• Report: #319567

Complaint Review: Andy Kurtzig,JustAnswer.com, Serenade Ventures LLC,JustAnswer Corp.

Thank You

Read how Ripoff Report saves consumers millions.

  • Submitted: Thu, March 20, 2008
  • Updated: Thu, December 10, 2009

  • Reported By:Contra Costa California
Andy Kurtzig,JustAnswer.com, Serenade Ventures LLC,JustAnswer Corp.
297 South Street & 36 Lincoln Blvd Ste 200 Sausalito & San Francisco, California U.S.A.

JustAnswer.com, Serenade Ventures, JustAnswer Corp., Andy Kurtzig: the man behind the scam. Legitimate or fraud? You decide. Sausalito & San Francisco California

*UPDATE Employee: JustAnswer.com

*Consumer Comment: Experts.... are they really experts?

*UPDATE Employee: Doctors, Attorneys, Veterinarians, Mechanics on JustAnswer

*UPDATE Employee: Fellow Experts?

*UPDATE Employee: Fellow Experts?

*UPDATE Employee: Fellow Experts?

*UPDATE Employee: Fellow Experts?

*Consumer Comment: Think about it.

*Consumer Comment: YOu want proof I may be able to provide you with some.

*Author of original report: Contrary to Popular Belief.

*UPDATE Employee: JD, What?

*Author of original report: JustAnswer: United They Fall

*UPDATE Employee: Experts Need to Unite

*UPDATE Employee: Idiots

*UPDATE Employee: Idiots

*UPDATE Employee: Idiots

*UPDATE Employee: To Dr. D

*Consumer Suggestion: Few interesting things. Hope answer are forthcoming on these.

*Consumer Comment: much ado about nothing

*UPDATE EX-employee responds: justanswer.com: Is Dr. D really a doctor?

*Consumer Comment: Repetition ...

*Author of original report: update

*UPDATE Employee: Answers are guarenteed on JA

*UPDATE EX-employee responds: justanswer.com: For the Greater Good

*Consumer Comment: Wow you are an employee of JA? and an insider too?

*UPDATE Employee: Only Timbo Seems to Get It!

*Consumer Comment: Still more disgruntled experts

*Consumer Comment: Still more disgruntled experts

*Consumer Comment: Still more disgruntled experts

*UPDATE EX-employee responds: Just Answer: Hazzardous to you Health

*UPDATE Employee: Alphabeta

*Consumer Comment: Again no facts?

*Author of original report: rebuttal to Facts

*Consumer Comment: Facts?

*Consumer Comment: Read the report!

*Consumer Comment: Disgruntled Experts

*Author of original report: An even better look into JustAnswer practices

*UPDATE Employee: A real look at JA

*Author of original report: You Should be offended

*UPDATE Employee: I am offended

*Author of original report: One Happy and Thankful Expert

*REBUTTAL Individual responds: One Happy and Thankful Expert

What's this?
What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

With little to work with and a pocket full of change we have to wonder just what is it that Andy Kurtzig, owner and CEO, of JustAnswer.com is offering to his customers. In a business that is plagued by questions from "What is my age?" to "My son is bleeding from his rectum. Help Me, it's possible you may get a response, to either question, some time within a 24 hour period, or not at all. Holding your breath could be dangerous. Will the person responding be who you hoped it to be? There are no guarantees.

Read the fine print and read it closely. Amid all the, mostly non legal, mumbo jumbo you will see that Just Answer states that the site is for entertainment purposes only, that Just Answer does not guarantee that what they call "experts" in any give field, really are qualified experts. Just Answer states that they are not responsible for answers given by these "experts." So we have to ask, "Just what is an expert?" according to Andy Kurtizig. An expert was once anyone that had answered one question in any given field, Health, Law, Tax, Finance, etc. and, by golly, got a customer to actually pay for that answer.

That was the site first began, Was it 2001 or 2005, Some things get a bit tangled between the BBB and the D&B reports, so for the sake of argument, lets say 2004. Since 2004 anyone that has unconsciously bumped into this website, asked a question and expected an answer from a person that was a licensed physician, lawyer, tax practitioner vet., nurse, educator, Master auto tech ( the list goes on) was given NO guarantee that Joe RatherNotBeBotherd from Apt 297 was not sitting naked at his computer with a bowl of popcorn in one hand, a Miller light in the other, watching Charlie's Angels reruns while he typed in "I suggest you take your son to the ER ASAP. With an additional comment: Feedback and bonuses are greatly appreciated." The customer has received an answer, maybe not exactly to their liking, but is honest and accepts the response. Bada Boom. Another 7 bucks in Andy's...Pay Pal Account?

Mr. Kurtizg has begun to change things a bit, to his benefit. How you ask? A new plan has been set in place called, Prove it Or Lose .In an attempt to garner his ever seeking approval of customers, and hopefully a few "experts" this Prove It Or Lose It theory was implemented to improve "Quality Assurance." We still haven't figured out what the relationship is between his new proposal and quality assurance but I'm sure somewhere in the depths of a lost mind there's a reason, valid or not.

In this program Just Answer has told all experts who feel someone is lying about anything stated in their profiles such as a degree, work history, education etc. any other expert may challenge the credentials of the supposed lying expert.

In turn, Just Answer will perform a background search for verification, at the challenging experts expense. Andy Kurtzig has refused to pay to validate his own workers to improve his own site. Now, if the background check finds the challenged expert to have falsified his profile, you get your money you paid for the background check back.

But, are you ready for this. Not from Just Answer, but from the monies earned by the challenged experts JA account. Call me silly but that smells a bit like theft of income? I know it sounds a bit archaic but it's Andy's way of, again, avoiding responsibility. Place expert against expert and you've won a front row seat to a Greek Athenaeum for the best set of games of your life.

At first glance this plan may seem to be a workable until one of his prodigy admin adds a twist. All experts will have until March 1, 2008 to remove; yes I said remove any, or all, information contained in their profiles that they feel can be challenged by another expert. So what do we have now? A bunch of once bogus profiles, now, become altered to avoid expert to expert conflict while Just Answers retains the same quality of non credentialed experts on their site.

I'd like to also mention that if an expert is challenged and they refuse the challenge due to any personal reason. i.e. not wanting to reveal SS#, live addresses, etc. they are also banned for..not playing fair.

Bottom line. Andy Kurtzig has done nothing to improve the quality of his site.
Summary:
1.There is no guarantee you will receive an answer from a qualified or licensed individual.
2.There are never thousands of experts on hand to answer your question.
3.That money you deposited that you assume is going to the expert that helped you is not. Only a small percentage, including a smaller percentage of any bonuses goes to the expert. Yes Andy has to run a site, but a little upfront heads up to the customer would be a sweet gesture.
4.Are there experts on line anxiously waiting to answer your questions? Sure, if you place a $15-30 dollar value on your question. Understand these experts need to compensate for what JA takes. The larger the amount offered by the customer, the faster someone will jump in to answer you.
5.Will you receive quick service? Another no guarantee against Andy's false advertising tactics. You may if you want to pay more for it. See #4.
6.Are there honest experts doing an honest job? Sure there are amidst the muddle. But can you be sure you get one? Nope.
7.The site is listed as a site for entertainment purposes only. Another beware buyer signal. If that new puppy, your son, daughter, neighbor or friend has serious issues don't spend your good earned money on Just Answer if you expect guaranteed professional help. Think Entertainment and run like the wind.

I've seen Mr. Kurtizigs rebuttals to a couple of other complaints on this site. Standard Andy Answers. His best defense is no defense. Yes, Andy you have happy experts. Why? Because they are getting paid via a Pay Pal account, making easy, under the table, cash that the majority do not claim and stand a pretty good chance of getting away with because. JA refuses to send out 1099's.

And yea Andy there are happy customers although 10 million is a stretch. The reason? These customers are there because they are being fooled into thinking a professional person will be answering their concerns. You're won their trust Andy and their money. If any customer coming to JA knew the answer there'd be no reason to accept and pay for it. So as good, bad or indifferent the answer may be customers will pay based on the false premises you run you adevertise your site to offer.

Before you respond Andy, think long and hard about your answer. Or convey what it is you want to have said by your prodigy Admin. It would be my pleasure to be able to accurately disavow anything you may have to say. Congratulations my friend on one of the largest con games on the net. And before you use your standard response: You must be a banned expert, a disgruntled expert; maybe you didn't pass the eval. and so forth I will assure you, none of the above hold true.

JD
Contra Costa, California
U.S.A.


This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 03/20/2008 06:03 AM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Andy-KurtzigJustAnswercom-Serenade-Ventures-LLCJustAnswer-Corp/Sausalito-San-Francisco-California-94965-94129-1751/JustAnswercom-Serenade-Ventures-JustAnswer-Corp-Andy-Kurtzig-the-man-behind-the-scam-319567. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Andy Kurtzig,JustAnswer.com, Serenade Ventures LLC,JustAnswer Corp.

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
0Author 41Consumer 1Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 UPDATE Employee

JustAnswer.com

AUTHOR: Andy - (United States of America)

Don't work there, if you do you should quit and go outside. Andy gets 50% of all orders. It is basically a pyramid scheme. If you sit there and work for 12 hours, you probably get like 300 a month. Overall waste of time, except for some mental stimulation. Just google it yourself, most things are common sense anyways or you shouldn't be doing them.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Consumer Comment

Experts.... are they really experts?

AUTHOR: Shotgun - (U.S.A.)

I have been accepted as an expert on Just Answer since the 4th quarter of 2008 so my experience is limited.

I am a licensed skilled tradesman with multiple decades in my trade. I see people answering questions in the trades who have "former journeyman", "plumber" and "electrician" in their title or qualiifications and no valid license from a city, county or state or they had one 10, 20 or 30 years ago and didn't renew it. Reading the quality of answers from people such as this is pathetic from the point of view of a real professional.

If someone became an expert before the 10 questions to qualify was in place they are golden, no questions to answer while a new expert with real credentials has to answer the questions. Then we are on equal ground with equal status in the eyes of the administration. No, wait, the one with 3 months doesn't compare to the one who has 3 years and has a proven track record of crappy answers, code violations but has made money for Just Answer.

There are also experts on the site who give their own vest pocket rules for issues which can not be supported by the code. Not all the country is on the same code, Canada has it's own and Europe is on another set of regulations all together. An expert with terrible advice says something like "it's my interpretation" when defending himself against a claim of incompetence.

The moderators are not much help on this. Number one they aren't tradesmen and don't understand the issues at hand. You must be a professional to fully get it. When 2 experts disagree the one with the most time seems to win or they both get in trouble. I have seen experts kicked off and a week later they are back with a different name but same photograph. Who is letting these people in? Legal and Medical topics got rid of everybody who wasn't licensed in the profession. That makes good sense as it assures some level of qualification for the expert. How about the same in the trades? Does it matter that a screwed up answer might cause a spark next to a gas leak and KABOOOOOOM? Does anybody care about that? The moderators don't care. I as an expert take a lot of pride in the answers I give and more so in the feedback I have received from the customers. That is the real reward, not the $ 200 I earned last month. The sad thing is when the customer thinks the information he got is wonderful and the question is closed 15 seconds later and there is no way to warn him about the danger he faces using the information from the bad expert that he just received. Hopefully there is no KABOOOOOOM associated with the answer. It's rude to give an answer after another expert but what about the customer? Is rude better or worse than death?
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 UPDATE Employee

Doctors, Attorneys, Veterinarians, Mechanics on JustAnswer

AUTHOR: Justanswer Rep - (U.S.A.)

JustAnswer is the largest Expert answer site with more than 15 million registered users and approximately 20 thousand Experts, who help make sure that their peers are who they claim to be through our Prove It or Lose It policy. The five-step screening process is as follows:
1. Tests: We implement tests for each specific category, i.e. A Real Estate Law test that's different than Immigration Law. Traditionally only 1 in 10 applicants makes it past the test.
2. Stages: If the Expert passes, typically they start off with a limited account that we call Stage 1. They have a number of restrictions on their account, which are removed as they progress up the ranks.
3. Peer Reviews: All Experts are evaluated by their category peers.
4. Customer Feedback: If Experts receive excessive negative feedback from customers, they are banned from the site.
5. Prove It Or Lose It: We take a similar approach to eBay. Suspicious Experts are asked to prove their stated credentials to a third- party credential checking company. If they refuse the credential check or fail, they are banned from the site.

In fact, Experts on JustAnswer help people every day, 24/7. We have Experts that are Doctors, Lawyers, Mechanics, Veterinarians and CPA's. On the right-side of the homepage, under the Meet The Experts column, clicking on See More Experts shows JustAnswer Experts that meet these qualifications.

We're constantly trying to improve the site. One step the company has taken is streamlining Experts in categories. For instance, the Legal category now only contains attorneys, while the Veterinarian and Medical categories have been created to contain MDs/DOs and Veterinarians only. Our goal is to provide the best customer experience we can, by providing the platform on which they can connect with Experts. Each category shows the number of Experts currently online.

Customers place fully-refundable deposits and can read answers and respond until they're satisfied. Customers define quality and only pay for answers they are satisfied with by clicking on the Accept button. A full refund is instantly available at www.justanswer.com/refund.aspx. For more information, please email our Customer Service department at info@justanswer.com.

Since the site serves as a platform, we do not issue 1099s to Experts. The burden of reporting rests solely on the Experts.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#4 UPDATE Employee

Fellow Experts?

AUTHOR: Lisa - (U.S.A.)

As an active expert on JA for 3 yrs. I'd like to respond to some of my fellow co-experts. The initial presupposition of Ex-perience's post was in pointing out defects, to the public, in which they found to be potentially harmful to the consumers that frequent JA. I agree with the inferences made.

This venue is solely for consumer to consumer awareness. I am extremely troubled with the responses from fellow experts. Any argued reply made by the initial poster was in response to one of your agitated posts. There were no first shots aimed at anyone except Andy and JA. It would be Andy that had to duty to speak up if he felt the need. Apparently he didn't. Each one of you set the proof of action into effect in encouraging Ex-perience to respond to you. It is very audacious of each of you to surmise guilt. You sit with indignant opinions as you cauterize fellow experts that you presume are responsible for your exasperation. Your insidious actions are inexcusable.

