Hi FP community,

Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess they are
desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a fake bill
to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business strategy in
my opinion.

Re: Watch for a fake bill by Ook

Ook
Mon Aug 02 10:10:28 CDT 2004

Is this actually coming from Stonefield? Or someone else?


"Alex B" <nospameroni@sparmerio.com> wrote in message
news:%23Uqe0EKeEHA.3988@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi FP community,
>
> Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess they
are
> desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a fake
bill
> to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business strategy in
> my opinion.
>
>
>



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Fred

Fred
Mon Aug 02 10:19:11 CDT 2004

I sincerley doubt that Stonefield would be sending a fake bill to anybody.
It's more likely someone else's lame attempt to discredit them. They are a
fine upstanding company, backed by totally honest people. (you are aware
that what you have stated could be considered slander, unless you have some
absolute proof, your "in my opinion" not withstanding?)

Fred
Microsoft Visual FOxPro MVP


Have you brought this to their attention?
"Alex B" <nospameroni@sparmerio.com> wrote in message
news:%23Uqe0EKeEHA.3988@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi FP community,
>
> Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess they
are
> desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a fake
bill
> to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business strategy in
> my opinion.
>
>
>



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Alec

Alec
Mon Aug 02 11:56:44 CDT 2004

Hi Alex,

I have been a customer of Stonefield for years and have found them to be an
honest and reputable group. I too find it difficult to believe that such a
duplicate invoice was deliberately
generated from anyone at Stonefield. My bet is it was either an honest
mistake or sent by someone else trying to discredit them...

Alec Gagne
Crimestar Corporation
www.crimestar.com


"Alex B" <nospameroni@sparmerio.com> wrote in message
news:%23Uqe0EKeEHA.3988@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi FP community,
>
> Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess they
are
> desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a fake
bill
> to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business strategy in
> my opinion.
>
>
>



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Rush

Rush
Mon Aug 02 14:24:43 CDT 2004

Can you post specifics, or are you just blowing wind?

- Rush

"Alex B" <nospameroni@sparmerio.com> wrote in message
news:%23Uqe0EKeEHA.3988@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Hi FP community,
>
> Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess they
are
> desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a fake
bill
> to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business strategy in
> my opinion.
>
>
>



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Alex

Alex
Mon Aug 02 14:57:44 CDT 2004

It is titled "Software Subscription Renewal Invoice" and yes, I am extremely
confident that it came from Stonefield because it was on their letterhead,
it has direct contact info at Stonefield, and it has information about a
prior purchase from them long ago. The trick in the offer is that they
invoice you, but then the letter folded underneath the invoice states that
"it's been a long time since we've had contact with you". And that the
product I purchased from them was before 2001. And then some plugs for
their upcoming products.

So, instead of saying a fake bill, I should have called it a fraudulent
invoice.

To knowingly give a "Software Subscription Renewal Invoice" for
goods/services that the vendor knows weren't ordered (as stated on the
letter on the following page) is fraudulent.

The reason I posted this, is that at a decent sized business fraudulent
invoices from legitimate vendors could accidentally be paid. I want to make
sure no one's AP department accidentally pays for goods/services not ordered
to help discourage Stonefield from another attempt at this.

While I appreciate that Stonefield's products have some strong supporters
and clearly offer some value to many of you, I think reasonable people would
agree that knowingly invoicing someone for goods/services not ordered is an
unethical business practice.




"Fred Taylor" <ftaylor@mvps.org!REMOVE> wrote in message
news:O%23iW1PKeEHA.2784@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> I sincerley doubt that Stonefield would be sending a fake bill to anybody.
> It's more likely someone else's lame attempt to discredit them. They are
a
> fine upstanding company, backed by totally honest people. (you are aware
> that what you have stated could be considered slander, unless you have
some
> absolute proof, your "in my opinion" not withstanding?)
>
> Fred
> Microsoft Visual FOxPro MVP
>
>
> Have you brought this to their attention?
> "Alex B" <nospameroni@sparmerio.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Uqe0EKeEHA.3988@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Hi FP community,
> >
> > Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess they
> are
> > desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a fake
> bill
> > to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business strategy
in
> > my opinion.
> >
> >
> >
>
>



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Alex

Alex
Mon Aug 02 14:59:05 CDT 2004

I am not blowing wind. Specifics are posted in my reply to Fred.

