Op-ed: Tribune article falsely portrays Gephardt Approved

Gephardt Approved Inc. is misrepresented in The Salt Lake Tribune's Dec. 27 front page article, "Should we be assured when it's Gephardt Approved?"

Using a few anecdotal facts, my 4½-year-old company is presented in a false light, its business model misrepresented, day-to-day function mischaracterized and public service to both consumers and member businesses portrayed falsely. The Tribune portrays Gephardt Approved as a company that takes money from any company, honest, or not, then largely ignores consumer complaints. That is not, and never has been true.

From its inception, Gephardt Approved links honest businesses with consumers. Any business that applies for the Gephardt Approved endorsement must first pass our rigorous background investigation before we receive any fees from them. The business must also agree, by contract, to answer any consumer complaints to Gephardt Approved within 48 hours.

I have a team of employees which both investigates companies and handles consumer complaints. Our investigative process can be found at www.gephardtapproved.com. We reject roughly 20 percent of applicant businesses because they fail to pass our screening process.

Our business model requires that we endorse only honest companies. Honest companies would never join our organization if we placed them alongside known dishonest companies.

Membership in Gephardt Approved means their customers (who pay us nothing) receive up to a $1,000 refund guarantee: Any consumer we find to be treated dishonestly by a Gephardt Approved company is entitled to payment. The company which acted dishonestly, then, by definition, will no longer be Gephardt Approved (any pre-paid membership fee is refunded, pro-rated).

Success requires me to fully investigate a company so their customers are treated properly. When businesses are honest, no refunds are due.

That model has led to satisfaction of thousands of consumers, and growth of hundreds of Gephardt Approved member businesses.

The Tribune story is largely based on the complaint of one individual, Brittany Auger, who had a problem with one Gephardt Approved company, Magnum Contractors, in February of 2012. We duly investigated the complaint, but were unable to determine who was right. The customer wouldn't pay any more money until a job was done, and the contractor wouldn't do any more work until after another partial payment. I removed Magnum contractors from Gephardt Approved Jan. 9, 2013, not because of Brittany Auger's complaint but because I investigated the facts of a lawsuit I uncovered against Magnum Contractors. Nonetheless, I refunded the $1,000 guarantee to Brittany Auger on July 8, 2014. I still, to this day, do not know who was right in that dispute, but I weighed in favor of the consumer and paid.

Many of these facts were disclosed to, but ignored by, your reporter.

The Tribune reporter also used Better Business Bureau figures to unfairly malign my company and member businesses: "36 of the businesses [Bill Gephardt] tells consumers they can trust without reservation have drawn 350 combined Better Business Bureau complaints over the past three years." A complaint, in my view, is not true unless investigated to determine who is right. The BBB publishes all the complaints it receives. For example, The Tribune and its parent company have 45 complaints in the past three years. The Tribune has a rating of "B" by the BBB. Gephardt Approved has three complaints in the past three years, and has a rating of "A" plus. If this is an unfair comparison, then why did your reporter choose to adopt it for your article?

Unlike the BBB, there is no area for raw complaints or compliments at Gephardt Approved. We evaluate every complaint, we don't just echo. Regarding complaints, my staff is almost always able to bring a consumer and a Gephardt Approved business into agreement. That there are controversies, disagreements, or disputes should not be a surprise. When we find that the business did nothing wrong, we explain that to the consumer.

However, when we find a business to be wrong and still refuses to fix the problem, that company is eliminated from membership, and the consumer is entitled to a refund of up to $1,000. That has happened with two formerly Gephardt Approved companies, resulting in five refunds.

The reporter, again, knows this, but did not include that in the article.

When disputes arise, we warn a company, and very often, they make positive course corrections.

Just because a regulatory agency takes action does not always mean it was fair.

Finally, it would have been nice to see a Tribune editor's disclosure that admitted, "GephardtDaily.com, a company under Gephardt Approved.com, is a direct competitor of the The Salt Lake Tribune." Some of your employees have applied to work for us.

Bill Gephardt is founder and owner of Gephardt Approved and Gephardt Daily.