on this particular topic since I'm not directly affected but I just wanted to clarify:

I received a few emails today from PF friends asking me more about censorship and I just want to re-phrase my post earlier today. Jackie to my knowledge hasn't ever asked anyone to go back and erase their post. She's just contacted them directly after reading here and expressed her disappointment that it was shared to other's on the PF. She explained she doesn't respond to demands in this manner or actually will act just the contrary when one does that.

It's my PF friends that felt uncomfortable in that type of reply and decided to either make future posts sound much softer in order to keep BE's support or just remain quiet overall going forward. I can understand taking that approach after reading that type of email especially in the midst of a handbag issue.

Must run.... It's time to celebrate!
Have a great holiday all.

 

[TropicalGal]

In my opinion, this is all hearsay -- all of it. We don't know what, if anything, about the above post, is true. I am expressing my opinion.

 

[lovebags2]

In my opinion, this is all hearsay -- all of it. We don't know what, if anything, about the above post, is true. I am expressing my opinion.

Certainly that's a fair statement!

Please do feel free to read Susa's (as she is just one of my Pf friends with this experience) post's carefully and she will there confirm what I"ve said. I read Jackie's correspondence myself as did many on this forum. Perhaps they might decide to chime in? I know Susa wanted to post the actual email but then realized it was better left to just give the highlights. I don't like to get involved myself in heresy but this is not the case.

Now I really must run!

 

[sgreg]

sgreg....
One thing is to copy an email and paste it in a public forum, and another thing is to share some of the contents of the emails, that is, refer back to what either person said in them when discussing a QC/CS issue. That's what I'm talking about. I would have a problem if a designer told me she/he will take care of my issue if I don't tell anybody about my defective bag. I can't say whether or not that's happening here and/or to what extent. I was just making an observation about that possibility based on info I've read in this s/f.

In my post that you are referring to, I actually mentioned why BE seemed to object to some of the QC/CS issues. The rest of it besides those 9 words you have chosen to make reference to says;

"They'd prefer if we didn't post the emails directly, or post the specific resolution except to say that it was resolved/not resolved and whether the customer was satisfied.

Their reason was something like they'd had instances where a customer had their heart set on the same resolution as another tfp member, when the QC case was different and warranted a different solution. BE claimed that it put them in a difficult situation, and the poster/s in the instances claimed BE was showing some people preferential treatment."


I know I sound narky, and to be honest when I read the post I kind of was. I wanted to make it clear that Bonnie and I aren't imbiciles who have been unable to read and analyse the previous posts regarding CS censorship, and I totally condone free speech and the ability to constructively discuss QC issues. What I DON'T condone is people warping a post to passively aggressively fit their own ulterior motive and to make other posters appear stupid.

Edit: Let's take it outside, meet you for a punchup in half an hour? Sorry to sound to POed; I am, but I am also fairly sure you meant no offense. I have to work today, so take my stuff with a grain of salt.

 

[bonniekir]

karmen..it could also be the opposite..that a resolution of a complaint can be a bit more favourable for the complainant, that BE does not want it to become known , simply because others might want to get an equal outcome of their complaint. And not one case is like the other.
I can only relate from my own experience with two really minor issues, that I view Jackie's handling extremely professionel and I am very pleased with the outcome! And she never ever asked me not to tell openly about these bags. I simply chose not to, because the problems were solved...and I consider myself an adult!

Tash..I am actually happy with my bags...

 

[bonniekir]

in my post that you are referring to, i actually mentioned why be seemed to object to some of the qc/cs issues. The rest of it besides those 9 words you have chosen to make reference to says;

"they'd prefer if we didn't post the emails directly, or post the specific resolution except to say that it was resolved/not resolved and whether the customer was satisfied.

Their reason was something like they'd had instances where a customer had their heart set on the same resolution as another tfp member, when the qc case was different and warranted a different solution. Be claimed that it put them in a difficult situation, and the poster/s in the instances claimed be was showing some people preferential treatment."


i know i sound narky, and to be honest when i read the post i kind of was. I wanted to make it clear that bonnie and i aren't imbiciles who have been unable to read and analyse the previous posts regarding cs censorship, and i totally condone free speech and the ability to constructively discuss qc issues. What i don't condone is people warping a post to passively aggressively fit their own ulterior motive and to make other posters appear stupid.

Edit: Let's take it outside, meet you for a punchup in half an hour? :d sorry to sound to poed; i am, but i am also fairly sure you meant no offense. I have to work today, so take my stuff with a grain of salt.

 

[Tash1]

Tash..I am actually happy with my bags...

Please reread my post! I think this is another example of misinterpretation. Thank you!

 

[gingeybear]

Hi Ladies,



this will be my last post on this particular topic since I'm not directly affected but I just wanted to clarify:



I received a few emails today from PF friends asking me more about censorship and I just want to re-phrase my post earlier today. Jackie to my knowledge hasn't ever asked anyone to go back and erase their post. She's just contacted them directly after reading here and expressed her disappointment that it was shared to other's on the PF. She explained she doesn't respond to demands in this manner or actually will act just the contrary when one does that.



It's my PF friends that felt uncomfortable in that type of reply and decided to either make future posts sound much softer in order to keep BE's support or just remain quiet overall going forward. I can understand taking that approach after reading that type of email especially in the midst of a handbag issue.



Must run.... It's time to celebrate!

Have a great holiday all.

In my opinion, this is all hearsay -- all of it. We don't know what, if anything, about the above post, is true. I am expressing my opinion.

I have taken a brief break and logged on.


