First Things First

•Give the merchant the first chance to solve the problem. Contact the salesperson, retailer or business when you have a complaint about any goods or services you bought. When there is a complaints department, use it. When there isn’t, talk to someone in authority, such as a manager. A face-to-face discussion is best. Be firm and businesslike, but polite. Calmly and accurately describe the problem and what you want the company to do to resolve it.

•

If the problem is not resolved that way, ask for the telephone number of the company headquarters and contact the customer service department. Request specifics about how and when something will be done, and get the company representative’s name in case you have to refer to the conversation later. Write down any details of your complaint and keep them in a file. Make sure to date your notes.

•

If your call doesn’t produce satisfactory results, write a letter to someone higher up, such as the general manager or owner (see sample letter). Provide all the details of the problem and explain your efforts to resolve it. Ask for action. In the case of products, send a copy of your letter to the manufacturer, and be sure to keep a copy of it yourself.

•

If none of these steps work to your satisfaction, consult the key consumer contacts of this Handbook for government offices and consumer organizations that apply to your situation. If you don’t know where to start, call the federal-provincial-territorial government consumer affairs office where you live. Someone there will direct you to the right organization. Or, use the Complaint Courier to file your complaint online.

•

Taking legal action should be your last choice. If you decide to sue, remember that there are often time limitations on filing lawsuits. You may wish to check with a lawyer about the legal process and any limitations that may apply to your case in your province or territory.

Strategies for Success

•

Do not be afraid to complain. Good businesses will be pleased to correct any mistake on their part. They know that customer goodwill is the best form of advertising.

•Always keep a file of important information related to your purchase, include the sales receipts, repair orders, warranties, cancelled cheques, contracts and any letters you have written to or received from the company concerned.
•

Do not procrastinate. When a product is defective or unsatisfactory, it is important that you return it quickly so that you do not lose the right to get your money back or to collect damages in some cases. Always check the return policy before you buy.

What to Do When You Have Complained Without Any Results?

If you feel you have given the company enough time and that your problem has not been resolved, send a copy of your complaint letter and copies of supporting documents (not originals) to, or file a consumer complaint with, your provincial or territorial consumer affairs office or Better Business Bureau. If you use the Complaint Courier it will give you the option to automatically forward your complaint to the appropriate government office.

Small Claims Court

Small claims court can be an informal and relatively inexpensive way to resolve disputes when the amount involved is less than $3,000 or, in some provinces, up to $25,000. However, you will have to pay a fee to file a claim. Once the suit is launched, you may have costs for such things as serving orders, payments to witnesses and travel expenses.

You do not need a lawyer to go to small claims court, although in most provinces and territories the help of a lawyer is allowed. The court staff is experienced in helping consumers prepare the necessary forms, and the judges have the power to settle disputes. This court allows each side to explain its story and does not expect consumers to know legal technicalities.

For information on how to proceed, contact the small claims or provincial or territorial court nearest you (look in the government listings in your phone book). The websites of these courts also often list the procedures to follow and have copies of the forms you will need to complete.

In one of her first moves, ombudsman Fiona Crean asked all civic departments to forward copies of their processes for handling complaints from the public.

That was last December. She’s still waiting.

“We received good procedures from some, mediocre from others and none from yet others,” Crean told reporters Thursday. “Less than half the areas submitted processes or posted them on their website. Openness and accessibility was a problem even for those who had good procedures.”

Citizens must first seek redress from the relevant civic department before approaching the ombudsman’s office, on Elizabeth St. near city hall, but people often say the municipal public service just isn’t responsive to them, she said.

“I can’t tell you how many people said, `I never heard back from the city.’”
“So we’ll take the steps that are necessary to make sure that people have a well-understood point of access to approach the city with concerns they might have about a service, or a time frame in which a service was delivered. It’s completely reasonable.”

In 2009, the office received 1,057 inquiries and complaints and processed and closed 958 of them, or just over 90 per cent, she said.

As it began operations, the ombudsman’s office first focused on individual complaints. In 2010, Crean wants to turn her attention to solving systemic problems.

The first order of business is ensuring the government develops procedures to handle complaints and publicizes them.
People have been able to pursue complaints by speaking to a supervisor or, if that doesn’t get results, speaking to the division’s general manager, he said.

