- Report: #149098
Complaint Review: McKenzxie Scott - Personal Marketing Services - Nationwide
-
Author Confirmed
Why?
McKenzxie Scott - Personal Marketing Services
7979 East Tufts Avenue Parkway Nationwide, U.S.A.
Web:
N/A
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
McKenzxie Scott - Personal Career Transition Services Ripoff Deceptive practices, misrepresentation of product, services & results. Smooth operators, believe nothing they say. Roseland New Jersey Internet
One of the cruelest scams and group of scam artists. Out of work for 2 years, they promised me I would be employed within 8-10 weeks, provided I contract for the elite, $8500 service. A lesser fee was available, but the recruiter claimed that the services provided would be so reduced that I would be fortunate to secure employment within 9-12 months. To every concern I expressed, the recruiter (calling himself my advocate) said to trust him, trust McKS: they had only my best welfare inn mind.
I was promised a considerable range of services to be provided by a crack team of experts within three weeks. The promise made repeatedly during recruitment was that every penny would be refunded at the conclusion of phase 1 which included a meeting with the entire 5-person team; preparation of 2 resumes and an executive C biography; and a wide variety of cover and follow-up letters. After I had a chance to review and edit or comment on these, the final products would be handed to me within three weeks of signing the contract.
Tied to delivery of the above products and to a time frame, phase 1 had to be extended due to illness (my own and the team leader's). At that point, when McKS had to extend phase 1 to accommodate loss of time due to circumstances no one could control, I checked with my team manager and recruiter/advocate about the contract and a penalty I might have to pay as a result of the time extension. I was told not to worry: the contract would be adjusted to accommodate the required change in timeframe and, therefore, the 100% refund period.
However, it became clear immediately, that the main office held firm to the contract-stipulated 3-weeks. The etended delivery period was not in accordance with the contract as signed, even though the Roseland management formally sanctioned the extension. My team manager informed me that the 3 weeks between signing and delivery of materials remained McKS's critical factor in handling fees. She added that, once a contract was signed, she had never heard of anyone receiving any portion of their fee no matter the circumstances. She also laughed when I asked how the time delay would affect my 8-week job goal: it was not she at all likely that I would ever secure a job through McKenzie Scott's services.
During the brief weeks of my campaign, my campaign team leader was generally unavailable: she did not return calls or emails. When she left the firm, no one informed me, thus causing further delay. At this point, the factor for a refund suddenly changed from delivery of promised search materials to the phase 1 3-week period in spite of the extension allowed resulting from illnesses. Nor was she supportive. When I asked for the executive C-biography as promised, she dismissed it as unnecessary: I was not executive level.
When I questioned this unannounced shift in policy, I was told to trust McKenzie Scott: I would not need to request a refund once I got a job. At this point, my campaign was 4 weeks behind schedule; McKenzie Scott was scrambling to find a new campaign manager; and none of the 4900 letters sent, or 250 on-line job sites, or 200 employment agencies and headhunters contacted, and, in fact, I had only two resumes.
I did find a new position, but on my own and without using the one thing they did deliver: a resume. At this point, I requested termination of the association and requested the whole of my fee be returned or, at the least, 90%. That seemed to me a generous fee for 2 resumes. I was informed that only 35% was refundable.
I challenged McKenzie Scott's fee, placing a claim against my payment. After chastising me for breach of faith and his severe disappointment in me, the East coast senior Administrator in Roseland, NJ, prepared an unctuous rebuttal. In spite of McKenzie Scott's original time extension and the fact that they failed to deliver the services prerequisite to a full refund, I now own the two most expensive resumes in this state, if not the country.
McKenzie Scott is slick. They say one thing and are superbly adept at switching policy, players, and product promises in mid-stream. Policies, promises, time-based schedules and all recruitment promises per the contract were set aside in order to assure their full fee.
AVOID, AVOID, AVOID THIS COMPANY. They have one interest only: money.
Debra M.
Egg Harbor City, New Jersey
U.S.A.
Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on McKenzie Scott
I was promised a considerable range of services to be provided by a crack team of experts within three weeks. The promise made repeatedly during recruitment was that every penny would be refunded at the conclusion of phase 1 which included a meeting with the entire 5-person team; preparation of 2 resumes and an executive C biography; and a wide variety of cover and follow-up letters. After I had a chance to review and edit or comment on these, the final products would be handed to me within three weeks of signing the contract.
Tied to delivery of the above products and to a time frame, phase 1 had to be extended due to illness (my own and the team leader's). At that point, when McKS had to extend phase 1 to accommodate loss of time due to circumstances no one could control, I checked with my team manager and recruiter/advocate about the contract and a penalty I might have to pay as a result of the time extension. I was told not to worry: the contract would be adjusted to accommodate the required change in timeframe and, therefore, the 100% refund period.
However, it became clear immediately, that the main office held firm to the contract-stipulated 3-weeks. The etended delivery period was not in accordance with the contract as signed, even though the Roseland management formally sanctioned the extension. My team manager informed me that the 3 weeks between signing and delivery of materials remained McKS's critical factor in handling fees. She added that, once a contract was signed, she had never heard of anyone receiving any portion of their fee no matter the circumstances. She also laughed when I asked how the time delay would affect my 8-week job goal: it was not she at all likely that I would ever secure a job through McKenzie Scott's services.
During the brief weeks of my campaign, my campaign team leader was generally unavailable: she did not return calls or emails. When she left the firm, no one informed me, thus causing further delay. At this point, the factor for a refund suddenly changed from delivery of promised search materials to the phase 1 3-week period in spite of the extension allowed resulting from illnesses. Nor was she supportive. When I asked for the executive C-biography as promised, she dismissed it as unnecessary: I was not executive level.
When I questioned this unannounced shift in policy, I was told to trust McKenzie Scott: I would not need to request a refund once I got a job. At this point, my campaign was 4 weeks behind schedule; McKenzie Scott was scrambling to find a new campaign manager; and none of the 4900 letters sent, or 250 on-line job sites, or 200 employment agencies and headhunters contacted, and, in fact, I had only two resumes.
I did find a new position, but on my own and without using the one thing they did deliver: a resume. At this point, I requested termination of the association and requested the whole of my fee be returned or, at the least, 90%. That seemed to me a generous fee for 2 resumes. I was informed that only 35% was refundable.
I challenged McKenzie Scott's fee, placing a claim against my payment. After chastising me for breach of faith and his severe disappointment in me, the East coast senior Administrator in Roseland, NJ, prepared an unctuous rebuttal. In spite of McKenzie Scott's original time extension and the fact that they failed to deliver the services prerequisite to a full refund, I now own the two most expensive resumes in this state, if not the country.
McKenzie Scott is slick. They say one thing and are superbly adept at switching policy, players, and product promises in mid-stream. Policies, promises, time-based schedules and all recruitment promises per the contract were set aside in order to assure their full fee.
AVOID, AVOID, AVOID THIS COMPANY. They have one interest only: money.
Debra M.
Egg Harbor City, New Jersey
U.S.A.
Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on McKenzie Scott