"Rush Strong" <rush.strong]@[verizon.net> wrote in message
news:%236N9lXMeEHA.3016@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Can you post specifics, or are you just blowing wind?
>
> - Rush
>
> "Alex B" <nospameroni@sparmerio.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Uqe0EKeEHA.3988@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Hi FP community,
> >
> > Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess they
> are
> > desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a fake
> bill
> > to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business strategy
in
> > my opinion.
> >
> >
> >
>
>



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Alex

Alex
Mon Aug 02 14:59:48 CDT 2004

I am very confident it is from Stonefield. Details are in my reply to Fred.

"Ook" <usenet@nospam.emberts.com> wrote in message
news:ux4yZLKeEHA.556@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Is this actually coming from Stonefield? Or someone else?
>
>
> "Alex B" <nospameroni@sparmerio.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Uqe0EKeEHA.3988@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Hi FP community,
> >
> > Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess they
> are
> > desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a fake
> bill
> > to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business strategy
in
> > my opinion.
> >
> >
> >
>
>



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Alex

Alex
Mon Aug 02 15:05:04 CDT 2004

I'm glad to hear that you have found them to be reputable and honest.
Hopefully this invoicing ploy was just a poor decision by someone in their
marketing department or something and it won't recur. I posted details
about it in my reply to Fred.
"Alec Gagne" <agagne@crimestar.com> wrote in message
news:%23SLOCHLeEHA.1000@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hi Alex,
>
> I have been a customer of Stonefield for years and have found them to be
an
> honest and reputable group. I too find it difficult to believe that such
a
> duplicate invoice was deliberately
> generated from anyone at Stonefield. My bet is it was either an honest
> mistake or sent by someone else trying to discredit them...
>
> Alec Gagne
> Crimestar Corporation
> www.crimestar.com
>
>
> "Alex B" <nospameroni@sparmerio.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Uqe0EKeEHA.3988@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Hi FP community,
> >
> > Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess they
> are
> > desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a fake
> bill
> > to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business strategy
in
> > my opinion.
> >
> >
> >
>
>



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Andy

Andy
Mon Aug 02 16:27:24 CDT 2004

Thank you for bringing that to our attention.
If you are NOT a current subscriber, IMO,
whatever they send you should state that very clearly.

Andy Rice
San Diego, CA



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Fred

Fred
Mon Aug 02 20:00:03 CDT 2004

And what was their response at Stonefield? I do believe they did switch to
a subscription model sometime ago, but I'm not sure. You have contacted
them about this, didn't you? BTW, almost all magazines which are
subscriptions, operate in this exact same manner. If you pay, you continue
to receive said magazine. If you don't pay, you'll not receive the magazine
anymore, but you'll usually get "requests" to re-subscribe. If you don't
pay, you don't receive a "past due" notice, you're just no longer
subscribed.

Fred
Microsoft Visual FoxPro MVP

"Alex B" <nospameroni@sparmerio.com> wrote in message
news:OQqKNrMeEHA.3680@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> It is titled "Software Subscription Renewal Invoice" and yes, I am
extremely
> confident that it came from Stonefield because it was on their letterhead,
> it has direct contact info at Stonefield, and it has information about a
> prior purchase from them long ago. The trick in the offer is that they
> invoice you, but then the letter folded underneath the invoice states that
> "it's been a long time since we've had contact with you". And that the
> product I purchased from them was before 2001. And then some plugs for
> their upcoming products.
>
> So, instead of saying a fake bill, I should have called it a fraudulent
> invoice.
>
> To knowingly give a "Software Subscription Renewal Invoice" for
> goods/services that the vendor knows weren't ordered (as stated on the
> letter on the following page) is fraudulent.
>
> The reason I posted this, is that at a decent sized business fraudulent
> invoices from legitimate vendors could accidentally be paid. I want to
make
> sure no one's AP department accidentally pays for goods/services not
ordered
> to help discourage Stonefield from another attempt at this.
>
> While I appreciate that Stonefield's products have some strong supporters
> and clearly offer some value to many of you, I think reasonable people
would
> agree that knowingly invoicing someone for goods/services not ordered is
an
> unethical business practice.
>
>
>
>
> "Fred Taylor" <ftaylor@mvps.org!REMOVE> wrote in message
> news:O%23iW1PKeEHA.2784@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> > I sincerley doubt that Stonefield would be sending a fake bill to
anybody.
> > It's more likely someone else's lame attempt to discredit them. They
are
> a
> > fine upstanding company, backed by totally honest people. (you are
aware
> > that what you have stated could be considered slander, unless you have
> some
> > absolute proof, your "in my opinion" not withstanding?)
> >
> > Fred
> > Microsoft Visual FOxPro MVP
> >
> >
> > Have you brought this to their attention?
> > "Alex B" <nospameroni@sparmerio.com> wrote in message
> > news:%23Uqe0EKeEHA.3988@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > Hi FP community,
> > >
> > > Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess
they
> > are
> > > desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a
fake
> > bill
> > > to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business
strategy
> in
> > > my opinion.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Paul