“There always has been a way to make your concerns known. What we’re doing now is formalizing that, making sure it’s documented and available publicly on websites and that the city communicates it more clearly.

“The goal, of course, is to deal with concerns people have as quickly as possible without the need to make a formal complaint.”

Ideally, municipal services should be provided in a way that doesn’t attract complaints, he added.

That follows hundreds of complaints filed against the satellite television business, which McKenna said Tuesday was a huge number for a company operating in the state.

“These guys are off the charts,” McKenna said in a meeting with reporters. “We’ve had more complaints about them than any other (company) in America this year. So they really do stand out.”

The California-based company is accused of attracting customers with ads for low prices that hide fees and rate changes. The attorney general’s office filed a lawsuit Monday in King County Superior Court alleging that DirecTV had repeatedly violated the state’s Consumer Protection Act.

California-based DirecTV is accused of wooing new viewers with ads for low prices while hiding a multitude of fees, planned rate changes and terms that call for automatic renewals. Following a year-long investigation by its Consumer Protection Division, the Attorney General’s Office filed documents today in King County Superior Court that allege the company has repeatedly violated the state’s Consumer Protection Act. McKenna wants the company to put its terms in writing.

The state attorney general’s office received more than 50 overnight complaints against DirectTV after Rob McKenna filed a lawsuit against the company for “deceptive and unfair practices.”

That follows hundreds of complaints filed against the satellite television business, which McKenna said Tuesday was a huge number for a company operating in the state.

“These guys are off the charts,” McKenna said in a meeting with reporters. “We’ve had more complaints about them than any other (company) in America this year. So they really do stand out.”

The California-based company is accused of attracting customers with ads for low prices that hide fees and rate changes. The attorney general’s office filed a lawsuit Monday in King County Superior Court alleging that DirecTV had repeatedly violated the state’s Consumer Protection Act.

California-based DirecTV is accused of wooing new viewers with ads for low prices while hiding a multitude of fees, planned rate changes and terms that call for automatic renewals. Following a year-long investigation by its Consumer Protection Division, the Attorney General’s Office filed documents today in King County Superior Court that allege the company has repeatedly violated the state’s Consumer Protection Act. McKenna wants the company to put its terms in writing.

“They’re telling people they can sign up for a low introductory rate of $29.99 a month for 12 months, but literally in the fine print at the bottom of the ad there’s this rebate process you have to go through in order to obtain the introductory offer,” McKenna said. “Here’s the trick. Once they install they equipment you’re on the hook for the minimum period of the contract of two years. If you decide it’s not satisfactory…(there’s) up to $480 cancellation fee…We’ve been telling DirectTV they need to clean up their act for a long time and they’ve refused to make the changes that we require.”

DirecTV, in a statement, refutes those charges.

“We always strive to provide 100 percent customer satisfaction,” the statement said. The company also said that the number of complaints in Washington state represent less than 1 percent of their customers here.

Department brass have said Gillette was the latter, even after he had accumulated dozens of internal-affairs complaints. But 42 people — including accused criminals, people with no criminal records and law-enforcement officers — say in those complaints that, during more than 13 years as a sheriff’s deputy, Gillette acted as a law unto himself. His detractors say Gillette was a man with a penchant for profanity and roughness who crossed the line into criminal behavior
‘One of the worst cases’

By himself, Gillette racked up more complaints during his 13 years on patrol than the entire department generated in 2005, 2006 and 2007 combined. More than 70 deputies work for the Sangamon County sheriff’s department.

Based on the volume, seriousness and number of sustained complaints, Gillette should have been fired long ago, according to Samuel Walker, a University of Nebraska criminologist who is considered an expert on police misconduct.
Complaints can be a tool

Meyer and Walker said departments should use internal affairs complaints to help identify officers who need help.

Walker said the volume of complaints can be a tool to help figure out which officers need coaching, additional training or re-assignment. Meyer said departments can’t always go by complaint volumes — an officer assigned to DUI patrol, for example, is bound to get a fairly high number of complaints — but he blames himself for not doing more to help Gillette.
Williamson said he believes the department provides adequate help to employees with marital problems, psychological issues, alcohol-abuse problems or other issues that affect their work. The lack of psychological screening for new employees is due in part to the expense, Williamson said.