I have seen, read and spoken to many an expert, in my time at JA, which have voiced the very same opinions in the lounge as the initial poster. I have read, and openly agreed with the expert in which our last literacy challenged poster, Going2sue, mentioned in their feeble assumption. Does my voicing of similar opinions in the lounge and agreeing with other expert opinions not make me the inciter the first post as well as whom you indict? What a portentous fool you've made of yourself.

If you, as experts, wish to prove that JA is worth the look, that you have something to offer to the customers using the site, that you are more than disingenuous in your actions, it would be far better for JA if you remained silent. If I were a client reading this thread, at this point, I would fear any verbal interaction, or concise and accurate answer to my question, from any one of you excluding those being chastised for having an opinion. You are becoming more of discomfiture than the facts within the first post. Shame on every one of you, for being less than prudent, in your judgment of fellow expert/experts considering the less than virtuousness roles you, yourselves, play.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#5 UPDATE Employee

Fellow Experts?

AUTHOR: Lisa - (U.S.A.)

As an active expert on JA for 3 yrs. I'd like to respond to some of my fellow co-experts. The initial presupposition of Ex-perience's post was in pointing out defects, to the public, in which they found to be potentially harmful to the consumers that frequent JA. I agree with the inferences made.

This venue is solely for consumer to consumer awareness. I am extremely troubled with the responses from fellow experts. Any argued reply made by the initial poster was in response to one of your agitated posts. There were no first shots aimed at anyone except Andy and JA. It would be Andy that had to duty to speak up if he felt the need. Apparently he didn't. Each one of you set the proof of action into effect in encouraging Ex-perience to respond to you. It is very audacious of each of you to surmise guilt. You sit with indignant opinions as you cauterize fellow experts that you presume are responsible for your exasperation. Your insidious actions are inexcusable.

I have seen, read and spoken to many an expert, in my time at JA, which have voiced the very same opinions in the lounge as the initial poster. I have read, and openly agreed with the expert in which our last literacy challenged poster, Going2sue, mentioned in their feeble assumption. Does my voicing of similar opinions in the lounge and agreeing with other expert opinions not make me the inciter the first post as well as whom you indict? What a portentous fool you've made of yourself.

If you, as experts, wish to prove that JA is worth the look, that you have something to offer to the customers using the site, that you are more than disingenuous in your actions, it would be far better for JA if you remained silent. If I were a client reading this thread, at this point, I would fear any verbal interaction, or concise and accurate answer to my question, from any one of you excluding those being chastised for having an opinion. You are becoming more of discomfiture than the facts within the first post. Shame on every one of you, for being less than prudent, in your judgment of fellow expert/experts considering the less than virtuousness roles you, yourselves, play.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#6 UPDATE Employee

Fellow Experts?

AUTHOR: Lisa - (U.S.A.)

As an active expert on JA for 3 yrs. I'd like to respond to some of my fellow co-experts. The initial presupposition of Ex-perience's post was in pointing out defects, to the public, in which they found to be potentially harmful to the consumers that frequent JA. I agree with the inferences made.

This venue is solely for consumer to consumer awareness. I am extremely troubled with the responses from fellow experts. Any argued reply made by the initial poster was in response to one of your agitated posts. There were no first shots aimed at anyone except Andy and JA. It would be Andy that had to duty to speak up if he felt the need. Apparently he didn't. Each one of you set the proof of action into effect in encouraging Ex-perience to respond to you. It is very audacious of each of you to surmise guilt. You sit with indignant opinions as you cauterize fellow experts that you presume are responsible for your exasperation. Your insidious actions are inexcusable.

I have seen, read and spoken to many an expert, in my time at JA, which have voiced the very same opinions in the lounge as the initial poster. I have read, and openly agreed with the expert in which our last literacy challenged poster, Going2sue, mentioned in their feeble assumption. Does my voicing of similar opinions in the lounge and agreeing with other expert opinions not make me the inciter the first post as well as whom you indict? What a portentous fool you've made of yourself.

If you, as experts, wish to prove that JA is worth the look, that you have something to offer to the customers using the site, that you are more than disingenuous in your actions, it would be far better for JA if you remained silent. If I were a client reading this thread, at this point, I would fear any verbal interaction, or concise and accurate answer to my question, from any one of you excluding those being chastised for having an opinion. You are becoming more of discomfiture than the facts within the first post. Shame on every one of you, for being less than prudent, in your judgment of fellow expert/experts considering the less than virtuousness roles you, yourselves, play.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#7 UPDATE Employee

Fellow Experts?

AUTHOR: Lisa - (U.S.A.)

As an active expert on JA for 3 yrs. I'd like to respond to some of my fellow co-experts. The initial presupposition of Ex-perience's post was in pointing out defects, to the public, in which they found to be potentially harmful to the consumers that frequent JA. I agree with the inferences made.

This venue is solely for consumer to consumer awareness. I am extremely troubled with the responses from fellow experts. Any argued reply made by the initial poster was in response to one of your agitated posts. There were no first shots aimed at anyone except Andy and JA. It would be Andy that had to duty to speak up if he felt the need. Apparently he didn't. Each one of you set the proof of action into effect in encouraging Ex-perience to respond to you. It is very audacious of each of you to surmise guilt. You sit with indignant opinions as you cauterize fellow experts that you presume are responsible for your exasperation. Your insidious actions are inexcusable.

I have seen, read and spoken to many an expert, in my time at JA, which have voiced the very same opinions in the lounge as the initial poster. I have read, and openly agreed with the expert in which our last literacy challenged poster, Going2sue, mentioned in their feeble assumption. Does my voicing of similar opinions in the lounge and agreeing with other expert opinions not make me the inciter the first post as well as whom you indict? What a portentous fool you've made of yourself.

If you, as experts, wish to prove that JA is worth the look, that you have something to offer to the customers using the site, that you are more than disingenuous in your actions, it would be far better for JA if you remained silent. If I were a client reading this thread, at this point, I would fear any verbal interaction, or concise and accurate answer to my question, from any one of you excluding those being chastised for having an opinion. You are becoming more of discomfiture than the facts within the first post. Shame on every one of you, for being less than prudent, in your judgment of fellow expert/experts considering the less than virtuousness roles you, yourselves, play.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#8 Consumer Comment

Think about it.

AUTHOR: Going2sue - (U.S.A.)

Ok the experts are not verified.
Ok some experts may not claim their tax.
Ok there is cheating and fraud in this business,

Lets put it into context.

Experts verified. PSSST. If the expert is crap they dont get no accepts. The customer looks at the answer and then decides.

Experts not claiming tax. PSSST. Non of your business. Not the JA's fault. No proof. Useless accusation.

Cheating and fraud. PSSST. happens everywhere. JA be doin a good job trying ti fiter them out. Not as good as possible but good.

I know in my Car cats that there be some idiots that dont know what they are talking about. they dont last. Customer feedback, other experts. It is working.

Dee you make no sense, you talk in circles, you spout your mouth of in the lounge. You have like 200 accepts and 5000 posts, You are full of it. Your ugly as well.

Wake up and dont take my work away cause you guys dont know how business in the real world works. Some good some bad, but all on a good effort.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#9 Consumer Comment

YOu want proof I may be able to provide you with some.

AUTHOR: Yepme - (U.S.A.)

I kept track of a few dangerous posts. One I can prove I sent an email to Andy and moderator and administration about. NOTHING was done. I even provided proof of how and why it was dangerous. That one I know the (expert) HA! did have the job they said. Problem was they were to lazy to look for a recall of a fire hazard. Trying to get many posts done with least effort.
Want proof I have the threads and CC copies of the letters sent. IF that customer gets burned badly or more who is responsible. Certainly JA knew and took NO action. Is that Reasonable care? They dont even have to say it is or is not a dangerous post but certainly should send a differing opinion on it.
I have other examples also.
I offered a way for JA to fix all of this and better serve the customers.
NOW I am working on doing that. I will invite you to come check it out when complete.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#10 Author of original report

Contrary to Popular Belief.

AUTHOR: Ex-perience - (U.S.A.)

Although we appear to be on the same page you are also a bit of an argumentative fellow aren't you? You are absolutely correct that standing up and raising my hand is not warranted. It is warranted when assumptions are made, which you did in your first post by stating : "I agree, Ex-perience surely sounds like a banned and disgruntled former expert. In fact, I think we are all pretty sure who it is. 'Prove it or lose it' didn't work out too well for you did it? But, with the outlandish claims that were made in your profile, what did you expect?"

In keeping form with your assumptions one must remind you that had you comprehended my first post you would not have made such an assumption, nor challenged it. Did you not have two feet on the floor when you validated your relationship with JustAnswer. Again, use your words wisely and read with caution and introspect.
.
James, a united front here would show nothing to Andy. Service providers are, and will always be, available to the site as you well know. What is important is that the consumer knows what they are receiving, if that service provider is credentialed when they opt for a lawyer, doctor, vet, accountant, etc., and that no "real" harm comes to any consumer because of Just Answers lack of service provider control. If you have a personal agenda, if you wish Andy to read these in order to control new service provider influx then it may be in your best interest to begin another report so those that wish to follow your steps may do so.

We agree that the site is poorly run and needs change. The changes I am imposing are related to the consumer and the consumer alone. Additional comments and thoughts that deter from that premise will only make this report less then adequate in doing the job in which it was intended.

I have not witnessed, or am I witnessing, seasoned service providers being replaced. I have seen excellent service providers leave. Dr. Nash is a prime example. I have seen experts be banned for speaking up. I have not seen seasoned experts intentionally being replaced to allow newbies come in. I agree that the newbies answers are not up to par, the eval.system bites and the administration is past adequate in filling the job. If you would like to begin another report based on inadequate service providers that has a negative affect on consumers, I would be more than eager to join your cause.

JD
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#11 UPDATE Employee

JD, What?

AUTHOR: Jamesb - (U.S.A.)

No one expected you to stand up, raise your hand and say, "yes, that's me". You know who you are, why you are no longer there and it's really of little importance in the grand scheme of this thread. Neither does anyone expect the experts to band together in any way beyond feeling free to speak their minds in this forum right here. For those still working the site, it would be JA suicide to do otherwise. As I pointed out, we can rest assured Andy is reading all of this and hope springs eternal, he just might, one day, give some consideration to what is being said here. The truth can abound when there is no danger of retaliation, as there would be, if one were to post such thoughts in the lounge, in an email to Andy, or even in the not so private message area on the board. That's what I meant by encouraging others to show a united front here. If you are not aware of any recent replacement of strong, productive and knowledgeable experts with barely literate newbies, then you have been gone from the board for awhile. If you still have any friends there with whom you correspond privately, you might ask for an update. As for the rest of your message, I don't know if it was the wee hours of the morning when you posted it or if you were doing some good drugs but, for me at least, the majority of it was pretty much scattered, unfathomable, and impossible to follow your thoughts.
JB
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#12 Author of original report

JustAnswer: United They Fall

AUTHOR: Ex-perience - (U.S.A.)

Quote: JamesB: "Wow, this is really getting off the track. Or so it seems from the intent of the original post. I agree, Ex-perience surely sounds like a banned and disgruntled former expert. In fact, I think we are all pretty sure who it is. 'Prove it or lose it' didn't work out too well for you did it? But, with the outlandish claims that were made in your profile, what did you expect?"

While in agreement with the majority of your statements I am sorry to say that the above is not accurate. I dare say I do find the assumption amusing. I will reiterate my last words at the closing of my first report which stated that if you feel I "must be a banned expert, a disgruntled expert, maybe I "you" didn't pass the eval. and so forth I will assure you, none of the above hold true." Clearly one should be able to determine, by that statement, the option left. I would also like to state that not service providers, that are no longer with Just Answer, have been banned because of outlandish claims in their profiles. Least we forgot those that spoke their minds, employed their intelligence and offered their services, pro bono, in order to help Mr. Kurtzig better the site for all, up to and including, Kurtzig and the service providers.

It is not without surprise, JamesB, that service providers will find this a venue for release of frustrations, good, bad or indifferent. To try to restrict others opinions or views, whether they are misconceptions or assumptions, in this forum is not a privilege any one of us has obtained. The beauty of freedom of speech and expression it all it's glory. You may repond or be silent. The choice is each of ours.

JamesB, you will not find service providers, like yourself, that will band together to make a change. It's not going to happen for the very same reasons you are still answering questions on the JustAnswer website. For the very same rason you wish to remain anonymous. If monetary gain is possible and unaccountable, for some, who is it that will fight your cause with you that is willing to lose those amenities? The responses here are from people currently answering questions the site, people banned from the site for various reasons and those that have left voluntarily. That's coming together. Self agenda is saved for those not wishing to muddy the very same water they are dirtying with their own urination.

Quote: JamesB:"All this about peer review, entrance exams, making reports on bad answers is just so much fluff. All three are a joke. As soon as really good experts advance to that top level where they are getting a larger percentage of what they bring in, he is going to find a way to get rid of them."

There are numerous service providers on JustAnswer that are long term, unqualified, have illegitimate profiles, no experience or knowledge and remain top earners. I have yet to see Mr. Kurtzig replace anyone with earning capabilities with a newbie. I agree the peer review system, entrance exams and reporting are a joke. But on whom? Mr. Kurtzigs top admin. has made it clear that if a party with lawyer stated in their profile passed one of the multiple choice law evals., vs a party with paralegal, the professed lawyer would be admitted to Just Answer first. Without a stern approach to the verification of credentials what makes the uneducated nitwits doing the selective process positive the lawyer is not a paralegal in an Armani suit?

All is not as it appears.

JD
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#13 UPDATE Employee

Experts Need to Unite

AUTHOR: Jamesb - (U.S.A.)

Wow, this is really getting off the track. Or so it seems from the intent of the original post. I agree, Ex-perience surely sounds like a banned and disgruntled former expert. In fact, I think we are all pretty sure who it is. "Prove it or lose it" didn't work out too well for you did it? But, with the outlandish claims that were made in your profile, what did you expect?

