'madrelabs'에 해당되는 글 1건

  1. 2015.01.28 Madre Labs, problematic toner & ill-mannered customer service 28

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(product in problem : Witch Hazel Toner, unscented, non-alcohol.)

 

 

 

 

This is (hopefully) to be my final posting on Madre Labs. I just want to have the related facts listed here for my future reference, after which I shall stop bothering myself with the issue. I find it unrewarding to communicate with a brand which will not face the problem straight out. These people need to understand what customer claim really means, that it is they who need to make the effort and communicate, instead of sending back (may I say) improper replies.

 

My husband said that he fully is ready to communicate as far as it gets with the brand (customer center, chemist in charge, or whoever) but that, I will think it over. I mean, come on, we're dealing with a brand which is not even officially on sales in Korea (and which will continue to remain that way in the future...) and I don't feel like wasting effort in talking them out. But I would very much like to share my not-so-pleasant experience with whoever happens to read this posting.

 

Anyway, to save myself the trouble of jotting down every detail, I will list the emails that I have exchanged so far with Madre Labs customer center and add a quick view summary at the head. Summaries will be boxed in blue, and I may thrust in my comments in between lines, which I will mark in red.

 

 

 

 

<MYSELF : 26 Jan.>

 

Summary :

- Disputed material was not glass fiber, but not aloe percipitate either.

- It was benzoic acid crystal, which should not exist in the product, if according to the stated formula.

(For more detailed explanations : http://msds.tistory.com/43)

- Demand for a thorough quality check-up on product and proof that given problem has been improved

 

 

 

Full Text :

 

Thanks for your response.
 
After sending my email below, I had the substance tested.
Below are the result :
 
The fiber-looking material was not glass fiber, fortunately,
but was certainly not aloe percipitate as you claimed.
 
It was BENZOIC ACID CRYSTAL
which, again, should not exist in the given product
and is harmful for human use (especially to the eye)
 
No real harm done for me,
as I only used the product once
and iHerb said that they would immedately process a refund.
 
(I contacted iHerb's customer center, got a reply, thanked them for the swift refund,
and also demanded that they select their listed products more selectively in the future
as I had reasons to believe that the toner in problem should not be available in sales.)
 
Likewise,
I request that you implement a thorough check-up on (1) the formulation of your product and (2) the manufacturing process.
I also advise you to hold off the sales of the disputed product, until YOU can prove that its formula problem has been improved.
 
I have raised the issue as product purchaser and even processed a fully certified chemical test to find out the actual truth.
My preliminary guess on glass fiber was unfounded and I hereby rectify it.
 
Now, it is your responsibility as manufacturer to amend the problems.
I'll be looking forward to receiving your feedback on after-measures.

 

 

 

 

<Madre Labs : 26 Jan.>

 

Summary :

- We replied within 24 hours, so why did you share the issue with others.

- Have you read the ingredients? We have sodum benzoate included in formua, as preservative.

- (and the email included a list of questions. Let me quote a few of them. "Do we instruct peopel to use our toner in their eyes?" or "Why do you dislike our product?" or... I could go on. One really needs to see the full text to grasp the tone, which is why I have attached the entire email below.)

 

 

 

Full text :

 

Thank you for your email.
Our apologies but we are confused as you sent us an email on 1/26/2015 and claimed glass fibers were in our toner.  You stated you shared this info with many people.  We responded and within less than 24 hours you now claim the product contains Benzoic Acid Crystals. 
 
Have you read the list of our ingredients?  Please see below:
 
Purified water (aqua), rosa damascena (rose) oil extract, aloe barbadensis (aloe vera) leaf juice*, hamamelis virginiana (witch hazel) extract*, gluconolactone¹, sodium benzoate², glycerin*, citrus grandis (grapefruit) seed extract, citric acid.

 

(My notes : Sodium benzoate is legitimately used in the formula as preservative and it is not this substance that we called into question. It is benzoic acid crystal, which we presume was produced due to unforeseen chemical reaction, and it was this by-product which I claim poses potential dangers to the user. I did not once suggest that ML may not use a preservative system. Do stick to the point, guys.)

 

  1. Do you see that we use Sodium Benzoate in our formula? 
  2. Are you aware that Sodium Benzoate is used as a preservative and is considered GRAS?
  3. Are you aware that we need to use a preservative system?
  4. Who conducted your testing in less than one day?
  5. Can you provide the name of the Lab and the test methods?
  6. Why would you test our product without waiting for our reply?
  7. What did your test results find?  (It looks like your lab found that our toner did indeed contain Sodium Benzoate.)
  8. Do we instruct people to use our toner in their eyes or do we instruct them to ' Avoid Contact With Eyes '?
  9. There is nothing wrong with our formula and it is safe to use, in fact many of our customers love our toners.
  10. Why do you dislike our product?
  11. Why are you claiming that the product is not safe for topical use?  Please qualify your claims.
  12. Why should we hold off on sales?
  13. What problems do we need to amend? 
 We look forward to your detailed reply.
 
