Tint World Names Jacob Eisenberg As Director Of Marketing

first_imgDeMoulpied comes to LSI from the Private Client Services practice of Ernst & Young where he managed strategy & operations improvement engagements for privately held client businesses. Some of his prior roles include VP of strategic development, director of strategic initiatives, and Lean Six Sigma Master Black Belt at OptumHealth, UnitedHealth Group’s health services business, as well as Lean Six Sigma Black Belt at General Electric, where he applied operations improvement principles to customer service, supply chain and product development. A successful entrepreneur, deMoulpied is also the founder of PrestoFresh, a Cleveland-based e-commerce food/grocery business.  AdvertisementClick Here to Read MoreAdvertisementTint World Automotive Styling Centers has named Jacob Eisenberg as director of marketing, where he will provide the company’s more than 60 global franchise locations with marketing and advertising support.Eisenberg brings more than 15 years of marketing experience and a solid background working with clients in the auto industry to his new role at Tint World.“Jacob has the background and knowledge of the automotive industry to help our store owners grow their business,” said Charles Bonfiglio, president and CEO of Tint World. “We’ve always been proud of the fact that our Tint World franchisees have the best marketing and advertising support possible. His wide range of experience will ensure that we continue leading the industry.”Graduating from Florida Atlantic University, Eisenberg holds Bachelor of Science degrees in both marketing and business management. Prior to joining Tint World, he served as president of Reco Advertising, which he founded. He also has worked in the affiliate marketing, insurance and sub-prime/prime lending verticals.“This is an exciting opportunity to work with an incredible brand and all of our individual store owners,” Eisenberg said. “My role is to support the franchisees and the overall Tint World brand. I want to ensure that the Tint World family grows together.”,Lubrication Specialties Inc. (LSI), manufacturer of Hot Shot’s Secret brand of performance additives and oils, recently announced the expansion of senior leadership. Steve deMoulpied joins LSI as the company’s chief operating officer (COO). AdvertisementClick Here to Read MoreAdvertisement With more than 20 years of experience across multiple industries and functional areas, deMoulpied has particular expertise in organizations with complex technical products. Combined, his prior positions have required a spectrum of skills in corporate strategy, operations improvement, product quality, and revenue cycle management. He has an impressive history of utilizing data driven problem solving (Lean Six Sigma) and project management (PMP and CSM) to achieve strategic goals surrounding customer satisfaction, operational efficiency and improved profit.  DeMoulpied has a Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering Management from the United States Air Force Academy and a Master of Business Administration degree from the University of Dayton in Marketing and International Business. He served six years with the USAF overseeing the development of technology used on fighter aircraft and the E-3 Surveillance aircraft, finishing his career honorably as Captain. LSI President Brett Tennar says, “Steve’s success in developing operational strategies that improves the bottom line, builds teamwork, reduces waste and ensures quality product development and distribution checks many of the boxes of what we were looking for in a COO. This, coupled with his career in the Air Force working with highly technical systems and his in-depth understanding of Lean Six Sigma and Business Process Management sealed our offer. As our tagline states, our products are Powered by Science. This data driven approach is one reason why our company has grown exponentially as we employ the most advanced technology to product development. I am confident that Steve is the right person to drive operational strategy for our diverse and growing brands.” Advertisementlast_img read more