That aside, I fail to see that any satisfaction is to be gained from appearing to go after other experts on the site. You efforts might be better spent just going after Andy. The lack of any reply or rebuttal from him notwithstanding, don't think for one moment he is not reading every post. The up side to that is, here is your chance to tell him what you dare not, under any other circumstances. So many observations of him, his business practices, his lack of acumen when it comes to people skills, are so right on, it should follow, that you are all not wrong in your assessment.

It is also correct that many really outstanding experts are no longer on the site. If you had a way to find out, I'd almost bet it's because they had the audacity to stand up to him and try to tell him when something is not working. Does he listen? Who are you kidding? He surrounds himself with fresh out of school, wet behind the ears lackeys and yes-men/women. You could show him, with all the needed facts as back up, that something needs to be changed and it will fall on deaf ears. He will brook no such comeuppance from anyone. Why? Because he won't suffer when the whole thing goes belly up. It will just be written off to another of sonny boy's screw ups and off he will go to the next great adventure, leaving all of us in his wake.

For those to whom it's just a way to pass some time and make a couple bucks in the process, no big thing. For those of us who have come to truly depend in this income for vital necessities, it will be a huge deal. Why keep fighting at, and picking at, each other? Why not band together and try harder to get some changes made that will benefit everyone? If Andy had one iota of true business sense, he would have learned a long time ago that one must be open to hearing suggestions from employees. (Yes, I know we are not truly employees but we do bring in the money so for lack of a better word.....) The people who are most involved in the day to day workings of a business are the ones who will have the most valuable input for making things run more smoothly for all. Until he wakes up and realizes that, it's only going to get worse, not better.

All this about peer review, entrance exams, making reports on bad answers is just so much fluff. All three are a joke. As soon as really good experts advance to that top level where they are getting a larger percentage of what they bring in, he is going to find a way to get rid of them. The customers are then at the mercy of the newbies, many of whom give horrible answers. But, if they can get an accept, who cares if they give out bad or even dangerous information. It's more money in Andy's pocket and that's the bottom line for him. Whether it ever comes back to haunt him, from the legal standpoint, as Dr. Nash thinks is inevitable, it will surely come back as negative word of mouth. How long can newbies continue to give out dangerous information and word not get around? Hello, Andy...bad press travels much faster than compliments. I've seen many returning customers, asking to work with the seasoned, knowledgeable expert they trusted, only to be told he/she is no longer on the site.

Hopefully, some of them will end up googling and finding themselves here. Then they will know what really happened to that person with whom they were building a trusting relationship. They will also see that the tip (bonus) they thought they were giving to their expert did not all end up there. Going above and beyond for the customer only pads the Andy coffers more. So sad for the customers, so sad for the experts while being of no consequence at all to Andy. He simply doesn't care whether the experts are happy or not. He treats everyone as if he were the whip cracking overseer and the experts are his field hands, to treat with as little respect and as much contempt as he likes. And before anyone wants to jump on me for not using any kind of real signature on here, you are right. I am not. I can't afford to as long as I want to keep answering questions. One does not get away with speaking one's mind with Andy. He cannot deal with the truth. For now, I'll just have to be
Disgusted/Disillusioned
Anywhere in the World
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#14 UPDATE Employee

Idiots

AUTHOR: Timbo - (U.S.A.)

Ms Dee don't worry about what was said. Your cool . I read what ya say in the longe.That's gotta be Chase trying to talk or one of the mods. Not lori she's cool and smart. But I'm bettin on Chase or AskWalt again 'cause it sounds idiotic. Like a box of rocks tryin to talk. The posts in the lounge are off the d**n wall. I ain't no rocket scientist but you all think no one can search the archives if they're banned. BS.

Chase said,
Posted: Yesterday at 5:06pm
Jay, a banned expert has no way of going through experts archives records. If they are banned, someone here is giving them the info.

Dummy. All ya gotta do is go to google and type in something like justanswer dog with itch or hey how bout JustAnswer MsChase and a shitload of questions come up with the answers. Ain't nobody that needs to be on JA or a expert that can't do that and don't have to pay the 3 bucks Ja wants to charge 'em for a answer. All of our answers are free. It don't have to be no expert on JA that's given anyone anything from those archives. Another thing, you all are saying that noone is using their real names and s**t here. I am, This is my nickname they call me here at home and I got my real location up here. You all go have fun checkin me out. I ain't got nuttin to hide. Hey Doc Nash! good to you see you man.. Yea your the doc I was tlakin about. The rst of you except the Dee lady ,the Doc and Kilnowski are all using fake names so who ya talkin about tahts lying or hidin here jerks.

Ya think a few posts in the lounge is gonna amke someone pissed enough to tell ya off so ya can catch a rat. Your more stupid that you act.The only rats here are the fakers. I hope they catch ya all.The guy thats the mechinic is right on to.

Tnxs for the beer offer Kim. You get here to Ill and you got a deal.

Timbo
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#15 UPDATE Employee

Idiots

AUTHOR: Timbo - (U.S.A.)

Ms Dee don't worry about what was said. Your cool . I read what ya say in the longe.That's gotta be Chase trying to talk or one of the mods. Not lori she's cool and smart. But I'm bettin on Chase or AskWalt again 'cause it sounds idiotic. Like a box of rocks tryin to talk. The posts in the lounge are off the d**n wall. I ain't no rocket scientist but you all think no one can search the archives if they're banned. BS.

Chase said,
Posted: Yesterday at 5:06pm
Jay, a banned expert has no way of going through experts archives records. If they are banned, someone here is giving them the info.

Dummy. All ya gotta do is go to google and type in something like justanswer dog with itch or hey how bout JustAnswer MsChase and a shitload of questions come up with the answers. Ain't nobody that needs to be on JA or a expert that can't do that and don't have to pay the 3 bucks Ja wants to charge 'em for a answer. All of our answers are free. It don't have to be no expert on JA that's given anyone anything from those archives. Another thing, you all are saying that noone is using their real names and s**t here. I am, This is my nickname they call me here at home and I got my real location up here. You all go have fun checkin me out. I ain't got nuttin to hide. Hey Doc Nash! good to you see you man.. Yea your the doc I was tlakin about. The rst of you except the Dee lady ,the Doc and Kilnowski are all using fake names so who ya talkin about tahts lying or hidin here jerks.

Ya think a few posts in the lounge is gonna amke someone pissed enough to tell ya off so ya can catch a rat. Your more stupid that you act.The only rats here are the fakers. I hope they catch ya all.The guy thats the mechinic is right on to.

Tnxs for the beer offer Kim. You get here to Ill and you got a deal.

Timbo
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#16 UPDATE Employee

Idiots

AUTHOR: Timbo - (U.S.A.)

Ms Dee don't worry about what was said. Your cool . I read what ya say in the longe.That's gotta be Chase trying to talk or one of the mods. Not lori she's cool and smart. But I'm bettin on Chase or AskWalt again 'cause it sounds idiotic. Like a box of rocks tryin to talk. The posts in the lounge are off the d**n wall. I ain't no rocket scientist but you all think no one can search the archives if they're banned. BS.

Chase said,
Posted: Yesterday at 5:06pm
Jay, a banned expert has no way of going through experts archives records. If they are banned, someone here is giving them the info.

Dummy. All ya gotta do is go to google and type in something like justanswer dog with itch or hey how bout JustAnswer MsChase and a shitload of questions come up with the answers. Ain't nobody that needs to be on JA or a expert that can't do that and don't have to pay the 3 bucks Ja wants to charge 'em for a answer. All of our answers are free. It don't have to be no expert on JA that's given anyone anything from those archives. Another thing, you all are saying that noone is using their real names and s**t here. I am, This is my nickname they call me here at home and I got my real location up here. You all go have fun checkin me out. I ain't got nuttin to hide. Hey Doc Nash! good to you see you man.. Yea your the doc I was tlakin about. The rst of you except the Dee lady ,the Doc and Kilnowski are all using fake names so who ya talkin about tahts lying or hidin here jerks.

Ya think a few posts in the lounge is gonna amke someone pissed enough to tell ya off so ya can catch a rat. Your more stupid that you act.The only rats here are the fakers. I hope they catch ya all.The guy thats the mechinic is right on to.

Tnxs for the beer offer Kim. You get here to Ill and you got a deal.

Timbo
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#17 UPDATE Employee

To Dr. D

AUTHOR: Dee - (U.S.A.)

Yes, Ex-perience sent your report to me Dr. D. That would stand for Dr. Dre the rapper, correct? They also sent the first report to me. I am going to respond to you alone, as you have taken the time to "assume," while making libelous comments, that I am purported to me someone that I am not. Maybe someone that you wish I were in order to justify reports that you have felt hurt by. I see no difference in your accusations towards me than in those comments made by others that you find so offensive.

Experts agreeing, or disagreeing, within the JA lounge is not new. It happens often and it will, no doubt, happen again. It's also not new news that I have voiced some of the same stances, in the lounge, as the original poster here. Yes, I do believe credentialed experts, only, should be answering in major categories. Andy and I have discussed this very same opinion on a personal level above and beyond anything I've posted in the lounge.

Prior to that there were long discussions between Charles and myself on this very stance. If you are that well read in what I've said in the lounge, then you'd also be as well read in knowing I have no qualms about asking questions as to the workings of the site, the evals. the cats or expert credentialing. I am entitled, as you are, to present what I might feel or have a concern with up to, and including, bogus appearing profiles. There are many experts that have expressed a number of those same opinions and concerns over time. And a number that have emailed me thanking me for saying what they fear they would be banned for saying. It's unfortunate more of those experts do not speak up.

If those opinions, and they can only be opinions as Andy will run his site as he sees fit, are taken as offensive by yourself or any other expert, there is a reason. A possible loss of income if changes were made would warrant a natural concern. Fortunately for you it doesn't matter what one expert, two experts, or a number of experts opinions are as they are not the parties that would implement the change. So where does the animosity come in toward any expert with an opinion that does not have the ability to put that opinion into affect?

I'm sure yourself, Walter, Joe, and Lindie feel insulted by the Kim report. Right or wrong, your feelings are real. With that in mind, to do the same to someone else without cause, that you openly express your disdain in seeing done to you and others, is as malicious an act as the one you are trying to condemn.

If you, or any expert has problem with anything I have said in the past, present or future in the lounge, be person enough to PM me about it. Using this format to also try to hide, while suggesting in the same breath that others are hiding behind phony names and locations, in order to belittle someone that openly doesn't agree on the same issues as yourself shows more vindictiveness, disrespect and unprofessionalism than anything said here by one single poster. If you are trying to set an example of intelligent, caring, thoughtful and considerate experts coming from the JA site, you've failed your friends, and JA, terribly by this post alone.

I can live with myself, my work on JA ,how I present myself in the lounge and to Andy personally. If you can say the same, my friend, this topic becomes moot.

Have a good one.

Dee
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#18 Consumer Suggestion

Few interesting things. Hope answer are forthcoming on these.

AUTHOR: Yepme - (U.S.A.)

Hello,
I read the report. It had some good points. BUT also missed some problems. I always feel that it is good to apply buyer beware. It is funny that in this world of law suits and limited liability and such so many companies have to use disclaimers and warnings to protect the ignorant. I was amazed that to even post on your re-fute here I had to read a few disclaimers and warnings. Ironic. Maybe your sight should take more responsibility for what happens to people who use it? Hey maybe they do? See more then double edged sword I bet your editorial department edits this out.
Anyone who comes to the sight (JA) should check the profile of the expert they are working with. But even those who claim to be in a certain job. AND might even be able to prove it can give bad answers. This made worse when real money is involved. I have done some dealings with the sight. It does have a peer review. I do the automotive area. There is not ONE expert in the automotive area that answers a decent amount of questions that has not missed on a question. It is hard to get everything correct all the time. Especially when you can not hear, see, taste, feel and sense what is going on. Even some that I can tell work at the dealer for the make the represent on JA.
They some times represent the reason some come to JA in the first place. Some come to get information so they are not talked down to and feel stupid or get ripped off by shady shops. And there are lots out there. Especially the female customers. (I used customer but more on that later) I had a gal customer who came to sight with a question. I gave her the basics it could be and how to take it apart and fix it. Hoping to get it all in one shot. It was a simple task. Probably, I always say it like that because it is not absolute for sure 100% that I have it right. She said whaoo. I don't want to fix it. I will have it done I just want to have an idea what might be wrong and some good terms so they don't try to take advantage of me. I filled their need and then some. But I have seen experts who have talked down to customers and even said they were wrong about a problem. Even when I knew the customer was right. the peer review is not a good system at all. Any time you use it. It becomes a problem. And using it will come back on you. Right or wrong it does not matter. I have lists of the examples I talk of. Truth is some of the longer standing EXPERTS are the worst at helping customers. WHY?
The task for JA is huge. The type of questions in JA is huge. They range for the simple how much air do I put in my tire to the serious health ones. SO JA must protect itself with lots of disclaimers and by the actions it takes. Puts them in a NO/WIN situation. IF they personally do anything to the experts besides a test to get in then DO they or don't they except some responsibility for the answers? Some that may have serious liabilities if they do accept some responsibility. SO the owners are stuck in a tough spot. So they must say it is for amusement to cover their bacon. Cover their (useful animal to carry heavy loads) SO what to do about it. I also sent information to ANDY and others at admin about another expert. They chose to do nothing. Even after I showed real proof that one messed up and had a dangerous answer. Same one who was rude to customers. Same one who effort for the customer was so limited they did not say one word just posted an exploded view of the part and left it. JA chooses to not do anything out of fear of liability.
So what can they do. I also have suggested ideas of a different structure to limit the bad experts and get a far better product for the customer. They were ignored. What is the problem? I feel that when the owner started the sight it was hard to get experts. Now it ahs been years and they rely on the few that have stayed a long time. They have risen to the top become mentors and interact with the administration and moderators who watch over the sight. So are the foxes running the hen house? Not exactly but they are sure hard on any of the dogs who show up. There certainly is some that are only concerned about how much they make not growing and making the sight better.
Now to the other things you mentioned to the sights problems
1.There is no guarantee you will receive an answer from a qualified or licensed individual.
Nope it is true no guarantee. BUT if you do you will be able to interact with them and either be satisfied or your money returned. Also you can ask for another experts opinion. Careful though it seems some are asking only friends (foxes) to do the second opinions for them not really re-listing it. Also like I mentioned some of the one I am sure are what they say are the worst at their answers. And I can supply proof of this. Another example is a father and son team who own a shop out west. I would pay huge money to have mine towed before I would let them touch it. I would not have confidence in their ability or certainly the customer service or honesty. (the father has since be booted) But I am sure they have the certs to back up their profile. I have taken some tests (ASE) and will never pay again. You pay 70 dollars to take a multiple choice test that you are supplied study guides for. With a good memory and studying anyone can pass. Now there is a SCAM that needs some reporting. Almost worse then ISO9000 and such were anything can be forgiven for a price.