Let me make something clear. I am expressing fact not hearsay in this post. I can't post the exact correspondance but it was between BE and myself so this is not second hand. Perhaps this is inadmissible in court but according to TPF rules this is the best I can do.


I was first told the resolution hinged on my not posting on TPF because I would cause trouble, then I received an immediate email back-pedaling the wording and the reason for the proposed solution and condition it hinged on written in the first one.


This is the order of my correspondance after I emailed BE about this purse. I submitted photos as requested and listed what was wrong with the purse.


First I received an email and was told there was nothing wrong with it. Then I received another stating that BE was aware of my posts on other forums (which in all due honesty, I and others had done in support of a friend who posted there before there was a QC/CS thread here). That therefore I could/would cause trouble if I posted on TPF, and was offered something I would not have been comfortable with on the condition that I not post about it and never buy from BE again.

Finally I was told that lest I misinterpret the above message, that I was not being strongarmed into not posting, but rather being offered this solution because I am a special customer, not because I was being warned not to mention the issues about the bag.


I am not going to be analyzing or expressing my opinions about any of these emails or the wording. That would be opinion. I posted the factual paraphrasing of the emails since I did not accept the conditions offered, which I rejected in order that I can be free to post the truth about what happened.

This is not heresay. This is paraphrasing, which is legally permitted as long as I give attribution..it is not plagiarism either..I will cite where I got the wording from; directly from BE's emails to me.



It is not in any way the exact wording of the emails which are not allowed to be posted here on TPF. Had I been permitted to post them, there would be no debate or discussion. They would speak for themselves. So that is why I brought the matter to the forum. I did not want to remain quiet about how I was treated as a customer, nor about what I was offered or the terms and conditions it hinged on. I wanted it out in public.


One more thing. As far as repeated purchases, despite QC issues, in my case, most of my BE bags are second hand.They are one style and one style only. The same style I purchased this time from BE because I believed that perhaps the first occurence was an abberation. The rehomer usually is kind enough to supply detailed photos, details of condition and descriptions. No hassle, no CS issues, no international drama should I need to return it. If there is a problem, with THESE purchases, which I never have had, I can deal directly with the person.


I am not generalizing my experience to all BE bags. Nor do I want to rehash the first QC issue I had.I am stating that in THIS case, there were definite quality issues. Will I ever buy a BE bag again? Perhaps from a friend I trust. I have been informed that I am not permitted to buy directly from BE anymore; which I find ironic; why would I do so after this?

I would like you all to know that I am in the process of hopefully working out a solution that I am comfortable with, namely returning the bag. The method and manner in which that is done is still not clear enough and so I need more details.


In all fairness to BE, once the solution is reached, I will post the facts and no more, and not merely walk away. But once that is done, and this matter is over and done with, I will once again walk away from this subforum and never look back. And as tempted as I might be to offer support if and when other women post about their CS issues should any more occur, I will not be doing so in print and in posts, but will do so in spirit.



Have a Happy Thanksgiving to all my American friends. Back to my real life. After all, it's just a bag, right?

 

[sgreg]

First I received an email and was told there was nothing wrong with it. Then I received another stating that BE was aware of my posts on other forums (which in all due honesty, I and others had done in support of a friend who posted there before there was a QC/CS thread here). That therefore I could/would cause trouble if I posted on TPF, and was offered something I would not have been comfortable with on the condition that I not post about it and never buy from BE again.

They said they'd only rectify from QC problem if you would agree not to buy from BE ever again? Wow...that seems rather counterproductive of them, lol.

 

[K.Z.]

In my post that you are referring to, I actually mentioned why BE seemed to object to some of the QC/CS issues. The rest of it besides those 9 words you have chosen to make reference to says;

"They'd prefer if we didn't post the emails directly, or post the specific resolution except to say that it was resolved/not resolved and whether the customer was satisfied.

Their reason was something like they'd had instances where a customer had their heart set on the same resolution as another tfp member, when the QC case was different and warranted a different solution. BE claimed that it put them in a difficult situation, and the poster/s in the instances claimed BE was showing some people preferential treatment."

I know I sound narky, and to be honest when I read the post I kind of was. I wanted to make it clear that Bonnie and I aren't imbiciles who have been unable to read and analyse the previous posts regarding CS censorship, and I totally condone free speech and the ability to constructively discuss QC issues. What I DON'T condone is people warping a post to passively aggressively fit their own ulterior motive and to make other posters appear stupid.

Edit: Let's take it outside, meet you for a punchup in half an hour? Sorry to sound to POed; I am, but I am also fairly sure you meant no offense. I have to work today, so take my stuff with a grain of salt.

I appreciate your humor, I do, but now I'm really confused...seriously confused! :weird:

Of course I meant no offense--why would I? TBH I'm super surprised you or anyone would be offended by a post in which I'm speaking in general terms about what seems to be an ongoing topic here. Evidently, there's a lot more going on that I'm aware of. I thought it would be OK to post my thoughts on the matter in a respectful manner. I apologize for sticking my nose where it apparently didn't belong.

Who said or implied that anyone is an imbecile? Are you saying I did? () How? And where did the part about "warping posts to passively-aggressively fit their own ulterior motive and to make other posters appear stupid" come from? Are you saying I did this, too? :s How could I have an ulterior motive when I just got here and have sided with no one in particular? And why would I want to make anyone appear stupid?

I must be the dumb one kuz I truly don't understand what's happening here. :wondering

I'm very interested in BE and was hoping to participate in this s/f, but now I'm thinking I should stick to reveals only from now on kuz the last thing I want to do is create or contribute to any drama. I was hoping getting into a new designer and being here would be fun