Failing to investigate complaints can cost thousands

first_img Service improvements When it does not add up High cost of administration Mr A’s Dad died. He and his brothers then sold their father’s property. They asked a solicitor to help them set out their interests and those of their mother in the property – this was done in a statement of account. After some time, Mr A and his brothers realised that it was incorrect. The reason they found out was that the consequence of this error was that they had underpaid their capital gains tax and incurred penalties and interest from HMRC. Mr A wrote to the firm on several occasions to complain about what had happened. His correspondence went ignored. Mr A and his brothers were needing to spend a lot of time and effort trying to sort the tax issue out – and the final tax position of one of the brothers was still not finalised. It would have helped to have been able to talk to the solicitor to get an exact handle on what had (or had not) been done. To try and sort out this issue once and for all, Mr A instructed a new solicitor, who made a complaint to the firm on his behalf. They received a brief acknowledgement of the complaint and a note stating that the matter had been referred to the first firm’s insurers. Both Mr A and the second firm sent more letters asking for more information, but did not get a response. Not knowing what to do next, Mr A made a complaint to the Legal Ombudsman. After our investigation, which the firm was involved in, we found that there had been poor service. The firm agreed that it did not respond to the complaint and this was because of human error – its systems just hadn’t worked. The firm agreed to send out a comprehensive reply to Mr A as a resolution of this complaint and to chase its insurers. Both parties were informed that a new complaint could be made if Mr A felt his original issue had not been addressed in the letter sent by the firm. To date, we have not heard from Mr A regarding this issue, as the firm was now working to resolve the outstanding issues. Mrs H employed a solicitor to sell her property in July. In October 2010, she complained to her solicitor after her bank had contacted her to advise that the mortgage on the sold property had not been redeemed. Mrs H complained to the firm because it had failed to redeem the mortgage and she felt that it had not finished the work she had paid it to do. The firm was slow to respond to her complaint. She told us that she was also unhappy that the solicitors did not appear to have a proper complaints procedure in place. As she was having no joy with the firm, Mrs H decided to complain to the Legal Ombudsman. Following our investigation, the firm admitted that Mrs H’s complaint had not been forwarded to its complaints-handling partner owing to an administrative error. But it did tell us that it was keen to resolve all of her issues. To try and put things right, the firm offered Mrs H £250 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience its mistakes had caused her, as well as a refund of £450 for fees she had already paid. Mrs H was pleased with this offer and accepted it. Mrs G was buying a new house. Three years ago, she employed a solicitor to carry out the conveyancing on her new home. Part of what she wanted them to do was to register the property under her name. Time passed. Mrs G was living happily in her new home. Then Mrs G received a letter from HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) which said that she owed over £29,000 in outstanding stamp duty. Mrs G looked into this and discovered that her property had not been registered properly. Mrs G contacted the firm to find out why her property had not been registered. She told us that she tried many times but no one in the firm gave her a satisfactory answer. In addition, the firm could not provide her with proof that it had attempted to register the property. Mrs G then made a formal complaint to the firm. She did not hear anything from it. Distressed and upset at the large bill from HMRC, Mrs G contacted LeO with her complaint. We looked into what had happened – it turned out that Mrs G’s solicitor had sent a cheque to HMRC and this had been cashed. But the property had not been correctly registered to Mrs G, so HMRC records were showing that there was money owing. What was most puzzling was that, given the mistake was within HMRC, why the firm had not looked into this and explained it earlier, especially when it had the chance using its in-house complaints procedure. As a result of our involvement, the firm agreed to correctly register the property and pay any outstanding stamp duty. It also offered Mrs G £1,000 as a goodwill gesture given how upset she was because of this mistake. Mrs G told us that she was happy with this outcome.center_img Our business is complaints. Yet I suspect that I was not the only one who spent a fair amount of time poring over the picture revealed by the Legal Services Board’s research into the way lawyers deal with complaints. To be sure, there are areas where the methodology has some quirks (it is ­difficult to understand how respondents were meant to express a view about the work of the Legal Ombudsman prior to our actual opening). But to dismiss the general finding that the customer experience of complaining about their legal service is still very patchy, as I have heard some do, is to ignore the truth. I am probably in a better position to know this than most. With up to 100,000 complainants contacting us a year, we get a pretty good picture of what is going on in the legal world. Admittedly, we only see a small sample of users of legal services and, by definition, the ones we do see are unhappy. But every one we do see has already – or all too often should have already – engaged with the firm’s complaints process. And, with some honourable exceptions, most of those calls we receive ­represent an expression of failure. Perhaps some of this failure is inevitable. For people offering a service which their customers do not properly understand in an area where there can be no certainties of outcome, complaints will always be a fact of life. No matter what a lawyer tries to do to explain to some clients why things happen as they do, there will be some who will simply be unwilling, or unable, to accept it. However, if complaints are inevitable, complaints-handling failures are not. Each of the 40,000 or so people who come to us each year to raise a complaint, but who have not yet complained to their lawyers, represents a complaints-handling failure. These are solicitors’ customers and firms are under an obligation to explain to them how to complain if they are not satisfied with the service provided. That is not simply a matter of including a passive sentence at the bottom of a five-page client engagement letter. As the Legal Services Board research illustrated, there are many consumers who will be so in awe of solicitors that they will take some convincing that you are serious about wanting them to raise any issues they have with the service you have given them. But I am not really that exercised about the number of complainants we have to send back to solicitors to make their complaints (usually accompanied by a quick email to the firm from the ombudsman alerting them that a complaint is on the way). All professions face the same issue. And an ombudsman spends most of their time redirecting complainants back to their service provider. The cases that worry me are where complainants have already raised their complaints with firms but where LeO investigations reveal clear evidence of poor service. I would like to give some examples. A taxing situation Mr X went to court for a family law matter. After the final outcome of his case, Mr H did not feel that his case had been conducted very well so he made a formal complaint both to his solicitor and barrister. After a couple of months, Mr X had not had a response to his complaint, despite pursuing the matter over the telephone. He had been promised a response, but was advised that there was an administrative delay; Mr X was frustrated with this reply. Mr X complained to the Legal Ombudsman about the way his lawyers had conducted his case and the fact that his complaint had gone unanswered. When we looked into this complaint, we decided that the issue was not the way in which the cases had been conducted; rather, there was a service issue concerning the way Mr X’s formal complaint was handled. After speaking with the firm, it admitted that it had delayed in responding to Mr X’s complaint and agreed that it would provide a proper, substantive response as well as sending a formal apology. The firm also provided us with evidence that our investigation had led to it amending and improving its internal complaints procedure to prevent future failures of this nature. While Mr X was not happy that we could not look at his other complaints, he was advised that he could seek independent legal action if he so wished. Mr X told us that he was happy that the issue surrounding his other complaint had been dealt with and he no longer wished to pursue this any further. What these cases illustrate is the sheer cost to firms of failures in their complaints-handling systems. Forget the value of the remedies which they had to pay as the result of our intervention or the embarrassment of being criticised by us. The cost of the billable hours wasted in having to respond to our enquiries and comment on our reports alone probably exceeded the profit on the transactions that gave rise to the initial ­complaints. A slicker, more reliable complaints-handling process in the first place would have saved these firms thousands. There is a degree of self-interest in this. One of the things that I have made a priority is to try to run an efficient, streamlined and high-value operation. In these days of austerity, with the profession facing cuts in legal aid and competition from new corporate entrants into the legal market, the last thing you want to pay for is an expensive and inefficient second-tier complaints-handling operation. So we have a choice. I can run an organisation that spends its time settling tens of thousands of simple complaints, which could easily have been resolved at a local level, all at the expense of the profession. Or, I could run a smaller, faster and cheaper operation which spends its time reviewing complaints files assembled at the local level and arbitrating on the most difficult, complex or intractable cases. I know which one I’d prefer. A monthly column featuring practical advice and anonymised case ­studies from chief ombudsman Adam Sampson and his teamlast_img read more