2.There are never thousands of experts on hand to answer your question.
heck no certainly if you are not in a popular area. Like you are a UK car question. (the test they use to qualify experts has an error so they are having problems getting experts who get 100% correct) Teh tests are not a sure thing to qualify either obviously. They are often made by the foxes mentioned earlier. One area the fox who runs it made the questions to limit the experts not to get good ones.

3.That money you deposited that you assume is going to the expert that helped you is not. Only a small percentage, including a smaller percentage of any bonuses goes to the expert. Yes Andy has to run a site, but a little upfront heads up to the customer would be a sweet gesture.
First of I doubt the customer cares about the fee. And the larger percentage of the bonus goes to the person answering. Exept when the bonus is more then the answer. It has happened to me several times. Because I try to research items and make sure I catch RECALLS and also the EXTENDED warranty on emissions items. I have gotten a few. One customer posted his with an emissions part bad and was at a shop that did not do that kind of work. They were under the 10yr 100,000 miles on the extended warranty many shops will not tell you about. So they got it free and the bonus was twice the question price.

4.Are there experts on line anxiously waiting to answer your questions? Sure, if you place a $15-30 dollar value on your question. Understand these experts need to compensate for what JA takes. The larger the amount offered by the customer, the faster someone will jump in to answer you.
Most questions are answered even if they are under priced. Except many will skip the non-deposit customers. Because they often will not reply after you take the time to form an answer. I noticed you did not mention that they do not even have to leave a deposit.

5.Will you receive quick service? Another no guarantee against Andy's false advertising tactics. You may if you want to pay more for it. See #4.
This one here is I feel rather bias and not totally true. Heck you can even search for a common question NOW for as little as 3 dollars. This is a fact that lots of the experts on JA do not know about. Seems that JA sells your questions more then once. With nothing to the expert who answered. This why some of the experts are restless. The common ones like (heater blower fan only works on high) are being sold with a search. Seems JA owns the answers sorta. Always a slippery slope.

6.Are there honest experts doing an honest job? Sure there are amidst the muddle. But can you be sure you get one? Nope.
This one I certainly have to agree. The system is flawed. Some of the foxes (I feel and am in the process of testing now. Answer in a few days) use influence to avoid negative reports. So even the feedback is not a good measure. The sight uses feedback for customers also. A genius idea. SO many will only have one question in a year. Certainly why they use that e-mail address which can change sometimes a few times a year. BUT because of sights like Ebay they feel they have to leave an accept or they will look bad. I have had this happen to me and tell them do not pay if not happy. I can look at other options or even re-list it so others can look it over. SO any who come there should remember that. Even if it asks a 100 times get your answer right first. NOW that is good consumer warning.

7.The site is listed as a site for entertainment purposes only. Another beware buyer signal. If that new puppy, your son, daughter, neighbor or friend has serious issues don't spend your good earned money on Just Answer if you expect guaranteed professional help. Think Entertainment and run like the wind.
This is another one that is, I feel, not very truthful and misleading. We covered why they must add lots of disclaimers and even why your sight adds them. If your kid, dog, friend or what ever is gushing blood or ahs a serious problem and you are waiting for JA to help. Ceratinly the help you need must be deep and professional in person help. So this one is a little unfair.

Yes, Andy you have happy experts. Why? Because they are getting paid via a Pay Pal account, making easy, under the table, cash that the majority do not claim and stand a pretty good chance of getting away with because. JA refuses to send out 1099's.
I am one who did not claim the money I made from JA. Lets say I made 650 dollars give a few 100 dollars max. OK now I did not get a 1099. I am wishing I did. I spent 240 dollars for a new external hard drive just to hold the reams of info I need to read to answer some complicated questions. I subscribed to a few places that supply information for answers totaling more then the 650+ I received.
BUT this is way more complicated then that and I wish you had consulted some true professional help on this so you were certain about your statements. (if you dont ahve the large fee i know were you can get information BUT make sure to use buyer be ware) IF it is like you say and I needed a 1099. Then I know from the past that the items I bought for that purpose are deductible and I have a loss to deduct from my taxes. But what if what they are buying is the information? is this an item like a software I download? IF so then I only need to keep track of the sales and the loses and claim any extra. BUT certainly the buyer is the one who OWES taxes! They must pay the sales tax for the purchase. BUT wait some of the customers I answered were in Canada. I even did own in Malta. Which I do not even know were that is. OH my is there an export or import tax I need to file? If so what is the income responsibility I have for income from over seas? IF it is a service then it has a tax like sales tax in many states. OR does it all come out of California laws? Does California have a sales and service tax? I am very concerned. About this because I did just receive a call from PayPal about the JA payments I received. Funny to because I have had that account for years and this is the first call I ever got and they tracked me down. Gee think it was a scam and was really the IRS I hope so. I need the deductions. hopefully you will post the answer to if it is a sales tax the customer owes or a 1099 I should get so I can deduct the things I bought for use.

Finally because of ANDY'S lack of interest and a few other problems I had I am looking at doing the same kind of sight and am meeting with the money guys soon to hopefully cut a deal. If my ideas which I tried to offer work like I plan JA will not be able to compete. He has many Foxes not enough hounds and certainly some lazy moderators. The chickens well that remains to be seen. He (Andy) certainly is in a tough position. Like so many in today's sue happy world. The structure is poor to weed out the bad and keep the good hard working. A good structure like I plan will help. BUT AS ALWAYS BUYER BEWARE!!
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#19 Consumer Comment

much ado about nothing

AUTHOR: Klin - (U.S.A.)

Ok- As I'm not an employee of JA, I will offer my comments as a consumer of JA (an expert). I have, as you can see, no problem with others knowing who I am. The most destructive thing I can see about this report is having experts posting under new pseudonyms.

With that said, I'd like to address the points made by the original poster. You say that your comments are designed to be helpful to would-be customers of JA. I don't think so; they seem to be designed to push an expert's agenda for JA.

For instance, on No. 3-
Why would a customer care how his money was distributed after he clicked 'accept'? Only an expert would feel cheated by getting a smaller cut.

On No. 6-
"honest experts doing an honest job"- an interesting way to phrase it. Not "giving honest answers", no, that is not your emphasis. But it would be, if you were so concerned about the consumer. No, you are concerned about experts cheating to get their correct answers- again your agenda, not the customer's. Why should a customer care if the expert is cheating to get an answer, as long as it's right.

The whole tax thing (which to be fair, was only brought up by you in response to another poster) is something that no customer would care about. Neither is the amount of money that JA makes. Only experts would feel that is something to gripe about.

Time to address the rest of your comments which are consumer-related.

Nos 1 and 2-
Ok- so what? Even if JA spent its own money to verify credentials, how would they or anyone else know if the person typing really belonged to those credentials. It always amuses me when people expect the internet to work the same way real life does. I think people are smarter than your elitist attitude assumes. They know after 20 years, that the internet is the wild, wild west of capitalism. They know its not really regulated and that they're (for the most part) not as well-protected as they would be in a real-life situation. They know about larger-than-life advertising (which is pretty much the norm on the internet). They know that the internet is full of people who are not what they claim to be. They know that they are taking a chance.
But they do, anyway.
Maybe because they have no health insurance and $15 sounds good. Maybe because they can't afford a lawyer. Or maybe they just want reassurance that what their high-priced providers told them, is right. Because, guess what? Most people have very little faith in those credentials hanging on the wall. The internet gives them another way to cover as many bases as possible.

Nos. 4 and 5-
Hey, come on- you know that there are experts waiting like vultures to swoop down on deposited questions. Thousands? maybe not- but way more than enough and more come every day. The number one complaint day in and day out is not enough questions.

No. 7-
Well I really think a consumer report is warranted on this one. Imagine, a site that realizes the inherent difficulties in solving people's problems long-distance and tells customers that upfront. What was JA thinking of?

My take on JA is that its problems are those of the internet, but I have never seen an online business that tries so hard to compensate for these problems. Their customer care cannot be matched anywhere.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#20 UPDATE EX-employee responds

justanswer.com: Is Dr. D really a doctor?

AUTHOR: Professor Of Medicine - (U.S.A.)

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. (Proverbial - late sixteenth century. Often wrongly attributed to Samuel Johnson.)

In truth, this thread began as an argument that quality of answers is more important than quantity, not as personal attacks. What have been perceived as personal attacks appear to me to be simple statements of fact: some JA experts consistently give bad information in areas in which they have no vocational or professional background. The fact that their inaccurate answers are accepted as gospel truth does not validate them; remember, half of the population has IQs below average. How can the person seeking advice tell if what is given is good or bad? Helpful or harmful? If people who put the public at risk do not want to be exposed, if the heat is too great, they should get out of the kitchen. There is a very old saying, A dog smells his own first. (Concise Dictionary of European Proverbs, By Emanuel Strauss)

Now, I will get a bit personal. I hoped to make the JA health category as good as it could be, the kind of thing I have been doing for decades in many situations, but Mr Kurtzig did not care for my input, or that of any other expert who wanted to help in any area. I still question how he could open and maintain a health site without continued input from a health professional. So, I left. Fortunately, I left behind one very qualified physician (Family Physician, FP) and a small group of very knowledgeable nurses whom I regard as friends; I know that they are giving good answers and reporting bad ones, but they are a minority. I get daily reports.

Now, I had repeatedly urged Mr. Kurtzig to make use of the knowledge and experience of truly qualified JA experts who were not only willing but had actually agreed to help, years of experience that would have been free for the taking. One conclusion to draw is that Mr. Kurtzig does not make use of the people he promotes to the public because he knows that many are unqualified and will give him bad advice, and he does not know how to differentiate between the good and the bad. And that is a crying shame. How does that make you feel?

Anyone who feels he/she has been attacked unjustly, should rebut point-by-point with hard facts and not pontificate anonymously using only diffuse generalities. This is not about points of view, it is about quality of product, quality of life, pride in product, pride in excellence. Some people have forgotten the admonition about wishing for others what they wish for themselves.

I no wish to destroy JA. I want Mr. Kurtzig to accept that the quality of the JA product must come before the stability of the system. Beautiful computer code cannot substitute for bad answers and the harm they can do.

Professor of Medicine (aka Doctor Nash)
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#21 Consumer Comment

Repetition ...

AUTHOR: Alphabeta - (U.S.A.)

1.There is no guarantee you will receive an answer from a qualified or licensed individual.

That really should be stated that there is no guarantee the expert will give an answer the complainant agrees with or be a person the complainant approves of based on personal prejudices. If the answer is a good one the source should not matter as much as the information. Let me point you to a real life case story
http://www.newsnet5.com/health/11125917/detail.html

2.There are never thousands of experts on hand to answer your question.

You claim to have seen the front page of the site so what part of "## Experts are Online Now. Ask a Question, Get an Answer ASAP! " is hard for you to understand?
If 'operators are standing by' does that mean all operators are working 24x7? IDTS!
ASAP stands for as soon as possible this does not mean in seconds or even minutes every time. Possibilities vary.

3.That money you deposited that you assume is going to the expert that helped you is not. Only a small percentage, including a smaller percentage of any bonuses goes to the expert. Yes Andy has to run a site, but a little upfront heads up to the customer would be a sweet gesture.

Deposited money does not go to experts at all. Only a paid out deposit gets shared between site and expert.
That sharing is not a 'small percentage' once customers have accepted you as supplying good answers which if you were a successful expert you would know. But small is a relative measurement so your half empty is my half full.

4.Are there experts on line anxiously waiting to answer your questions? Sure, if you place a $15-30 dollar value on your question. Understand these experts need to compensate for what JA takes. The larger the amount offered by the customer, the faster someone will jump in to answer you.

Low dollar questions get answered all the time. Most of the experts are interested in helping others in addition to making income. Motivation for doing the work is not singular. Many do not even look at the dollar amount of the question.

5.Will you receive quick service? Another no guarantee against Andy's false advertising tactics. You may if you want to pay more for it. See #4.

You can't have it both ways - either you want only qualified people to answer the question or you want a fast answer. If the person who has the knowledge you need is not online, or if there is no such person available as yet on the site, then answer time can vary from super fast to never happens with most falling in between. Many experts address urgent need requests first despite the up front disclaimer that urgent issues should be addressed in person to an appropriate source of help. This means a less urgent request may linger longer.

6.Are there honest experts doing an honest job? Sure there are amidst the muddle. But can you be sure you get one? Nope.

Can we be sure you are a valid judge of that? Nope. I'd say there are a few overreaching experts not yet winnowed out of a lot of quite good ones.

7.The site is listed as a site for entertainment purposes only. Another beware buyer signal. If that new puppy, your son, daughter, neighbor or friend has serious issues don't spend your good earned money on Just Answer if you expect guaranteed professional help. Think Entertainment and run like the wind.

Don't expect guaranteed professional help anywhere, because there are no guarantees any person claiming to be a professional is actually what they say they are, and the abilities of all within a field vary dramatically one to the other. All you have to do is read www.bbb.org to see the tip of that iceberg.