Williamson, who started the department’s internal-affairs division in 1997, has the final say on who gets hired. He said he requires prospective deputies to have a college diploma, and he interviews extensively before making a decision.

“This is one of the worst cases I’ve heard, just hearing his record,” Walker said. “This sounds, really, pretty shocking. This officer should have been long gone. There’s a really serious failure here.”

That view is shared by Stephen Meyer, former head of internal affairs for the Sangamon County Sheriff’s Office, who said he would have fired Gillette if he’d had the authority.

“Given the frequency and severity (of complaints), there comes a time when the agency has to say ‘enough,’” said Meyer, who retired in 2001 but remains a sheriff’s chaplain. “I deemed law enforcement a profession. And you need to remove those who are not professional.”
Gillette, who is now working for a private entity (he declined to be more specific) in Afghanistan, called Meyer a “religious fanatic” who was out to get him and generated complaints by contacting people who had been arrested. While he admitted violating some rules, Gillette denied doing anything seriously wrong.

“The only thing I’ve been found guilty of is minor department infractions,” Gillette said in a telephone interview. “I’m not saying I’m an angel. It’s obvious that I’m not. I did a good job for the sheriff’s department, and we took a lot of bad guys off the street.”

Meyer said he never solicited complaints — when Williamson made him the department’s first head of internal affairs in 1997, the sheriff made it clear that he was to let complaints come to him, not go looking for them, Meyer said.

“My job would have been in jeopardy,” Meyer said. “The sheriff had said, ‘You will not solicit.’”
42 complaints

By October 2001, the number of complaints against Gillette stood at 28, with six of them sustained. He’d been a deputy for six years. Then the pace slowed. He was the target of 14 more complaints for the last eight years of his career with the county, with two of those — the complaint filed by Barr and the allegation of profanity by Anderson — sustained by the department.

A few things changed. Gillette was deployed to Iraq for a year in 2003 and won the Bronze Star, so he was off local streets. Meyer, who Gillette says was out to get him, retired in October 2001. And in September 2001, Lt. Patrick Davlin moved from the bureau of professional standards, which includes the department’s internal affairs division, and became supervisor of the midnight shift that included Gillette.

Eva Porter can’t get the phone to stop ringing. Debt collectors trying to get in touch with her brother have been calling Eva seven times a day. Her brother moved out a year ago, but that hasn’t stopped the calls.

“It’s just aggravating to have to deal with those harassing phone calls,” Eva said.

Federal law prohibits debt collects from calling before 8:00 AM or after 9:00 at night. They’re also not allowed to make threats. Eva says the company calling her doesn’t play by the rules.

“They’ve called at 7:00 o’clock in the morning on Saturday. They’ve even called one morning and woke me up at 6:30,” said Eva.

Debt collectors have become more aggressive since the economy tanked. Six thousand calls and emails have come into two state agencies. But most of the complaints have been ignored because of confusion over who has the authority to police the debt collectors.

Attorney General Bill McCollum says his office lacks authority.

“A lot of confusion exists about this issue and I want to be sure we have the powers people think we do,” said McCollum.

The AG’s office refers the complaints to the Office of Financial Regulation. CFO Alex Sink, who doesn’t oversee the OFR, says she doesn’t care who is to blame, she just wants the problem fixed.
Both McCollum and CFO Alex Sink are asking for legislation to make the policing process easier. The state cabinet members, who are both running for governor, are asking lawmakers to act quickly. Both are hoping for legislation to be passed in the 2010 legislative session which begins in March.

Mayor Mark Eckert, who has defended the city’s practices and said leaders have focused on strengthening neighborhoods, said it would be “premature” for him to comment on the federal HUD complaint, other than to say he had received correspondence Monday from HUD and that he would work with City Attorney Robert Sprague to prepare a response to the complaint.

The office of Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan also has confirmed an investigation of Brown’s allegations. Brown has notified the U.S. Department of Justice, though he hasn’t filed a formal complaint with that agency.

In Brown’s complaint, he accused city leaders of revising zoning ordinances to reduce the amount of minority residents and limiting rental opportunities for African-Americans. City leaders have said Brown’s allegations are not true.