Ajuy ‘kap’ dies in road mishap

first_imgHe was on his way home when the accident happened around 10:40 a.m. on Sept. 11, the report stated. ILOILO City – He lost control of the motorcycle he was driving in Barangay Malayu-an, Ajuy, Iloilo, police said. Eugene Tupas, a village head of Barangay Bay-ang, Ajuy, sustained fatal injuries on the head, a police report showed.center_img Tupas was rushed to the Barotac Viejo District Hospital but the attending physician pronounced him “dead on arrival.”/PNlast_img

2 Ebola Cases Left

first_imgThe Liberian government has announced that it has just two remaining cases of Ebola in the country, indicating that it is close to zero case and the total eradication of the deadly virus from Liberia.  Making the disclosure over the weekend at the Ministry of Information, Cultural Affairs and Tourism on Capitol Hill, Deputy Minister Isaac Jackson said Montserrado County had maintained seven consecutive days without any new Ebola case, while Liberia is accounting for 16 suspected cases, describing this as further progress for the country. “Liberia [has made] strong progress in the fight against the deadly Ebola virus because communities have been very robust in ensuring that this disease is contained,” Isaac Jackson declared.  He continued: “The two confirmed Ebola cases are in Montserrado County, including most of the suspected cases. The issue of contact tracing is also in Montserrado and Cape Mount, which the Incident Management System and partners continue to work on,” Mr. Jackson added. He further disclosed that Grand Cape Mount County, which was recently hit again by the Ebola virus, has not reported a single case for the past 43 days.According to Minister Jackson, Liberia is in search of 116 contacts in the entire country.Meanwhile, the head of the Incident Management System (IMS), Mr. Tolbert Nyenswah, has assured the government that the people of Liberia will soon be Ebola-free, considering the positive update throughout the country. Dr. Jerry Brown, who is Co-principal Coordinator of the Ebola trial vaccines, has disclosed that the clinical trial of the Zmapp vaccine in Liberia has begun with 1,000 persons targeted. “A full-scale clinical trial of the experimental Ebola drug Zmapp commenced at the ELWA-II Ebola Treatment Unit (ETU) in Monrovia Friday,” said Dr. Brown, adding that the process is a partnership between the Liberian government and the U.S. National Institutes of Health to find a cure for the Ebola virus. Brown explained that the trial is intended to find a perfect cure for Ebola, as well as authenticate whether, if administered alone, the Zmapp drug can heal an Ebola patient.  He recounted that during the height of the Ebola crisis, nine persons worldwide received emergency doses of the drug and six of them survived.  Dr. Brown, who is also the lead doctor at the ELWA ETU-II, pointed out that people who test negative for the Ebola virus or those who have taken an Ebola trial vaccine and experimental anti-Ebola drugs, will not be eligible for the Zmapp trial.Finding a cure for the Ebola virus remains a cardinal concern of Liberians and the world at large and as such the clinical trial will be done professionally and in accordance with internationally accepted standards, Dr. Brown assured.  “Only a person confirmed to be infected with the Ebola virus is qualified to take part in the trial of Zmapp. The first trial test was under emergency and cannot be counted due to other supportive drugs or medicines that were also given along with a Zmapp to Ebola patients,” he explained.  Dr. Brown said if Liberia cannot get the targeted number of one thousand persons for the Zmapp trial vaccine, it will be extended to Guinea and Sierra Leone to help ensure that Ebola has a vaccine.Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)last_img read more