Paul
Tue Aug 03 10:10:21 CDT 2004


"Fred Taylor" <ftaylor@mvps.org!REMOVE> wrote in message
news:%230nXaUPeEHA.2764@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

<snip>
> almost all magazines which are
> subscriptions, operate in this exact same manner. If you pay, you
continue
> to receive said magazine. If you don't pay, you'll not receive the
magazine
> anymore, but you'll usually get "requests" to re-subscribe. If you don't
> pay, you don't receive a "past due" notice, you're just no longer
> subscribed.

Time magazine has been taking flak for just such dishonest practices as Alex
B described. In teeny tiny print on subscription forms, Time stated that the
subscription was perpetual until explicitly canceled. Then when people's
subscriptions ran out, Time would automatically renew, then send ever more
threatening letters demanding payment for the renewal that the sucker
"ordered".

I'm not sure whether they're still doing it. That's one reason I don't
subscribe. (Krauthammer is another, but that's another issue.)




Re: Watch for a fake bill by dhennig

dhennig
Tue Aug 03 10:19:00 CDT 2004

Hi Alex.

> Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess they are
> desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a fake bill
> to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business strategy in
> my opinion.

I want to clear up a few misconceptions others may have received from
your posting. As Fred pointed out, we went to a subscription model
several years ago. Initially, we simply contacted people whose
subscriptions had lapsed or were about to. However, a lot of people
asked us to simply send them an invoice. As Fred pointed also out,
pretty much every magazine in the world does this, so we considered
that it was a normal business practice and started doing the same
thing. I subscribe to several software packages and those companies do
the same thing. In the four years we've done this, you're the first
person who's mentioned it as a issue.

Second, I think it's extremely unfair for you to call this a "fake
bill" or "fraudulent invoice". As you pointed out (in a second
message, rather than the initial inflamatory one), a cover letter
accompanies the invoice that clearly states the purpose and the fact
that renewal is optional. We're not trying to trick anyone; we simply
make it easier for people to re-subscribe than requiring multiple
communications back and forth to do that. If someone does not wish to
re-subscribe, they simply don't pay the invoice (again, just like
renewing or not renewing a magazine subscription).

Third, your comment "The reason I posted this, is that at a decent
sized business fraudulent invoices from legitimate vendors could
accidentally be paid. I want to make sure no one's AP department
accidentally pays for goods/services not ordered" is rather strange.
I've worked with hundreds of companies in my career, from Mom and Pop
organizations to some of the biggest and best-known companies in the
world. In my experience, and I'm sure most consultants would agree
with me, it's hard enough to get a legitimate invoice paid let alone a
"fake bill". Only a company with very loose business practices would
pay an invoice without first inquiring the purpose of the invoice and
whether the goods or services had in fact been received.

Finally, when I have a problem with a company, I contact them to find
out whether they did something wrong or if I simply misunderstood
something. Only if I don't get satisfaction do I pass on to others
that the company is difficult to deal with. That's the fair way to
work out problems with others, rather than attacking them in a public
forum where people who may not be familiar with them can get a wrong
impression.

Doug

Re: Watch for a fake bill by Fred

Fred
Tue Aug 03 10:20:24 CDT 2004

"Paul Pedersen" <no-reply@swen.com> wrote in message
news:eW6q$vWeEHA.2764@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
> "Fred Taylor" <ftaylor@mvps.org!REMOVE> wrote in message
> news:%230nXaUPeEHA.2764@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>
> <snip>
> > almost all magazines which are
> > subscriptions, operate in this exact same manner. If you pay, you
> continue
> > to receive said magazine. If you don't pay, you'll not receive the
> magazine
> > anymore, but you'll usually get "requests" to re-subscribe. If you
don't
> > pay, you don't receive a "past due" notice, you're just no longer
> > subscribed.
>
> Time magazine has been taking flak for just such dishonest practices as
Alex
> B described. In teeny tiny print on subscription forms, Time stated that
the
> subscription was perpetual until explicitly canceled. Then when people's
> subscriptions ran out, Time would automatically renew, then send ever more
> threatening letters demanding payment for the renewal that the sucker
> "ordered".
>
> I'm not sure whether they're still doing it. That's one reason I don't
> subscribe. (Krauthammer is another, but that's another issue.)
>


FWIW, I had the same issues with Time magazine years ago. There is a
difference between the two practices, but in some cases, its not very
obvious.

