We’re in this together! Stay safe with our COVID-19 guide

View
×
Developed in part with a grant from
the National Science Foundation

Pamela R.

  • 2 Reviews
  • 3 Helpful Votes
  • 0 Thank Yous

Experience: Law & Government

Member since February 2017

  • Reviews

    2

  • First Review

    1

  • Thank Yous

    0

  • Fans

    0

  • Profile Views

    174

Review Distribution

2 Reviews by Pamela

2/22/20
I have a tiny dog and ,especially when her BG is very high, I just can't draw enough blood to activate the Alpha Track glucose reader. I saw the Vet-tab No-stick saliva test and thought, that's what I need. The perfect solution. If I had a larger dog with plenty of room and saliva in his cheek, I might not have looked further into how these test strips work- AND how they DON'T work- until I was able to compare the results against the vet's glucose tests. My dogs cheek was too small and dry. I had a hell of a time holding that test strip (with the very sharp corners) in her cheek without cutting her. I collected enough saliva to turn the test strip purple but it took forever. I think there was eve less saliva and it took me longer to collect it with my first actual tab test. It wasn't saturated enough and showed a very low reading. So I tried again a much easier way under her tongue, where there was plenty of saliva and collected instantly. That test showed a VERY high reading. I tested myself with a 3rd strip.
Quickly wet it with the saliva under my tongue. That also showed a VERY high reading. Almost identical to the dogs under tongue reading. What I discovered is the strips don't use a sophisticated set of chemicals that react to specific repeatable sets of circumstances (at least not circumstances that have anything to do with your actual BG levels). What reading you get depends on how much saliva you collect. Under-saturate and get a low reading. Over-saturate and the reading is high. Collect the correct amount of saliva on pad (whatever the correct amount is) and you might get something mid-range, maybe even accurate. Or you wait 30 seconds too long before phot scanning. Allowing the test pad to absorb saliva for too long- So you get another high reading. Glucose levels are NOT measured by the amount of saliva you can collect. Therefore, if both under and over-saturating control the outcome of the reading then the test does NOT - in fact - measure glucose. The test is invalid and the readings are completely unreliablable.
2/20/17
Forget that the information they supply is inaccurate, incomplete, and outdated The bulk of revenue this business takes in is literally STOLEN. As it comes from recurring transfers that the customer is unaware of and would never agree to. Their offer page goes way out of it's way to hide their true intentions and convince consumers it is exactly what it says it is. ONE Flat Payment For ONE Month, 3 Months, or 6 Months. Really simple right? None of that membership or free trial bullcrap! They should all offer this type of deal. Or so I thought.
When I get the confirmation email, it lists the transaction as recurring. WTF?
So I called customer service Why is this listed as recurring? I only needed the service for a few days. I did not and will not authorize recurring payments. I authorize ONLY the one payment already made.
I made it perfectly clear exactly what I did and did not wish to purchase.
Now im going over accounts for tax time and see that they went ahead and made recurring transfers anyway. 7 of them. I demanded they return my money and they reply «oh so SORRY you weren't PROPERLY ADVISED of our trial membership...» They are not in the least bit sorry, they actually COUNT on customers NOT being advised. Everything about their offerings of plans page is intentionally designed to hide this fact and they have every intention from the start to rip off as many people for as much as possible.
They have the nerve to say they are doing me a courtesy to return 3 of the 5 months stolen. They figure they stole it fair and square.
But they are wrong. NOthing is square, not even under scum bag scammer standards. Because I DID notice the «recurring transfer» in the confirmation email. Because I DID catch their scam before the second transfer was made. And I DID call them and UN-AUTHORIZE any future payments.
But they did it anyway. That puts them beneath the average variety of scum bag scammers.
What is BBB thinking accrediting this business? How on Earth can they give them an A+ rating? And Where did they find the 3 and a half stars from reviews that are 100% negative experience?

Pamela Has Earned 3 Votes

Pamela R.'s review of BackgroundAlert earned 3 Very Helpful votes

Pamela hasn’t received any thanks yous.

Pamela doesn’t have any fans yet.

Pamela isn’t following anybody yet.

Similar Reviewers on Sitejabber

lindat177
4/15/18

They told me I could get all the info I needed for 22.95 for 1 month. All they told me for that...

diannal6
6/20/17

Signed up for services on 06/16/17 @ aprx 1:12p - cancelled @ 3:43p. same day. Horribly...