Thanks,
Customer Support

 

 

 

Additional email :

 

After looking at your blog, you may also want to have your husband analyze the competitive brand's ' Alcohol Free ' Witch Hazel Toner that you mention.
 
Ask him how an Alcohol-Free product with the 1st ingredient being ' Water ' can be Free of a Preservative System.  How would microbes be controlled in a product like this?  Please be aware that Grapefruit Seed Extract is not a natural preservative.

 

(My notes : Wow, they're asking a lot, for a brand which won't do much in return.)

 
Please get back to us with this info also as we are interested in your response.
 
Thanks,
Customer Support
 

 

 

 

<MYSELF : 27 Jan.>

 

 

Summary :

- As customer, I reported suspicions, which I am entitled to share with others.

- Once the customer files a quality complaint, the burden of proof should be upon the manufacturer, ML in this case.

- ML's initial email showed no signs that it will implement a proper test.

- As for the other questions, I will hold my answers as I find them inappropriate (and rude.)


 

 

Full text :

 

Hi,
Here's my response.
 
One :
I said I found substances "suspected of being glass fiber" but I most certainly added that in-depth lab test was needed.
Let me remind you (and it is absurd that I should even do this) that I have the right as customer to suggest allegations and demand for explanations, based upon these unfounded circumstances.
Things would have been different if I had "confirmed" the material to be glass fiber but I said that it "looked close enough and further test was needed." Now I would like to have one decent reason why I should not be able to share such allegations, either with iHerb, with my blog readers, or any of my acquaintances. I find it inconvenient and out of place that you should accuse me of sharing my observations with others, especially as my statement was not final and therefore not false.
 
Two :
Once the customer files a complaint on the quality of the product, the burden of proof should be upon the manufacturer, to find out the cause of the problem or to make the customer understand that there is indeed nothing wrong with the product.
Though it wasn't up to me to prove, I took the trouble of having the material tested, and I gave you the back-up facts. (which you didn't at all in your initial email.)
In your email, question No. 6, you ask "why I tested the product without waiting for your reply," but your reply had absolutely no answer to my problems, nor did it imply that you will make any efforts of the sort. You just said that the material was aloe-based. The test took place right after I received your initial email. Once I saw how you pushed me for answers, without offering me a single reason to believe your claim, I decided it would be better if I suggested any tangible result myself. (By the way, the test would not even have taken place if your email had not been so rude and pushy...)
 
Three :
As for other aggressive questions that you listed, I shall hold my answers. For example, "Why do you dislike our product?" This question is based on your (frustrated, it seems to me) presumption that I am going through all this trouble simply because I "don't like Madre Labs." I have suggested in sufficient details that I have found plausible quality faults in the product and I have so far obtained no rational explanation from you, but just accusations.
 
To be honest, I do not even have the desire to speak further with a brand which is facing the matter straight out and which just keeps accusing the customer for bringing up a problem. So, I first watch and see how you respond to my complaints in this email and then decide whether or not to communicate more on the lab information and other things that you asked.
 
I'll be waiting for your reply.

 

(My notes : I tried, oh man did I try, to remain as polite and reasonable as I could.) 

 

 

 

 

<Madre Labs : 27 Jan.>

 

Summary :

They decided to jot in their replies in between, adding up to my previous email.

 

 

Full text :

 

Hi,
Here's my response.
 
One :
I said I found substances "suspected of being glass fiber" but I most certainly added that in-depth lab test was needed.
 
We explained to you that our product did not contain glass fibers.  We have produced/sold 10's of thousands of our toners and this is the 1st time we have seen or heard of anything like this. 
 
We are aware and have always been aware that our toners did have Aloe precipitate present.  This is normal and cannot be avoided.  A gentle shake gets it back into solution.
 
  1. Would it be fair for us to want to conduct our own in-depth lab analysis with your bottle of product and the crystals seen in your pictures?
 
You Stated: 
"You will find the details below, on my blog :
I have already shared the problem in Korean with many others.
Hope to hear your explanation and planned actions ASAP."
 
  1. How quickly do you think we could investigate your claim?
  2. Don't you think we would need to see your actual bottle of toner to investigate this properly?
 
 
Let me remind you (and it is absurd that I should even do this) that I have the right as customer to suggest allegations and demand for explanations, based upon these unfounded circumstances.
 
 
  1. Did we once say that you could not ask questions and have genuine concerns?
  2. Are we not allowed to ask questions to get clarification or should we not respond?
  3. Why do you have to 'demand '?  Why not just ask and await our reply?
  4. Why not work with us so we can better assist?
 
 
Things would have been different if I had "confirmed" the material to be glass fiber but I said that it "looked close enough and further test was needed." Now I would like to have one decent reason why I should not be able to share such allegations, either with iHerb, with my blog readers, or any of my acquaintances. I find it inconvenient and out of place that you should accuse me of sharing my observations with others, especially as my statement was not final and therefore not false.
 