Fred
Microsoft Visual FoxPro MVP



Re: Watch for a fake bill by dhennig

dhennig
Tue Aug 03 10:22:33 CDT 2004

Hi Andy.

As I mentioned in my reply to Alex (and he himself noted in a second
message), the invoice is accompanied by a cover letter that clearly
states the purpose of the invoice and the fact that it's simply
provided for the convenience of anyone wishing to renew their
subscription. This is a standard business practice with companies that
sell products on a subscription basis (magazines, newspapers, and
other software companies).

Doug


"Andy Rice" <notmyemail> wrote in message news:<#f7ICeNeEHA.3476@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>...
> Thank you for bringing that to our attention.
> If you are NOT a current subscriber, IMO,
> whatever they send you should state that very clearly.
>
> Andy Rice
> San Diego, CA

Re: Watch for a fake bill by Ook

Ook
Tue Aug 03 10:20:35 CDT 2004


> Time magazine has been taking flak for just such dishonest practices as
Alex
> B described. In teeny tiny print on subscription forms, Time stated that
the
> subscription was perpetual until explicitly canceled. Then when people's
> subscriptions ran out, Time would automatically renew, then send ever more
> threatening letters demanding payment for the renewal that the sucker
> "ordered".
>
> I'm not sure whether they're still doing it. That's one reason I don't
> subscribe. (Krauthammer is another, but that's another issue.)
>

I have had other magazines do this as well. It's not illegal, and it's not
that uncommon. It is unethical, and I would be very dissapointed in
Stonefield if they were actually stooping to such a low level. I, too, won't
subscribe to magazines that pull stunts like that.



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Alex

Alex
Tue Aug 03 11:27:40 CDT 2004

Thank you for your response, Doug. I think you make some valid points.

To set the record straight, you are correct that if I was a current customer
whose subscription was lapsing, this post would not have occured. However,
that is not the case.

I have not any other software vendor send me an invoice when I haven't used
their products/services for over 3 years! Also, your invoice does not state
anywhere on it that it is a 'proposed' invoice --- you'll notice that the
magazines we speak of are very careful to include some language on the
actual fake invoice.

I made my post to make sure that no one pays your invoice in error and to
encourage you to change the practice of invoicing former customers who have
lapsed for years. Maybe it's a statement of the company I work for, but we
almost did pay the fake invoice. Hence the title "watch for a fake bill".
I agree with you that I let my frustration (and disappointment) spill over
making my initial post less professional, so I apologize for that.

I don't think your defense of the invoice not being fake or fraudulent does
not hold water. Like the magazines that send fake invoices - they are
fake - call it what it is - it is not a legitimate invoice. I believe the
reason you entitled it "Software Subscription Renewal Invoice" with nowhere
on it saying that it is proposed or anything - well I believe reasonable
people would conclude you are knowingly trying to make it look like a valid
invoice and it was sent to someone who hasn't used your products in years -
well that is a fraudulent invoice --- I guess I don't know what else you
want me to call it?

I'm disappointed by this practice, and I hope you'll reconsider it.
Obviously, I'm not currently a customer and haven't been for many years, so
my opinions might not matter to you to the level that a current customer's
will, but I hope you'll reconsider nonetheless. And if you won't reconsider
that, at least make your cover letter actually be the cover letter of the
bill! The way mine arrived, the fake invoice was on top, then a sales
brochure, then the cover letter on the bottom.