Once again you are iterating non facts and claiming they are factual or trying to make up front presented information out to be devious. Repeating the claims doesn't improve their significance or accuracy.

It's your right to do so of course.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#22 Author of original report

update

AUTHOR: Ex-perience - (U.S.A.)

It's quite fascinating how a topic can turn to personal agendas when the initial report never made mention of non qualified service providers not being part of JustAnswers team. Quite the opposite. Perhaps a refresher course for those of you with short term memory or low comprehension levels:

Summary:
1.There is no guarantee you will receive an answer from a qualified or licensed individual.
2.There are never thousands of experts on hand to answer your question.
3.That money you deposited that you assume is going to the expert that helped you is not. Only a small percentage, including a smaller percentage of any bonuses goes to the expert. Yes Andy has to run a site, but a little upfront heads up to the customer would be a sweet gesture.
4.Are there experts on line anxiously waiting to answer your questions? Sure, if you place a $15-30 dollar value on your question. Understand these experts need to compensate for what JA takes. The larger the amount offered by the customer, the faster someone will jump in to answer you.
5.Will you receive quick service? Another no guarantee against Andy's false advertising tactics. You may if you want to pay more for it. See #4.
6.Are there honest experts doing an honest job? Sure there are amidst the muddle. But can you be sure you get one? Nope.
7.The site is listed as a site for entertainment purposes only. Another beware buyer signal. If that new puppy, your son, daughter, neighbor or friend has serious issues don't spend your good earned money on Just Answer if you expect guaranteed professional help. Think Entertainment and run like the wind.

Now that you have reread the initial contention of this post allow me to address a few characteristic errors made within some of the rebuttals. I do applaud all of your vigilant attempts at survival. Some well written, some not, but to be congratulated for an effort made. Again, to repeat the same overture in the symphony, this report is a voice to consumers. A voice that allows consumers to choose wisely and with caution prior to entrance onto a site that contradicts, it's practice, advertising and credentialing methods. The three obvious and unarguable topics. It is unfortunate that those issues, alone, are not being addressed. Instead the resorting to name calling, assumptions and rhetorical frippery is only adding claim to the initial report. Again, I thank you.

From Alphabeta: "For the initiator - what makes your opinion on how to run the site more valid than that of the person who does all the work to make it run?"
The report was not made to present a better means of running JustAnswer. Nor was it stated as such. See above. The purpose of the report was to warn consumers of the possible disadvantages of usage of the JustAnswer site unless Mr. Kurtzig corrected the standing problems. If you are willing to argue that quality consumer care is not of great importance, we may have a legitimate banter. Until then, you are surmising what is not an issue, but..what could be if you opt to continue.

From Alphabeta:"The only rip off I see is right here where there is an attempt to rip off all the hardworking individuals on the site by claiming they don't exist and are not there to help people and those people who come looking for help and get it." Again, read the initial report. I accept the responsibility of having had sat on one of your nerves. It is with great expectations that there are several more usable ones remaining so that you may continue helping those customers in need of your professional services.

Dr.D: An impressive start on an insupportable ranting that's non related the basis of the report. There are few things I can assure you of, made by others, within these reports. Yet, there is one in which assurance can be made. The poster Kim has not now, nor at any time in the past, presented any arguments in the lounge in regard to any stances taken in this report. I, too, am well aware of the lounge poster you are assuming is one and the same as Kim. As we would love to have this service provider make a statement here, and I recently approached them a second time to do so, they declined on both occasions. Your report was forwarded to them this morning so as to give them an option if so desired to refute your accusations. I sincerely doubt they would lower themselves to do so. With their open and honest expression of views already having been stated in the JA forum, this venue would certainly not be congruent to their writing skills. You must also take into account, this party was not on JA as a service provider when the facts presented by Ms Kim were stated as being seen or done within the Just Answer lounge or site. One must take everything into consideration prior to submitting an accusation, shouldn't they? A huge failure on your part. I can only hope your answers do not reflect the same lack of substance.

Fact: It is with great reason that you should, indeed, be seeking fellow allies within your own arena as suspect. Those that were previously part of a joint venue to challenge the very issues brought fourth here. Be weary my friends. There are two among you whom speak loudly against these very beliefs they support.

JD
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#23 UPDATE Employee

Answers are guarenteed on JA

AUTHOR: Dr. D - (U.S.A.)

It amazes me that people are so bitter that they are actually posting other experts names here. It seems to me that 'kim' is only interested in having the very same experts that she complains about in the Just Answer lounge, "outed", so in some way it might encourage the owner to throw away some of his best experts? You've got to be kidding me.

No one is fooled D, by your phony name or location. Just as you knew who Walter was by his 'tone' and writing, so you reveal yourself with your 'tone' and little slips. It would be smarter to stop complaining here AND on JA about the same things, since the more you talk, the more sure many of the experts know who you are. Since your DEMANDS weren't answered on JA, you decided to post here and possible extract and little revenge and use a little, dare I say, 'extortion' tactics?

You're biggest issue has always been that you weren't able to get into the categories that you thought you should be in. You tried to get into the same cateories you're complaining that people don't have 'licence' to be in, but had you gotten into these categories, it's very likely you would never have posted this rant.

I watch you on many occasions argue and rag on the very same experts you are calling out here. So disrespectful and unprofessional, but I guess that's to be expected. You've spent so much time ragging other experts, simply because they could do what you could not. Your recent rejection for the entertainment category, I believe has pushed you over the edge. You are so very lucky that you can hide behind this rip off report, or your butt would be booted from JA faster that you could say 'but I passed the test'.

Is your life so shallow and boring that you have to sit here and throw rocks at other experts? The fact is EVERY single expert you have throw rocks at, from Walter, to Mschase, Lindie, CSI guy, and others ALL HAVE STELLAR RECORDS at Just Answer. With so many of their fellow experts around and abounding, had they been as bad as you try to point them out to be, how could they maintain records of 100% for so long. These guys must be great at guessing so many answers and satisfying so many customers. I have worked with these experts and refute all of the nonsense that has be spouted about them. Being grandfathered in or being on the site for a long time, does not equate to 'favortism' and it's childish and disgusting for you to suggest that this is the case. Sour grapes was a perfect analogy.

Anyone who lives with so much jealousy and malice in their hearts, simply because they cannot do what others are doing is shameful. Take a cold, hard look in the mirror D....I know who you are. I see that pathetic person inside of you trying to harm some really good people over bitterness and selfishness.

Not only am I an expert at JA, I have been a customer. I recommend JA to family, friends, and co workers. I challenge ANY customer in the world to come on JA and ask for any of the experts that "kim" has tried put down; mcastillo, 4ren6, askwalt, mschase, lindie (eidnil), or any of the others, and it is my promise, if you don't get exceptional satisfactory results from any of these experts, you will get your money back. In fact, that is the RULE of JA, if you do not get satisfactory service, you get your money back, no questions asked. I ask you, where is the rip off in that?

How many businesses will give you the results and if you're not happy, give you your money back? Not many. Try and see through bitter posters (and I'm not speaking to the doctor, who was and continues to be an asset to many experts), but the ones who are so unhappy with their lives and the fact that they cannot get validation when it suits them.

If you are a consumer, you're not dumb, you can see the experts credentials, you have the options to choose from different experts, you get to choose your own price and you get your money back if you're not happy. Everything is not perfect at Just Answer, every new business has its ups and downs. JA is growing every day and improving every day, and a place I can say I'm proud to be a part of.

Oh, did I forget to mention that all answers are guaranteed?
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#24 UPDATE EX-employee responds

justanswer.com: For the Greater Good

AUTHOR: Professor Of Medicine - (U.S.A.)

(Please note: Because quotation marks ( ) from my Word Processing application are replaced with other characters when pasted into the Ripoff box, I am using double ellipses (... ...) for quotation marks.)

I am pleased to respond to a person of strong convictions who expresses him-/herself so well. Please allow me to use the masculine form from this point.

From the day I began on JA (May 10, 2006), at every opportunity, and in response to many problems, I offered all necessary assistance to Mr. Kurtzig, never requesting compensation of any kind. Mr. Kurtzig has a copy of my curriculum vitae; it documents my 45 years of professional medical activities in academia (hence, Professor of Medicine), in industry (insurance, both commercial and governmental, hence, Senior Medical Director), and on the web (see below). I am certain that he will vouch for me.

The mere fact that I was (until the short term banning in December 2007) willing to guide him so that JA's health unit could become better, and if I lived long enough, the best on the web, should suggest that I had the best interests of Mr. Kurtzig, Just Answer, Inc., and my friends in health foremost. Can you find personal gain here?

When you state, ... ... fail to see how a lack of language skills or the disappointment of no longer being on the site turns conjecture into facts, ... ... are you referring to me? The peer-reviewed professional journals that have published my work have found my language skills acceptable. Am I disappointed at ... ... no longer being on the site? Heavens no. Mr, Kurtzig will tell you that it is by my own choice that I am not active on the site now; he still receives e-mails from me concerning problems that active Experts report to me (they fear banning if they post in the lounge, so I carry the message), presented in their own words.

The following is both ungrammatical and fallacious: ... ... The only rip off I see is right here where there is an attempt to rip off all the hardworking individuals on the site by claiming they don't exist and are not there to help people and those people who come looking for help and get it. ... ... Those people certainly do exist; no one has disputed that, but are they all really qualified? Who has claimed that none of the experts in any particular category are true experts? There are many nurses who are excellent as well as a few physicians. In fact, a few months ago, I sent Mr. Ashworth (no longer with JA) and Mr. Kurtzig a list of the nurses and physicians with whom I would gladly work in an urgent, clinical, patient care situation, urging that administration use care to keep them on board. Strange, one of them was the only neurosurgeon to ever appear on JA; in fact, he was one of only two MDs on the site who had been trained in and practiced surgery. I happen to be the other one, and both of us are gone, as are all of the other good MDs who were active on JA when I began. Why?

Now, as to the medical malpractice issue: I take teaching seriously (at age 75, I still teach Biomechanics); I know quite well what a health-care professional should know. My mini profile stated that I tell the client what I teach. Working in a university medical center, I have taught students in the schools of medicine, dentistry, nursing, and allied health sciences (physical and occupational therapy). If I see medical/health care negligence, I act. I have testified for the plaintiff in 34 health-care malpractice matters; I have never testified for the defendant. I will give deposition in my 35th case later this month: negligent orthopedic surgeon. Does this answer you question/inference?

Let us look at the business of expertise, qualifications, and certification from the standpoint of performance. I took an oath to do good. If I or anyone else does anything bad, does not perform up the the standard of practice in the nation/world, he or I should pay.

So, I address only those who proffer advice about health. Some physicians (and surgeons) and nurses do not meet the standard of practice, They do harm. Should I hold experts on JA to a lesser standard that I hold myself or my colleagues? Shall I allow harm to be done and so encourage the perpetrator to continue? Should I excuse an untrained and unqualified individual just because of his ignorance? In my field, we grandfathered people who were trained and had practiced for years before specialty board examinations were organized for a given specialty, not just because they were the first to happen along. I myself am grandfathered in one of my specialties and helped write the first board examination (1967).

I cannot speak for the others contributing to this thread, whoever they are. Nevertheless, it is not my intention to take down JA, to destroy it, and to leave a crew of old timers in the lurch. What I want is to have Mr. Kurtzig understand what has to be done in order to avoid serious consequences; man-to-man contact has had no effect, and this is a last ditch attempt to awaken him.

The disclaimer and statement that this is an entertainment site will not protect those providing answers. I compelled Mr. Kurtzig to post that truth in the lounge long ago. In fact, it may not fully protect JA or him. I posted the opinion my attorney gave me; I did this because I cared for the other experts, to warn them, even though I myself am protected by malpractice insurance. Regardless, if something dire follows bad health care advice, even if the answerer and Mr. Kurtzig win in court (unlikely), the publicity will kill JA. This truth is not exclusive to health.

How you misjudge my intentions. Did you ask any of the experienced experts who it was who had the title Professor of Medicine following his screen name? Whether he was good or bad?

I've been working on the web for years; I was writing routines in Fortran and Cobol in the 1960s, and I currently own two professional sites which I created and maintain (Mr. Kurtzig can give you the URLs). You ask why I do not start my own Q&A site. At this age? Absurd, which is one reaason I decided to help Mr. Kurtzig and JA in the first place.

Sir (or Madam), I think you are relatively new to JA. If you are not, you know who I am (Professor of Medicine}; if you are, you can find out. You can then open the lounge archives to see how hard I worked to help experts and management. You can also access my question and answer threads to see how hard I worked, some times for weeks, to help people in need.

In fact, if you are clever, you can put together a character string with which you can find all of them using any search engine, such as Google, without going through JA. It's really quite simple, and I see that someone has posted to that effect elsewhere on Ripoff. Thinking again of the welfare of JA experts, I would not consider mentioning this were it not already in the public domain.

Just Answer, Inc. has a web site and is a service provider, but it does not operate in a virtual world. Its products influence people in the real world. Any damages that result from its products will not be virtual; they will be real.

All of my productive life, I have worked for the greater good. I continue to do so.

Professor of Medicine
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#25 Consumer Comment

Wow you are an employee of JA? and an insider too?

AUTHOR: Alphabeta - (U.S.A.)

With so few actual employees I'm surprised that one could be living in Florida when the majority are in CA. I know of a couple here and there elsewhere but FL wasn't on that list. Maybe I missed it, or you moved.

Speculation is a wonderful thing but have you ever speculated on honest reasons why someone would not want to be put in the position of handing over their SS# because of someone's vindictiveness and jealousy? Many people including myself are very very careful where they hand out that information nowadays.

See here is the thing - what I see consistently is the conclusion jumping that doesn't match up to facts. You have absolutely no way of knowing anyone's motivation for doing anything beyond your own or what people willingly share with you. Given your accusatory nature, sharing at such a level might be difficult to attain.

Honesty in profiles goes more than one way. Ever consider that some people might claim less than they have for credentials for good reason?