You are free to do as you want, but we feel it is fair/reasonable to 1st contact the manufacturer and allow them to investigate any and all issues.
 
You mentioned a competitive brand and you actually recommend it over our product.  We asked some simple questions about that branded product...we hope you will answer.
 
We asked:
  1. Ask him how an Alcohol-Free product with the 1st ingredient being ' Water ' can be Free of a Preservative System? 
  2. How would microbes be controlled in a product like this? 
We stated:
  1. Please be aware that Grapefruit Seed Extract is not a natural preservative.
  1. How is this competitive product so crystal clear?
Nine times out of 10 natural/organic-type ingredients impart color to a product like this unless the majority of ingredients are used in very small %'s. 
 
We do not do this.  Is it possible others do? 
 
 
 
Two :
Once the customer files a complaint on the quality of the product, the burden of proof should be upon the manufacturer, to find out the cause of the problem or to make the customer understand that there is indeed nothing wrong with the product.
Though it wasn't up to me to prove, I took the trouble of having the material tested, and I gave you the back-up facts. (which you didn't at all in your initial email.)
 
  1. How quickly do you think a typical investigation takes, especially when dealing with an overseas (you mention Korea so we assume you are in Korea) customer? 
  2. What do you think is a fair amount of time?
 
You stated:
It was BENZOIC ACID CRYSTAL
which, again, should not exist in the given product
and is harmful for human use (especially to the eye)
 
Please qualify this statement as the Sodium Benzoate we use in our formula is a safe preservative with GRAS status and it is necessary to our formula.  It is part of our preservative system.  Our Alcohol-free Toners need a preservative system as they contain water.  We need to control microbial growth. 
 
You stated:
' I have raised the issue as product purchaser and even processed a fully certified chemical test to find out the actual truth.'
 
  1. Please share the ' fully certified chemical test ' for our review. 
  2. Who ' fully certified ' your testing?
 
We would like to share this  ' fully certified chemical test ' with our chemist.
 
We do not recommend that people use our facial toner in their eyes.  We ask them to avoid getting our toners in their eyes.
 
In your email, question No. 6, you ask "why I tested the product without waiting for your reply," but your reply had absolutely no answer to my problems, nor did it imply that you will make any efforts of the sort. You just said that the material was aloe-based. The test took place right after I received your initial email. Once I saw how you pushed me for answers, without offering me a single reason to believe your claim, I decided it would be better if I suggested any tangible result myself. (By the way, the test would not even have taken place if your email had not been so rude and pushy...)
 
How was our email ' so rude and pushy... '
 
We answered your questions to the best of our ability.  The answers were truthful an accurate.
 
  1. How can we truly investigate something without having the product to inspect?
 
 
 
Three :
As for other aggressive questions that you listed, I shall hold my answers. For example, "Why do you dislike our product?" This question is based on your (frustrated, it seems to me) presumption that I am going through all this trouble simply because I "don't like Madre Labs." I have suggested in sufficient details that I have found plausible quality faults in the product and I have so far obtained no rational explanation from you, but just accusations.
 
Why are our questions designated as ' aggressive '?
 
Your emails and your blog posts are not ' pro ' Madre Labs.  Are we incorrect with our interpretation?
 
 
To be honest, I do not even have the desire to speak further with a brand which is facing the matter straight out and which just keeps accusing the customer for bringing up a problem. So, I first watch and see how you respond to my complaints in this email and then decide whether or not to communicate more on the lab information and other things that you asked.
 
We do not understand what you are stating here.  Our apologies. 
 

 

 

(My notes : They claim to have been accurate and truthful, and they deny the aggressiveness. Well... Let me put it this way. That's why I am listing all the emails here without a single correction. The judgment is each person's to make.)

 

 

 

 

<Madre Labs : 28 Jan.>

 

Summary :

- We have passed on the issue to our chemist.

- Can you ship the product to the U.S. for review?

- and the fully certified chemical test? and the related info?.

 

 

Full text :

 

How are you?
We have forwarded all of your emails and blog info to our Chemist.
We would like to continue with our investigation.
Can you please ship the product back to the United States for our review and testing?
Our Chemist would like to review a copy of your ' fully certified chemical test ' results.  Can you please include the name of the Testing Lab & Test Methods used?
Will you be responding to our email that was sent to you on 1/27/2015 at 3:58am (California Time)?
Please get back to us at your earliest possible convenience as we would like to determine why this has happened to your bottle of Toner.
We look forward to your prompt reply.
 
Thanks,
Customer Support

 

 

 

 

(My notes : Buh bye, now. I just hope that Google's search engine finds this intriguing and classifies this as a priority. BTW, my last posting would pop up on the first page, when one types in Madre Labs on Google. That posting is title "suspected glass fiber," which I would have corrected after the last test result but I admit, I no longer feel the need to.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
 «이전 1  다음»