Alex said, "IM chose to send users a letter indicating their intent to re-box proactively in the name of information security." 

In our case, the letter did not arrive until more than a month after we had already been invoiced for a number of re-boxing charges.  And, similar to others' experience, they wouldn't/couldn't tell us specifically which boxes had to be re-boxed.  (Doesn't this negate chain of custody somehow?)  We store boxes in a number of Iron Mountain facilities across the country.  Interestingly enough, the inventory in the facility which charged for the re-boxing had been in storage the shortest length of time (less than one year with the boxes originally in excellent condition), and had no retrieval/return activity whatsoever.  So, how did they get damaged?

Unfortunately, our account representative has had to bear the brunt of my dissatisfaction with these heavy handed tactics.  We, too, have refused to pay for services not previously agreed upon.

Sandra Tucker
RIM Project Manager
Monroe, NC

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]