"Doug Hennig" <dhennig@stonefield.com> wrote in message
news:b7f3eb69.0408030719.7b495090@posting.google.com...
> Hi Alex.
>
> > Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess they
are
> > desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a fake
bill
> > to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business strategy
in
> > my opinion.
>
> I want to clear up a few misconceptions others may have received from
> your posting. As Fred pointed out, we went to a subscription model
> several years ago. Initially, we simply contacted people whose
> subscriptions had lapsed or were about to. However, a lot of people
> asked us to simply send them an invoice. As Fred pointed also out,
> pretty much every magazine in the world does this, so we considered
> that it was a normal business practice and started doing the same
> thing. I subscribe to several software packages and those companies do
> the same thing. In the four years we've done this, you're the first
> person who's mentioned it as a issue.
>
> Second, I think it's extremely unfair for you to call this a "fake
> bill" or "fraudulent invoice". As you pointed out (in a second
> message, rather than the initial inflamatory one), a cover letter
> accompanies the invoice that clearly states the purpose and the fact
> that renewal is optional. We're not trying to trick anyone; we simply
> make it easier for people to re-subscribe than requiring multiple
> communications back and forth to do that. If someone does not wish to
> re-subscribe, they simply don't pay the invoice (again, just like
> renewing or not renewing a magazine subscription).
>
> Third, your comment "The reason I posted this, is that at a decent
> sized business fraudulent invoices from legitimate vendors could
> accidentally be paid. I want to make sure no one's AP department
> accidentally pays for goods/services not ordered" is rather strange.
> I've worked with hundreds of companies in my career, from Mom and Pop
> organizations to some of the biggest and best-known companies in the
> world. In my experience, and I'm sure most consultants would agree
> with me, it's hard enough to get a legitimate invoice paid let alone a
> "fake bill". Only a company with very loose business practices would
> pay an invoice without first inquiring the purpose of the invoice and
> whether the goods or services had in fact been received.
>
> Finally, when I have a problem with a company, I contact them to find
> out whether they did something wrong or if I simply misunderstood
> something. Only if I don't get satisfaction do I pass on to others
> that the company is difficult to deal with. That's the fair way to
> work out problems with others, rather than attacking them in a public
> forum where people who may not be familiar with them can get a wrong
> impression.
>
> Doug



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Neil

Neil
Tue Aug 03 18:38:24 CDT 2004

I agree with Alex on many points. My magazine subscriptions in the UK are
generally followed up by 3 months to go, 1 month to go, renew now to keep
your preferred customer discount and claim a prize, your subscription has
ended would you like to resubscribe type correspondence. Don't know if I'm
just lucky in who I subscribe to in this respect.

The point about AP departments is also very apt. I incur a lot of
monthly/quarterly/annual bills from within the IT department. Examples are
rental on dedicated web servers, SLAs, maintenance contracts, hardware
leasing agreements, MSDN, now MS Software Assurance, many other software
subscriptions/renewals, affiliate web marketing schemes, web directory
listings, comms lines, data management fees, and at the lower end of the
scale magazines and simple web resources like news2news.com (worth every
penny), etc.

It's generally a long drawn out case of reconciling all this with AP every
month. It becomes more difficult when AP are given an invoice for a company
they know they have previously paid regularly. From my perspective, I've
cancelled the arrangement so I shouldn't be billed anymore, and AP shouldn't
receive a bill accordingly. Sometimes we get blatantly fraudulent invoices
from companies or individuals we don't know, so the excercise is worth
doing.

I've heard enough good news about Stonefield to believe you're ethical, and
can understand your exception to some of the terms Alex used, but at least
you could consider rewording your material. Better yet, you could consider
segregating your mailing list into customers, past customers, prospects and
sending them more appropriate material. Less grief, far more reward.