Making fun of others' beliefs is I'm sure a source of amusement for you but that doesn't mean that people don't have those beliefs and that others do not benefit from that knowledge applied to their issues.

You outline the way the site works to eliminate low quality and then are unhappy because the procedure doesn't suit you. You want experts to be qualified but then don't like the methods taken to make that happen.

You also seem awfully hung up on training, lack of skills, and professional status and yet praise your supporter here that has no language skills (swearing is the sign of a limited vocabulary) and acts unprofessionally. The idea that life experience might have some value appears to confound you.

You appear to 'want it all', 'want it right now', and 'want it done only to your liking' Or Else! What are you five? Or could it be with a lack of supporters you made up a fake profile on this site and are supporting yourself? Wait isn't that what you are complaining about in the first place? a lack of honesty in others?
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#26 UPDATE Employee

Only Timbo Seems to Get It!

AUTHOR: Kim - (U.S.A.)

Dear Timbo,

Again my deepest thanks for you responses and obvious grasp of the intent of these reports. You write from the heart and I really loved your posts. NO one at any time has said the TRUE, Skilled, educated, trained professionals at JA are not some of the best. Because they are. THAT is NOT the point. I have read many responses in health, tax, legal, car, pet, and others that are from genuine, caring and top educated professionals. THIS IS NOT ABOUT THEM. THIS whole thing is about those that pretend to be what they are not! There is an Expert who claimed to be an RN for over 3 years, yet is no longer one after the Prove it of Lose it! March 1. She made a boatload of monies on over 5000 accepts. She is now a "medical assistant." Never was a RN. In my world that is mal-practice and worthy of serious punsihment. A Friend came on the site over 3 years ago and managed to piss off many many!Experts with his overposting and horrible answers in health.

Now he answers legal. He is NOT a lawyer, has never been to college, but plays one at JA. However, a customer 3 days couldn't be fooled and wanted a REAL GEORGIA lawyer after he couldn't answer her child support questions. (You and Joe, CSI guy, need to work on your case law that you are so clueless about. And here's a hint, you won't find it on CSI TV). And don't start with Identity Thief issues, the people you stole THEIR answers from should be pissed.
How do these so called Experts get away with this for so long? Because like many other UNEDUCATED and UNLICENSED persons who have read answer after answer from OTHER REAL EXPERTS, they are now parroting them to unknowing customers.

THAT is the issue. Lindie claims as her legal expertize is "Been There Done That". What kind of BS is that? MsC has no legal degree, psychologists degree or for that matter a car technicians certificate, but she claims to be able to give competent answers. I thought the conversation in the Lounge years ago between Kerry and MsC about giving Tarot cards readings to customers really brought credibility to the site(?!) These are several examples of how people in the world of JA extort monies from unknowing individuals for profit only. There are fraudulent people in every aspect, of every part of the world.

THAT is not what this is about. THIS is about people pretending to be something they are not on JA. Period. I am not concerned about the gas station that ripped you off down the street, or the lawyer that gave you bad advice. I am only stating what Timbo has already said over and over, that the "grandfathered" bad experts continue to give JA a bad name. As they migrate to other areas that they know little about because the real experts are catching on to them, but have no power to get rid of them without tons of BE's and DA's. But rather then wait at the EXPENSE of the customer until this happens, Andy needs to grow a pair and get rid of the bad apples. I had no intention of reducing any of the reports to name calling or bullying, but Walt threw the first expected insult "I refused to have a battle of the wits with someone..." and then I realized it was a perfect ending to all of this.

He proved again, that he can NOT think for himself and must use SOMEONE else's words to speak for him. Thanks Walter, a fit ending to make my point AGAIN about unskilled/untrained professionals on JA answering legal questions no less!! You can't even come up with anything original to say to defend your fraudulent role on JA. That says it all. PS. Timbo, if I ever get to Illinois, Ill buy you a beer. Kim
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#27 Consumer Comment

Still more disgruntled experts

AUTHOR: Alphabeta - (U.S.A.)

I fail to see how a lack of language skills or the disappointment of no longer being on the site turns conjecture into facts.

The only person whose actions you are responsible for is yourself. Thus I refer to my actions as I know exactly what I do and how I do it. You all seem to have a lot to say about other people's actions and what everybody else should be doing.

Why are there professionals on JA at all? Is it because the non professionals made it a place to earn income by establishing a reputation for quality information being available through that site?

The start of many a new business is that it steps in to fill a niche where there was not a good product before. If you are so sure you can run everything better why not just start up your own company and see?

If you are trying to improve things, how will attempts to damage the income source and hard work of so many do that? What backing will that win you?

I agree there are things I would change if I owned or ran Just Answer but they might not be the things you would change. Just because your vision of how the site should be run didn't or doesn't match that of those running it doesn't mean you have a grievance.

For the medical professional - how many malpractice suits are filed annually? How many should be filed?
For the mechanic - how many in person service centers regularly rip off customers or do bad work?
For the initiator - what makes your opinion on how to run the site more valid than that of the person who does all the work to make it run?

The only rip off I see is right here where there is an attempt to rip off all the hardworking individuals on the site by claiming they don't exist and are not there to help people and those people who come looking for help and get it.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#28 Consumer Comment

Still more disgruntled experts

AUTHOR: Alphabeta - (U.S.A.)

I fail to see how a lack of language skills or the disappointment of no longer being on the site turns conjecture into facts.

The only person whose actions you are responsible for is yourself. Thus I refer to my actions as I know exactly what I do and how I do it. You all seem to have a lot to say about other people's actions and what everybody else should be doing.

Why are there professionals on JA at all? Is it because the non professionals made it a place to earn income by establishing a reputation for quality information being available through that site?

The start of many a new business is that it steps in to fill a niche where there was not a good product before. If you are so sure you can run everything better why not just start up your own company and see?

If you are trying to improve things, how will attempts to damage the income source and hard work of so many do that? What backing will that win you?

I agree there are things I would change if I owned or ran Just Answer but they might not be the things you would change. Just because your vision of how the site should be run didn't or doesn't match that of those running it doesn't mean you have a grievance.

For the medical professional - how many malpractice suits are filed annually? How many should be filed?
For the mechanic - how many in person service centers regularly rip off customers or do bad work?
For the initiator - what makes your opinion on how to run the site more valid than that of the person who does all the work to make it run?

The only rip off I see is right here where there is an attempt to rip off all the hardworking individuals on the site by claiming they don't exist and are not there to help people and those people who come looking for help and get it.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#29 Consumer Comment

Still more disgruntled experts

AUTHOR: Alphabeta - (U.S.A.)

I fail to see how a lack of language skills or the disappointment of no longer being on the site turns conjecture into facts.

The only person whose actions you are responsible for is yourself. Thus I refer to my actions as I know exactly what I do and how I do it. You all seem to have a lot to say about other people's actions and what everybody else should be doing.

Why are there professionals on JA at all? Is it because the non professionals made it a place to earn income by establishing a reputation for quality information being available through that site?

The start of many a new business is that it steps in to fill a niche where there was not a good product before. If you are so sure you can run everything better why not just start up your own company and see?

If you are trying to improve things, how will attempts to damage the income source and hard work of so many do that? What backing will that win you?

I agree there are things I would change if I owned or ran Just Answer but they might not be the things you would change. Just because your vision of how the site should be run didn't or doesn't match that of those running it doesn't mean you have a grievance.

For the medical professional - how many malpractice suits are filed annually? How many should be filed?
For the mechanic - how many in person service centers regularly rip off customers or do bad work?
For the initiator - what makes your opinion on how to run the site more valid than that of the person who does all the work to make it run?

The only rip off I see is right here where there is an attempt to rip off all the hardworking individuals on the site by claiming they don't exist and are not there to help people and those people who come looking for help and get it.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#30 UPDATE EX-employee responds

Just Answer: Hazzardous to you Health

AUTHOR: Professor Of Medicine - (U.S.A.)

Are the complaints and rebuttals in this thread about JustAnswer.com (JA) facts or fiction? What is the reader to believe? Perhaps I can help.

On October 8, 2007, I refuted Ripoff Report 257861 using the screen name Professor of Medicine (http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/0/257/RipOff0257861.htm); I am now withdrawing that argument. At that time, I was concentrating on getting rid of bogus health experts on JA, people who had no training, no clinical experience, and no certification in areas such as medicine and nursing. In effect, I was the unofficial, unpaid, volunteer quality assurance expert who wanted to make the JA health group the best on the internet, or at least better than it was -- and is now.

Shortly thereafter, I, and others, began to see changes in JA management and operations that were detrimental to the work of the highly-qualified experts who were trying to help people, the front line troops. Unfortunately, those who objected to those changes were either not heard or ignored, and the ones who became louder, were banned from the site. Quoting from one of the earlier reports in this thread, ..... We lost some good d**n experts because of that. Hammer's gone, the fellow that was adopting the kid is gone, one of the really good docs. A few others I can't think of off my head. People that had an opinion. Can't have no opinions on JA. ..... He's right, and I believe I am the doc he mentions.

My objections and suggestions were at first sent privately to Mr. Kurtzig. Lack of action by him coupled with concerns by other Experts him led me to be frank and open in the experts' lounge, naming names and calling a spade a spade. I was speaking for others who were afraid to complain openly because they might be banned from the site. Mr. Kurtzig banned me from the lounge after I termed management's actions as amateurish. I accepted that, intending to back off from quality assurance (for which I never was thanked). If Mr. Kurtzig does not want to have the best health site on the web, or at least one better that he has, the decision is his.

It was almost midnight at my house when I received his message, and I used the JA internal messaging system (Personal Message) to let the moderators, and several of the nurses on line, know that I was banned from the lounge, but I would still be available for consultation. I notified the moderators because they had become accustomed to contacting me at night for help with difficult health questions and with those that needed immediate answers; despite the JA disclaimer that the site is for entertainment only and is not meant to handle acute problems, people do look to JA in emergency situation, particularly at night. No sooner did I send those messages than I received another one from Mr. Kurtzig accusing me of spamming; allegedly, several experts had complained about receiving that informative message, so I was banned from the site for two months. Regardless, what I did does not fit the common use or legal definitions of internet spamming.

It is interesting that the nurses who received that announcement deny complaining to Mr. Kurtzig and are still in contact with me. It is now generally known that management does read what are termed Personal (by dictionary definition, Private) Messages, a fact that had been denied for years.

I have not applied for reinstatement to JA; I have no reason to do so. My object was not simply to profit from answering questions but to assure that only qualified, certified experts answered health questions, and that all the answers that I was able to read were true and accurate. Other questionable answers were called to my attention by good Experts who wanted another opinion about answers they thought were not accurate. We were cleaning house and working to improve the admissions evaluation procedure. Both came to an abrupt halt, and people are now admitted to the health category without verification of claimed training and licensure. At one point, I had offered to verify credentials at no cost to Mr. Kurtzig; he never responded to my offer. Now, Experts have to challenge a suspect person and pay, themselves, for verification of the other's credentials; this just does not happen. Would you pay $15.00 to prove that someone was not what he claimed to be?

Mr. Kurtzig has had (in the past) the opportunity to develop a site that both makes money for him and helps people in need, particularly in health, pets, and legal, where a bad answer can have disastrous effect, but he apparently has no desire to do so. It matters not that he says JA is an entertainment site; that will not prevent paralysis from an automobile accident or death from a brain tumor, either if which can result from a bad answer posted by an unqualified who just wants to make as many bucks as possible.

Although I no longer have access to the site, every day I receive e-mails from concerned, active Experts with copies of lounge message threads and of questions with bad answers, I probably know more about what is happening on the site that Mr. Kurtzig does; I do know that on a daily basis I hear from more experts than he does, and they are not only in the health areas.

My credentials are summarized in the original rebuttal message I posted; the link to it appears in the second paragraph. I am too old, too experienced, and too busy to be disgruntled. I am, however, distressed at seeing answers posted to health questions, answers that are below the standard I expect from first- and second-year medical and nursing students, in fact some do not meet the grammatical standards of 12th grade English, inaccurate statements that are not based on principles and facts known to all health care professionals, untruths that are dangerous if believed by the clients.

Professor of Medicine
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#31 UPDATE Employee

Alphabeta

AUTHOR: Timbo - (U.S.A.)

Lady, ya just gotta stop talking. The more you write the more your showing just how stupid some of the people are on JA. Your not helping here. The reports not about you! Its about Just Answer. All you been doing is saying I do this , I do that. Who the F*** cares what "you" do. There's lots of us that do good stuff. Thats not the reason this person is filing a report. Get over it. You know who should say something? Andy. He answered some other reports here but not this one? Why. Is it cause this persons right and he just can't prove it. Yea, it is. It says right in the beginning of the rip off that if you want to save face for your company answer the complaint. So I guess Andy isn't intrested in making anything right. But Andy never answers complaints anyway so whats the news there.

It don't have to be one customer that pays you $600 idiot. You aren't gettin paid by the customer. Andy pays you a lump sum. You got your head buried under the pail in the sandbox lady..And there ain't no comparison to Ebay with the way Andy runs the site. Your sounding more and more like one of the mods talking here trying to do what Andy ain't man enough to do here. If I were that experience person I wouldn't waste my time answering this crap. All they do is keep having to repeat themself. Like I said before, read the dang first report. Stop with the "I " crap already and say something you know what your talking about on. Christ Lady you are burying JA every time you open your keyboard up and start typing. And your worried about the first report!
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#32 Consumer Comment

Again no facts?

AUTHOR: Alphabeta - (U.S.A.)

Any company has the potential to rip off a consumer or provide services that are below what one might hope for.

Any individual worker has the potential to be doing things against the predetermined and agreed to rules of a venue, or even the laws of the land.

I can assure you of three things
1) No customer has ever paid me more than $600 in my time on JA let alone within a year.
2) The IRS has this year, as always, a full report of my earnings.
3) I am not an employee of Just Answer and have never been an employee of that company.

I agreed to JA terms when I signed up, same as I agreed to EBay terms when I signed up there. EBay is not my employer but they too may hold my funds, charge fees for their services, and have ways to 'punish' those who do not follow the rules. They don't send me a 1099 either.