New numbers released from the governor’s office show the state has spent nearly $2 million investigating ethics complaints against Gov. Sarah Palin and her staff.

These numbers were released to back up Palin’s claim that these frivolous ethics complaints have cost taxpayers too much, and one state lawmaker hopes to help change that.

Before Palin announced she would be calling it quits, she noted that she and her staff have spent more time lately battling ethics complaints than doing state business.

“I have been accused of all sorts of frivolous ethics violations such as holding a fish in a photograph or wearing a jacket with a logo on it, and answering reporters’ questions,” Palin said.

Palin noted that all 15 were dismissed, but proving she was right has not been cheap.

A spreadsheet from the governor’s office shows more than $1.9 million was spent by various state agencies to handle ethics complaints and public records requests up until June 23.
“What’s happening now is people are filing what appear to be frivolous complaints,” Lynn said. “And it’s all over TV, it’s all over the radio, the newspaper and everything before they’ve had a chance to weigh in on it.”

Lynn says Palin’s popularity could be fueling more ethics complaints, and with his bill a case would only be made public if the charges are substantiated.

“It appears it is more for political agenda rather than trying to get to the bottom of some ethics complaint,” Lynn said.

Some have criticized Lynn, saying whether valid or not, a complaint should not be silenced.

“Everybody ought to have the right to file an ethics complaint, against somebody in the legislature or the administration,” Lynn said. “But it should not be done with a political agenda it should be done because they think something is really there.”

“Especially when all these lawmakers are lining up for office. Their desire would be to clobber the administration left and right so that they can position themselves for office. I’m not going to put Alaskans through that,” the governor said, wearing a Cabela’s fishing bib as she stood on a Bristol Bay beach outside Dillingham.

Palin, who will hand power over to Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell on July 26, said she was particularly frustrated by the ethics complaints filed against her and costs and time involved for the state in dealing with them.

“It’s a combination of things that has brought me to this place of knowing. I love Alaskans too much to put them through a lame duck session heading into my final year in office; I was going to be honest and tell them I’m not going to run for re-election. I’m not going to let Alaskans go through a year of stymied, paralyzed administration and not getting anything done. I’m going to let Sean Parnell take this and we will see that things will let up,” she said.

Palin’s attorney, Thomas Van Flein, says the governor paid $8,143.62 to the state on June 19 for the nine trips, some with more than one of her five children, taken between January 2007 and February of this year. The payment was due Tuesday.

An ethics complaint had alleged Palin abused her power by charging the state when her children traveled with her. The Alaska Personnel Board found no wrongdoing, but Palin agreed to reimburse the state for trips found to be of questionable state interest.
Palin was the Republican vice presidential candidate when the complaint was filed and after the February settlement she called the grievance “an obvious political weapon.”

As part of the settlement, the Alaska Department of Law was asked to develop specific rules clarifying when the state should pay for a governor’s family travel. That effort is under way, with the goal to have a final draft by the end of the year, according to Judy Bockmon, an assistant attorney general.

Also on Tuesday, the governor’s office announced the 15th dismissal of an ethics complaint against Palin or one of her staff. It alleged Kris Perry – director of the governor’s Anchorage office

worked on state time to benefit Palin’s interests during and after her vice presidential run.

The governor’s office said the complaint was filed even after Perry obtained an opinion from Perez, her ethics supervisor.

“It is outrageous to file an ethics complaint against a state employee who sought and obtained ethics guidance in advance,” Mike Nizich, Palin’s chief of staff, said in a statement. “This is not about ethics. This is not about holding the governor or state employees accountable. This is pure harassment

The lawsuits were filed Tuesday against Explicit Media Inc. of Florida and SVM Inc. of Nevada, according to a news release from the AG’s office.

They are the latest in a string of lawsuits filed against telemarketing companies purporting to offer automobile warranties to consumers.
The most recent complaints detail multiple violations of both federal and state telemarketing laws: making calls to Arkansans listed in the Do Not Call database; “robo-calling,” or using prerecorded messages for commercial purposes; and caller ID “spoofing,” displaying false or misleading telephone numbers on consumers’ caller ID systems.