Regards,
Neil

"Doug Hennig" <dhennig@stonefield.com> wrote in message
news:b7f3eb69.0408030719.7b495090@posting.google.com...
> Hi Alex.
>
> > Make sure to watch out for a fake bill from Stonefield ... I guess they
are
> > desperate enough for business that they have resorted to sending a fake
bill
> > to try to get return customers. Very, very unethical business strategy
in
> > my opinion.
>
> I want to clear up a few misconceptions others may have received from
> your posting. As Fred pointed out, we went to a subscription model
> several years ago. Initially, we simply contacted people whose
> subscriptions had lapsed or were about to. However, a lot of people
> asked us to simply send them an invoice. As Fred pointed also out,
> pretty much every magazine in the world does this, so we considered
> that it was a normal business practice and started doing the same
> thing. I subscribe to several software packages and those companies do
> the same thing. In the four years we've done this, you're the first
> person who's mentioned it as a issue.
>
> Second, I think it's extremely unfair for you to call this a "fake
> bill" or "fraudulent invoice". As you pointed out (in a second
> message, rather than the initial inflamatory one), a cover letter
> accompanies the invoice that clearly states the purpose and the fact
> that renewal is optional. We're not trying to trick anyone; we simply
> make it easier for people to re-subscribe than requiring multiple
> communications back and forth to do that. If someone does not wish to
> re-subscribe, they simply don't pay the invoice (again, just like
> renewing or not renewing a magazine subscription).
>
> Third, your comment "The reason I posted this, is that at a decent
> sized business fraudulent invoices from legitimate vendors could
> accidentally be paid. I want to make sure no one's AP department
> accidentally pays for goods/services not ordered" is rather strange.
> I've worked with hundreds of companies in my career, from Mom and Pop
> organizations to some of the biggest and best-known companies in the
> world. In my experience, and I'm sure most consultants would agree
> with me, it's hard enough to get a legitimate invoice paid let alone a
> "fake bill". Only a company with very loose business practices would
> pay an invoice without first inquiring the purpose of the invoice and
> whether the goods or services had in fact been received.
>
> Finally, when I have a problem with a company, I contact them to find
> out whether they did something wrong or if I simply misunderstood
> something. Only if I don't get satisfaction do I pass on to others
> that the company is difficult to deal with. That's the fair way to
> work out problems with others, rather than attacking them in a public
> forum where people who may not be familiar with them can get a wrong
> impression.
>
> Doug



Re: Watch for a fake bill by dhennig

dhennig
Wed Aug 04 10:46:15 CDT 2004

Hi Alex.

> Also, your invoice does not state
> anywhere on it that it is a 'proposed' invoice

I took a closer look at it and you're right. I guess we figured anyone
reading it would assume it was proposed, similar to a magazine
renewal. However, neither our cover letter nor invoice explicitly
state that, so I'll make sure we change them to be clear that this is
only provided for the convenience of those who wish to renew. As I
said, we're not in business to trick or fool anyone.

Thanks for your thoughts on this.

Doug

Re: Watch for a fake bill by dhennig

dhennig
Wed Aug 04 10:49:57 CDT 2004

Hi Neil.

> I've heard enough good news about Stonefield to believe you're ethical, and
> can understand your exception to some of the terms Alex used, but at least
> you could consider rewording your material.

After reviewing this, I've decided we'll make the material more clear
that it's only provided for the convenience of those who wish to renew
their subscription. Perhaps changing "Invoice" to "Order Form" will
make it clearer.

Doug

Re: Watch for a fake bill by Ook

Ook
Wed Aug 04 12:29:22 CDT 2004


"Doug Hennig" <dhennig@stonefield.com> wrote in message
news:b7f3eb69.0408040749.3f7378f1@posting.google.com...
> Hi Neil.
>
> > I've heard enough good news about Stonefield to believe you're ethical,
and
> > can understand your exception to some of the terms Alex used, but at
least
> > you could consider rewording your material.
>
> After reviewing this, I've decided we'll make the material more clear
> that it's only provided for the convenience of those who wish to renew
> their subscription. Perhaps changing "Invoice" to "Order Form" will
> make it clearer.
>
> Doug

An "invoice" is basically "A detailed list of goods shipped or services
rendered, with an account of all costs; an itemized bill.". An invoice means
that you want money for goods or services already shipped or rendered. I've
had web marketing companies send me "invoices" for services that I had not
ordered or received, but their intent was to make it appear that I had and
that the invoice they were sending me was for an amount owed. Sending an
Invoice for something that was not even ordered is an extremely bad idea.
Changing it to "Order Form" is a very good idea.



Re: Watch for a fake bill by Alex

Alex
Wed Aug 04 13:04:42 CDT 2004

Thank you for reconsidering that and listening to the feedback. It's very
decent of you and shows that you respect your customers - even when they
start out a little hot-headed like I did. I think you're right on that
"Order Form" is a very good solution to the issue.



"Doug Hennig" <dhennig@stonefield.com> wrote in message
news:b7f3eb69.0408040749.3f7378f1@posting.google.com...
> Hi Neil.
>
> > I've heard enough good news about Stonefield to believe you're ethical,
and
> > can understand your exception to some of the terms Alex used, but at
least
> > you could consider rewording your material.
>
> After reviewing this, I've decided we'll make the material more clear
> that it's only provided for the convenience of those who wish to renew
> their subscription. Perhaps changing "Invoice" to "Order Form" will
> make it clearer.
>
> Doug