On JA the 'goods' I sell is my time and information. The price is what the customer decides the information is worth to them, and that is done long before I determine if the question is one I can answer. Once the answer is given, the customer decides whether or not to pay. Is it fraud on the customer's part when they don't pay for the information they said they wanted that I provided for them? How about when they ask question after question all on the same payment?

As for claiming an online business is 'different' somehow, I fail to distinguish between the two venues of online and offline. Both involve people who will vary in nature, abilities and honesty levels. Both have the potential to not meet expectations, to meet expectations, or to exceed them.

Oh and you are not correct about Paypal - haven't you read their latest missives about delays in money availability?

And as for assuming things - one should never do that. And that is one of the issues I have with your reporting - you assume a lot of things but I find the facts are missing based on my experience with the same company. I understand you hold your beliefs dearly but that does not a fact make.

You apparently believe that vast numbers of people are declaring fraudulent information as their claim to being an expert and that Just Answer 'allows' this. But I've seen no proof that this is so. In discussing entertainment vs quality I see nothing wrong with the expectation that entertaining information be valid. Just think of television news programs!

You also seem to believe that only a degreed professional can have valuable information to share and I've found that concept false in every level of life, not just online. Expertise and degrees do not always have anything in common.

Where I would see a 'rip off' would be if a company actively encouraged and directed people to be dishonest in some way in order to obtain monetary gain. I not only don't see that, I also don't act in that manner myself. I resent the implication that simply because I might be able to do so, that of course I must be doing so. The least honest often, in my experience, have the most belief in dishonesty being the rule.

I'd also see it as a possible rip off if the advertising was that you would only ever get an answer from a professional in the field. But that is not the case.

I've not yet found a company, or even a government, that can actually control all the actions of all individuals, though they can and often do punish infractions when found.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#33 Author of original report

rebuttal to Facts

AUTHOR: Ex-perience - (U.S.A.)

The questions you are posing are not relevant to the topic. The purpose of a rip off report is to warn consumers of companies that have already, or could have, the potential to rip them off. It is, then, the reporters obligation to report findings, and present facts, that would substantiate that warning. Such as has been set forth here.

You are correct in the fact that you are not an employee of JA. You are incorrect in the fact that you are an IC. If you insist on contending you are and your earnings are over $600 you must report those earnings to the IRS and the party with whom has paid those earnings to you must file, and supply you with, a 1009Misc. If your premise is that you contract with the customer as an IC, it would be the duty of the customer to pay you directly for that service. No service provider on JA gets paid directly by the conusmer/customer. Anytime you "pay" someone to do a job you have hired them. Because they have not requested a 1099Misc. does not mean they are not entitled, by law, to receive one if payment is equal to, or above, $600.00. If you are paying IC's cash, that is a different scenario and one that is best kept to yourself.

JA is not a venue for your payments. You have been made to believe they are. JA controls the amount and the times in which any service provider receives their share of earned income. In doing so JA has accepted the contractual agreement between the customer and themselves which would negate any contractual agreement between the service provider and the customer. PayPal is a holding company for your funds. You are charged a fee for usage of that holding company. You may deposit or withdraw at any time from PayPal without restriction. JA collects and restricts your funds. JA may hold them for any length of time until they reach a minimum deposit figure. That amount being set by JA at $20.00. There is no justification to your statement that you are contracted with the customer.

In working for an offline company one must assume you are a hire. It appears in the comparison you again, as with the other rebuttals, place emphasis on the word "employer" There is no equation between an offline hire job and JA practices.

When JA advertises that there are physicians, lawyers, vets and tax preparers ready to answer questions they have a valid ad. Consumers on the other hand "assume". when they ask a question. that the Physician, lawyers, vet and tax preparer is legitimate. Therein falls the rip-off. Until Mr. Kurtzig validates the credentials of each and every service provider that uses any one of the imposed pseudonyms in their profiles, JA is encouraging and abetting in fraudulent activity. If JA is gong to list themselves as a venue for entertainment purposes only, then there should be no reason for service provider peer review as entertainment would not require authenticity. JA is using a duel sword to garner monies from unknowing customers with the consent of the service providers. There has been no categorization on my part. It is in the rebuttals made that you have each categorized yourselves. The implication made will be shown below in response to your off site comparison.

If one were to seek professional services offline from a physician, unknowingly that the physician was practicing without a license, that physician would be engaging in fraudulent activities. Equate this with customers engaging with non verified service providers on the JA site. If a party were a receptionist, assistant or nurse in that particular physicians office, and was knowingly aware of the physicians engagement in fraudulent activity, they would be abetting in that fradulent activity. Equate that with service providers working for JA with the knowledge that JA allows non verified parties to practice illegally on their site.

Providing factual information as to JA's advertising, payment, credentialing and lack of providing 1099 misc., is all relevant to consumer concern. The very basis of this report.


JD
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#34 Consumer Comment

Facts?

AUTHOR: Alphabeta - (U.S.A.)

You had some questions about why anyone would object to what is being said here. Simplest answers are some more questions to consider - would you be better off if JA closed? or if they went to a paid employed answering staff? or if you were audited by the IRS? Even if you don't have anything to hide you have to know an audit is inconvenient. Would customers be better off if JA controlled all the answers given and allowed only approved answers?

As an independent contractor, I'm in business for myself, not an employee of Just Answer. The people I contract my services to are the customers.

I've never given an independent contractor any tax forms or been requested to do so. I pay them to do a job. They do it. They go to the next job. If my business hired them then that would be a different situation.

I'm aware I am also not a part owner of the website. Just Answer does handle the payments made to me and takes a cut of the money for providing the venue and the service and the advertising etc. Paypal takes a cut of the money that passes through their hands for their service but they are not my employer either.

I have worked for offline companies where I had absolutely no say in policy, hiring or firing, working conditions, compensation changes, hours I must work, method or timing of payment etc. I have certainly seen many companies offline determine that aggravation wasn't worth the contribution. I don't have to like that or even think it is fair to know it works that way.

I just don't see anything that different on the website from offline work except perhaps that, at one time, experts' input was given more weight than it is now. I've seen that happen when offline companies change from smaller to larger in scope too. Again I don't have to like it to be able to make the comparison between this and other companies.

The premise of this site is that someone is being ripped off intentionally. I don't think that is really the case from either side of the JA experience. I do think it's unfair to categorize all as being the same as a few. Particularly I find it unfair since I'm being categorized that way by that implication.

I do know that on JA I do my best to give out information that will be useful and accurate. I know others who do the same. I'm sure that, just as in any other grouping of people, there are slackers, those who don't do a good job, those who are incapable of doing a good job, those who will say anything to get more money, and people with faked resumes, along with the competent and honest workers who usually outnumber the others.

As for your example of ripping off a customer - that could easily happen in person too and that is my point. I'm not saying it's a perfect situation, but rather that I don't see anything remarkably different about it when comparing it to other work locations. In my experience, many companies have the never realized potential to be better than they are. It does not make them a rip off.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#35 Consumer Comment

Read the report!

AUTHOR: Timbo - (U.S.A.)

I been reading this and that other one the Kim lady did since they were done. And I answered the other one. I'm answering this one now cause you people can't read. It don't take a rocket scientist to get it. I work for JA. I do it cause I like it. I got my own shop, my own people and my own time. Yea some of the experts don't have that privilege but it still don't make it right to lie and cheat. I'm happy this person is speaking up. Doesn't mean they are banned or angry or disgruntled or jealous or any other dam thing you guys wanna stick on their noses. I can't see it meaning anything but facts. If they do still work for JA and even tried to say the same things they be out their asses faster than flea on a dog. We lost some good d**n experts because of that. Hammer's gone, the fellow that was adopting the kid is gone, one of the really good docs. A few others I can't think of off my head. People that had an opinion. Can't have no opinions on JA. There's a rule, you talk anything against JA and they bounce your sorry a*s outta there so fast you'd be leaving a skid mark.
To the last person, you ain't an IC. You write ok but you don't have any sence. Your not an independent contractor. They get a 1099! I know, I am one, I hire 'em, and I have to give 'em.
Next, it don't matter what you make, like the person says, or if you file or not. I know lots that don't. If you were so smart all you gotta do it go any experts question page, do the math. JA says, no talking about income. The hell they make it right there to find for all of us to look at.
How come when someone says the truth the hairs on the backs of you people stand up. Your all finding it real easy to bash these people cause they're talking the truth. You know it, I know it. The only fear I see here is that JA's gonna get called on this one and some heavy metals gonna be ringing in the bell tower.
PayPal. Some of you all just got some slow deposits. So someone posts this in the lounge, one expert says right there she don't claim it, and PayPal tells one of 'em that it's because of no money in the funding account. Another expert says the most he ever made. I been here since the go, I never had PayPal call me and I make darn good money. So that's gotta tell you there are experts making a lot more than me. This ain't going to go unnoticed. It bet dollar to donuts that PayPal got a whiff of this and I don't doubt the IRS will be breathing down all our necks with a year. You can talk all the big talk you want and no ones saying, even this person right here, that there are no excellent experts or good answers. There are. They're saying get it together, do it on the up an up to Andy and run the site like a real man. I said it before. Get rid of the deadbeats from the top down, hire some smart people and get JA where it belongs. Number one. It ain't happening without some serious work gettin done.
Another thing to the last person. Those people coming to JA, they don't know what the right answer is. Some poor woman can ask me about a differential and I give her info. on a master cylinder, pretty it up and make it sound so good that she'd bite at it and accept. I've seen it. the customers ain't coming here cause they got the smarts to figure it out. They are coming cause we're suppose to have the smarts. All this talk about happy customers is just BS when half of em can't tell the difference in what you say. Even I know thats a plain idiotic way of thinking.
I thought maybe someone from JA would say something to make the person posting this wrong. So far I see nothing here but help. Maybe you all better just not talk anymore. Whoever doing this has us all over a barrel writing the facts.
This aint' about disgruntled. This is facts man.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#36 Consumer Comment

Disgruntled Experts

AUTHOR: Alphabeta - (U.S.A.)

I have experience both as a customer and as an expert on the site Just Answer.

As a customer, the advice I paid for gained me a great deal, with very little expenditure, in comparison to gains, and I freely paid for the sound advice I was given and added a bonus. I know that, had I consulted an in person professional, the cost to me would have been a lot more, for very similar information, and it probably would have come with less of a friendly attitude based on previous experience with professionals in that field.

As an expert I'd like to know who is making all that money as I know I'm not despite long hours put in! But it doesn't really matter who earns what unless you are jealous of other's efforts.

With any free lance enterprise your income is often dependent on your work effort, and the quality of your work. As an independent contractor, offering my expertise to others through the site, I find that income dependency is as true on Just Answer, as it is out in the offline world.

As is also true offline, there is opportunity for people to misrepresent themselves or somehow cheat others. The opportunity's existence does not mean that everyone takes advantage of it, or that even a majority does so. I'm not sure it happens more often on Just Answer than it does in any business situation.

The same holds true for IRS avoidance. People who are inclined to do that will do so whether running their own business offline or on. Presuming everyone cheats by hiding income would be wrong as I know I don't. I have found that cheaters do tend to think everyone else is doing the same though.

As an expert, I see myself and others routinely advising people to get in person help from a professional if the solution is not one easily or appropriately provided online. What we can give the customer, as added value, is a basis for doing such a consult, plus the kind of help to seek for best results, and often guidance in knowing what to ask and expect.

I think we also provide a friendly point of view. We want the customer to solve their problem, we want to help, and it matters to us if the problem is resolved. We are generally on the customer's side though we may not be saying what they want to hear, and yes we want to make money for doing all that. It's nice having your expertise valued by others. I wonder how many professionals offline would be nicer to deal with if they knew there was no pay without customer satisfaction. I'm trying to picture telling a doctor sorry you were too late for my appointment so I'm going to take your information but not pay you!

Yes some experts are not professionals with degrees in a particular field where they answer questions. I just don't see how that makes a valid answer any different for the customer. Many times people are looking to validate information already gained from professionals, or in some cases invalidate it. They may want information or conversation that an in person professional will not give them. Of course the key is the quality of the information given, but I don't know anywhere you can be 100% certain of that, not even in the real world office of a paid professional. College degrees do not, alas, confer omniscience on those who earn them.

Someone who focuses on an area of expertise as a hobby may well be more informed than someone who works in a field. Someone who works in a field may have more practical information than someone who has merely studied it too.
I do know that many times with that in person professional, the customer does not get individual attention, or their questions answered in a way they can understand. They may not even be treated with common courtesy. Some professionals are so intimidating the people consulting them don't dare ask a question they may later ask anonymously online with no embarrassment.

I also know that the degreed individuals are often limited by law as to how much information they can give, while answering on the site, where non professionals may have a freer hand in offering advice. Not many doctors or lawyers will tell you where to go to file complaints against them or their compatriots for example.

The big plus for the site that I see for the customer is that the customer gets to choose to pay for the information or not. Unlike in the physical world where you pay whether you are happy with the quality of the service or goods provided or not on the website you get the information and then decide if you want to pay. I can think of many times offline that I'd like to have had that option!

I think you need to stop comparing the website to your ideal of what could, or should be, and instead compare it to the real world. So far, I find it holds up pretty well against that, based on my experiences with good people and bad in both types of business venues.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#37 Author of original report

An even better look into JustAnswer practices

AUTHOR: Ex-perience - (U.S.A.)

For those of you that have responded to my initial report, let me please inform you that RipOff report is not a message board. If you have additional information that is factual or information that would negate what was written in the initial report your responses, then, become valid. It is with sincere expressions that both "employees" have responded and it's appreciated as such. Yet I digress. Provide me with facts. Please note the use of the word employee by both parties. The first in their response and as a listed identity for the second response made by them. In the second parties rebuttal employee is used as the party listed as making the rebuttal. There are numerous options to choose from prior to placing updates or rebuttals. Fact: Just Answer Corp., Serenade Ventures LLC nor Andy Kurtzig "employ" neither of you


To the "friend" I have no intention of ripping you to shreds. I do have intentions of providing facts. You will find within those facts, it is within your own words, that the ripping has occurred.


