Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Excuses wearing thin for YDNA Transfer problems

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Excuses wearing thin for YDNA Transfer problems

    We were told in late 2014 that there were "software upgrades" and other problems with YDNA Transfers, which is a major function for my 50 member research team: over 38 results were done by Sorenson Genomics for our members, and since abandonment by Ancestry, we wished to take advantage of the $19 transfer to get these results out there, regardless of the limitations on transferred results.

    To this end, we were aided by Janine Cloud of FTDNA, who set up a system for us to have unused test kits in our UNPAID PRODUCTS, so that we could use on demand as long as we had funds. We sponsored nine transfers in 2014, and the first seven went well: the results were manually entered, the release was electronically signed, and all JOINS to our Project showed up on the Project GRID, which was a good result.

    Not that there were not a lot of bumps on the way. Because FTDNA does not take a non-functioning or flawed product out of their marketing pages, as we have seen with 111 score tests recently, where the lab they were using dropped out of service. Does this not compel Mr Greenspan to drop or re-message that offering online with a warning until there is a resolution? Instead, the customer pays for some products then suffers in silence for a seemingly interminable wait time. It is not unreasonable to think that a person could die before getting what they paid for, based on the delays reported in other forum messages.

    In Oct and Nov of 2014, we noticed that the last two transfers were either not showing any results on the kit page at all, or were only showing there and not on our Project GRID, which is our raison d'etre.

    I thank Janine for her efforts, but it would be foolish of me to remove any more General Funds to pay for a process that has not yielded the expected Project results since October and November of last year. Since these transfers are paid for by donors or sponsors themselves, the outlay of $38 is not the main issue, as I can (not happily) reimburse them out of my pocket. The issue is the non-performance of a function that is crucial to our turning to FTDNA in the first place.

    I can only repeat myself: our results are only transferred so that they will appear in our Project, the donors are not interested in accessing individual kit sites since what we are paying for is the ability to show results in comparison with other results. This is especially important as transfers cannot run MATCHES, and quite a few of our YDNA donors are dead.

    I have been able to get two new donors to do full YDNA tests, but another will not because he cannot see any results for his presumed match (B13701) in the Project.

    One customer's kit was delayed a month, because FTDNA needed a confirmation of his mailing address, which clearly shows on his transferred kit page. There is no real explanation for this problem when there is both a physical address and e-mail address clearly posted.

    Another customer received an e-mail instructing her to call long-distance to verify a mailing address to the shipping department. The customer has no long-distance service for financial reasons, the person she was requested to call does not answer the phone at all (I had to make the call), and there was no alternative method of communications offered to the customer, as a REPLY to the e-mail is apparently not sufficient. This is not the way to run a railroad.

    As for the transfers, I do not understand where the breakdown is, as seven previous transfers went with no problems. Why would I ever use a transfer again? I had in mind to do all of these and more, to accommodate the 38 scores we have from Ancestry/Relative Genetics, but we have no confidence in this procedure anymore.

    I was at least able to congratulate FTDNA on Customer Service last year, but the excuses are wearing thin. In the case of a $19 transfer, it would be more sensible to simply stop offering that service, or to charge the customer only on completion of the service offered.

  • #2
    clintonslayton76 ,

    I sent you a private message to get more information.

    -Darren
    Family Tree DNA

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks Darren

      sent one back at you, hope this can be resolved.

      Comment

      Working...
      X