"The first and foremost objective has always been to get the customer great service. And I must say we do a excellent job." This is a true statement. And again I thank you for helping to support my report. Key words are first and foremost. Eliminated from those words are "by only experts that are qualified to answer"


"As far as the IRS claim.. why is this person so consumed with how someone reports their income?" Why would you not be concerned is more logical question? I don't care if you pay your taxes or the dog expert pays their taxes. What is relevant is that income is derived from individuals making in access of 80,000 a year that do not claim their taxes and Mr. Kurtizig allows that process by not issuing 1009 misc's. A lack of concern only substantiates my initial post as well as my response to the Dog service provider. If you are willing to take funds, from customers, in any manner that is not in accordance with the Federal Government tax laws you are aiding in practice of confiscating of funds by misrepresentation and false advertising.


"As far as the issue of what people claim to be. another leap if you have any real knowledge of the site" That's very possible but not plausible. A peer review system is not effective if the peers are not qualified to judge accurate or inaccurate answers. In order for a peer system to work, those reviewing you must have same or more knowledge in an area then those reviewed. Top experts are those that have generated accepts. Accepts do not validate the answers. Expert reports are not working if unqualified individuals are still providing a service to the customer. From only a brief search I am providing you, the public, with examples of Just Answer customer protective services. Below is a list of some of Just Answer's service providers profiles and what they have stated their expertise is within each category they are allowed to answer questions in. To anyone considering using this website, before giving any money to the site or a service provider, check the profile!


Here we have a service provider that lists "Love of Pets" as her credentials for answering your pet questions: Do you want a lover or pets, a vet. or a certified vet. tech to help your ailing pet? In legal we have "been there done that." Why would anyone be allowed to give legal advice based on "been there done that?" Car. Worked with autos. What does his mean? Does she drive one? Own one? Bring it in for an oil change? Is this the person you want answering your blown gasket question?


Expert Categories
Pet: Lindie (100% Positive Feedback on 4 Pet Accepts) - Love of pets
Legal: Lindie (100% Positive Feedback on 4 Legal Accepts) - Been there done that
Car: Lindie (Expert's Profile) - Worked w/autos


And more...Legal: legal consultant. Lets take a look at this. And ask, if they are one that gives professional advice, they must be licensed to do so. Perhaps an attorney? It's not stated as such so we have to assume this person is one who consults another. Is this who you want giving you legal advice? Would any of you pay a friend to help you make a legal decision? Is that not called chit chat?


Expert Categories
Legal: Walter (100% Positive Feedback on 2252 Legal Accepts) - Legal Consultant
Family Law: Walter (100% Positive Feedback on 1407 Family Law Accepts) - Legal Consultant


And again in legal we have "consultant" See above. In health: "general health". What does this mean? Do they use thermometer properly? Can read the labels properly on Advil. Motrin or Anti Diarrheal bottles? Do they just plain feel good most of the time? What is a background in general health? And is this the person you want giving you advice on sick family member. Tax: Business consultant. There's that word again. and Publicist. Again, how do these qualifications make one knowledgeable in tax?


Expert Categories
Legal: Ms Chase (99% Positive Feedback on 355 Legal Accepts) - Consultant
Health: Ms Chase (99% Positive Feedback on 273 Health Accepts) - General Health
Tax: Ms Chase (100% Positive Feedback on 7 Tax Accepts) - Business Consultant, Publicist


I love this one. Homework Expert? Can't be a teacher they'd say so. What is a Homework Expert? Job Expert? All right. Has this person changed careers a number of times? Does merely having a job make one a job expert? Financial expert? This could be a stay at home Mom that knows how to balance a check book. Come on people. Health: general Medicine again. See Above.


Expert Categories
Homework: M. Castillo (100% Positive Feedback on 271 Homework Accepts) - Homework Expert
General: M. Castillo (100% Positive Feedback on 115 General Accepts) - Senior Research Associate
Job: M. Castillo (100% Positive Feedback on 16 Job Accepts) - Job Expert
Health: M. Castillo (Expert's Profile) - General Medicine
Finance: Castilloca (Expert's Profile) - Financial Expert


This is not even the tip of Just Answers claim to 10,000 or more experts. One can imagine what else is concocked. The rest are pretty self explanatory and I think well worth the read. Again, I can't stress enough, to each and every customer, how important it is to read the service providers (experts) profiles prior to making any decisions as to services rendered. Below are what I found to be positive profiles for customer care:


Expert Categories
Dog: Theresa (100% Positive Feedback on 2755 Dog Accepts) - A Voice for Your Pet
Cat: Theresa (100% Positive Feedback on 1352 Cat Accepts) - A Voice for your Pet
Pet: Theresa (100% Positive Feedback on 626 Pet Accepts) - The Voice for Your Pet


Expert Categories
Pet: Anna (100% Positive Feedback on 438 Pet Accepts) - Pet Magazine Writer
Cat: Anna (100% Positive Feedback on 45 Cat Accepts) - Pet writer/consultant
Dog: Anna (96% Positive Feedback on 39 Dog Accepts) - Pet magazine writer
Homework: Anna (Expert's Profile) - Teacher


Expert Categories
Dog: Peter Bennett, DVM (100% Positive Feedback on 609 Dog Accepts) - Veterinarian
Cat: Peter Bennett, DVM (100% Positive Feedback on 234 Cat Accepts) - Veterinarian
Pet: Peter Bennett, DVM (100% Positive Feedback on 154 Pet Accepts) - Veterinarian
Health: Peter Bennett, DVM (Expert's Profile) - Veterinarian


Expert Categories
Dog: NancyH (99% Positive Feedback on 10646 Dog Accepts) - Dog Expert:Rescue, Train,Breed,Care
Pet: NancyH (99% Positive Feedback on 6517 Pet Accepts) - Pet Health Care, Rescue,Train,Breed
Cat: NancyH (99% Positive Feedback on 1866 Cat Accepts) - Cat Health, Behavior, Care Expert


The author of this article takes no responsibility for the accuracy of any profiles submitted that are being shown as proof of various titles used by Just Answer experts. The above profiles were selected based on the experts listed as ready to answer ytour quersions on the home page of JustAnswer.com.

JD
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#38 UPDATE Employee

A real look at JA

AUTHOR: A Friend - (U.S.A.)

As a expert on the site I had a few things I wanted to say. First off your post reeks of vindictive behavior and as far as anyone saying you are disgruntle. the fact is you make that very obvious.

I have been with JA for over 2 years, I came as a customer and was so impressed with my experts ability to not only answer my question but took a genuine interest in my problem. The expert was kind, courteous, and knowledgeable about her subject. I wanted to be a part of something great so I came forward and signed up to be a expert. In the two short years I have been with JA the site has grown in leaps and bounds. The first and foremost objective has always been to get the customer great service. And I must say we do a excellent job.

As far as the IRS claim.. why is this person so consumed with how someone reports their income? Seems a little odd to me. I mean come on the world is full of people who do not pay their tax's. Is it right. no but at the end of the day who really knows who files tax's or not. As for the experts at JA who knows. unless you have insider information on their tax returns then it stands to reason that you really have no clue what you are talking about. I can claim that the world is going to end tomorrow but with no real proof it is simply a wild accusation I made. no different then yours. I know I claim my taxs...and I assume that everyone else does as well. I guess anyone can not report income....maybe my cousin bob is not reporting his? Should I slam him since I do not know for a fact that he is reporting his income?

As far as the issue of what people claim to be. another leap if you have any real knowledge of the site. What the poster fails to mention is that JA works on a peer review system. If a answer is incorrect there are procedures that are followed from placing the post on hold until the expert fixes the issue to removing the expert. The fact is that every category is routinely watched by top experts as well as mentors to prevent issues.

We have a system in place to check credentials and many experts have went forth and done the verifications on their own dime to help prevent issues. JA takes every measure to prevent issues from having moderators deal with this as well as voluntary Mentors. Most experts take the time to read other posts and do agrees and assists as needed.

The comments made are scare tactics. the person has no real proof of his accusations other then his word. The fact is when people are upset at a company they will often try to stretch the truth or make assumptions to try and bring down a site.

Now I bet you ten to one the poster will attempt to rip me to shreds as he/she has their own agenda and will not be happy until they have attempted to hurt the site that they were banned from. The real fact is that many many people have been helped by JA and many experts have been given the chance to not only help people but to make a living. I have had the pleasure of meeting experts that had they not been there would not have been able to save a loved pets life. Or fix someones computer, or even get their car up and running.

No we can not help every single question out there. somethings can not be fixed, but at the end of the day the great majority of customers are not only helped but saved the large consulting fees that they would have incurred outside of JA. If that makes me a bad person then so be it. I will love every minute of it and keep going forth to help others as the rest of JA has.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#39 Author of original report

You Should be offended

AUTHOR: Ex-perience - (U.S.A.)

You responded to my report. Therefore you got a response back from me Was it directed at you? You bet. Out of the 10,000 or more "experts" that Mr.Kurtzig claims to have working his website have you noticed that you're the only one taking a stance? Why's that do you suppose? Was the initial report directed to you alone? No. Instead of helping Just Answer's cause you helped my cause by stating, in your rebuttal, that you were sure there were experts that didn't claim their incomes. For that I thank you.

It does matter how Mr. Kurtzig claims you, and every other service provider for Just Answer, on his tax filings? Mr. Kurtzig continues to tell his service providers that their contract is with the customer. You just said the same thing, "..the customer is who we work FOR." Again, I thank you. If there is a contractual agreement between the customer and the service provider it would be the customer who pays you. Not Mr. Kurtzig, not Just Answer, not Serenade Ventures.

If you take pride in working for a business that draws in customers via false advertising of professional & licensed service providers while offering no express guarantee that a licensed or professional service provider will help them, you should take offense If you take pride in knowing that unlicensed service providers are helping health customers, law customers and, for you alone, animals or pets with serious health issues, you should take offense. If you are too afraid to take a stance against a business that allows these actions to occur without taking the preventative measures to reduce those incidents, you should take offense. If you are willing to work with a business that places it's sole importance on income over customer care, you should take offense. If you are as adamant in your expression of providing quality answers and not as adamant in the quality of answers given by others, you should take offense.

Before you sit down and debate this in your head for another day or so while you try to conjure up a response, take a few minutes to consider who it is that's the real party offending you.

JD
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#40 UPDATE Employee

I am offended

AUTHOR: Dog Expert - (U.S.A.)

I have read and re-read, debated and re-debated and after a couple of days, here I am. I will speak only for myself..NOT for anyone else. I should have said "worked on" or "with" but I said "for"..my mistake..its more often than not you work "for" someone. We all work FOR someone..even if we are self employed or independant contractors..the customer is who we work FOR. As far as taxes go....if you DON'T claim your income..that is your problem and decision..not mine. I don't think orange is my color so I choose to report. Its as easy as that. If you don't (I don't mean YOU specifically, just those in general) then that is your decision..it has nothing to do with me or Just Answer or Andy. If Andy files and claims and what he files and claims its his business not mine. No, I don't make a hundred thousand dollars per year...I make a pitance that I could make working anywhere for anyone. Could I make more..heck yes, but I only answer what I know...not what I have to go look up. Yes, I know there are experts that do search archives etc, but I am not one of them. I don't claim to be anything I am not. I take PRIDE in who I am and what I do regardless if it while I am working or just living day to day. Yes, I am sure there are experts that dont claim their earnings, but again, I am not one of them and I would appreciate if I was not categorized with those that do not. I will continue to do my job, to the best of my ability and honestly.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#41 Author of original report

One Happy and Thankful Expert

AUTHOR: Ex-perience - (U.S.A.)

Quote:"I have worked for Just Answer for the last 2+ years and wanted to voice my comments on working for the site. Working for Just Answer gives me the flexiblity to be able to work from my home, on my own schedule and with a wonderful group of experts and site administrators and yes, with Andy. The flexibility allows me to be home for my family and the extra income has allowed me to help my elderly and ill mother in law be able to live without worry."

Rebuttal: How is it that you "work" for a company that does not employ you? Who pays you? The customer or Just Answer? How do you get paid? Do you receive a 1099 misc. from JustAnswer? In the two plus years you've serviced customers for Andy Kurtzig have you claimed that income with the IRS? Did you know that over 90% of service providers don't claim their income? Would that not be the reason for all the happiness and thankfulness to Mr. Kurtizig you are conveying? What's the average monthly income derived from JustAnswer by professionals? Say 2,000-5,000 a month? Do you think the IRS would be interested in seeing those figures? How much in penalties do you think an expert not claiming their income would have to pay based on an average income of $24,000-80,000 possible a year? Does tax fraud have possible jail time attached to it? Are you comfortable with that possibility? Are you comfortable with that possibility for your good friends at JustAnswer? Who are you going to go after if that happens? Andy Kurtzig? JustAnswer.com? Serenade Ventures LLC? How? Do you think PayPal would not allow a peek into their records if demanded by the IRS?

So tell me Happy and Thankful Expert, how does it feel to be contributing to the practice of an unethical site? Just how safe does Mr. Kurtzig really make you feel?
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#42 REBUTTAL Individual responds

One Happy and Thankful Expert

AUTHOR: Dog Expert - (U.S.A.)

I have worked for Just Answer for the last 2+ years and wanted to voice my comments on working for the site. Working for Just Answer gives me the flexiblity to be able to work from my home, on my own schedule and with a wonderful group of experts and site administrators and yes, with Andy. The flexibility allows me to be home for my family and the extra income has allowed me to help my elderly and ill mother in law be able to live without worry.

I think the best thing is the relationships that we build with our customers. When they come back to just say a simple "thank you for being here for me" or "your answer was right on" or "you saved my dog's life"...yes, that is the best part. We take this job very seriously...sometimes lives are at stake. I have worked many jobs and this is, by far, the best one ever and I, personally, thank Andy Kurtzig for allowing me to work for him.
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.