Vanmedia Recensioni 82

Risposta di Vanmedia

26 feb 2026

Official Response from Van Media

Mr. Navaratnam,

This review is a complete distortion of what actually happened.

Before believing any of these claims, we strongly encourage readers to review the full WhatsApp conversation here between me and Mr navaratnam:

🔎 https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-MZ_X3WM1srTitntBfEQQHKelBbl0uuy

Everything is documented.

Now, let’s address the facts.

• You joined in December.
• You did not trust us — so we discounted the first month from £400 to £100.
• Ads ran. Leads came daily. You confirmed you were happy.
• You paid £300 at the start of month two.

Then a technical integration expired for several days.

The leads were still being generated inside YOUR Meta ad account.
They were not fake.
They were not shared.
They were not sold to 20 companies.

When the integration was re-synced, the leads that had accumulated during that short period were delivered at once — which is why you suddenly received many together.

This was a technical syncing delay. Nothing more.

You claim you “lost £1,500.”
Meta spend during the affected week was approximately £140.
We offered to refund that period — even though the leads were visible in your Meta account the entire time.

Instead of resolving this professionally:

• You refused calls.
• You demanded £500.
• You repeatedly used insults.
• You threatened to post on every social platform.

And most concerning —

You claimed we are “working with Meta” and “splitting money with Mark Zuckerberg.”

That statement alone shows how far this escalated beyond logic.

We do not “manage Meta.”
We do not control billing thresholds.
We do not work with Mark Zuckerberg.
We do not split money with Facebook.

Meta billing happens automatically when an account reaches its threshold. It has zero connection to lead syncing issues.

At one point, your accusations became so detached from reality that we genuinely questioned whether a rational conversation was still possible.

Again — all of this is visible in the conversation link above.

We stand by:

• The discounted first month
• The ad delivery
• The documentation
• The refund offer
• The transparency

We encourage anyone reading this to review the evidence themselves and make their own judgment.

We operate transparently and professionally — even when faced with extreme accusations.

— Van Media

Risposta di Vanmedia

9 feb 2026

Hi Vittorio, thank you for taking the time to share your opinion about the experience you had with us.

This is the first negative review we’ve received from a genuine client we actively worked with (in contrast to some other negative reviews on our profile that were not from real clients), so I do take this seriously. However, several statements in your post are simply not accurate, and I need to clarify them point-by-point so future readers understand the full context.

You mentioned that I told you that you didn’t know how to communicate with customers and that “most of what Nick told us was lies.” That is a very serious accusation. With all due respect, the reality is that companies who already have a strong and consistent lead-handling system usually aren’t in a position where they struggle to convert leads into booked moves month after month. That is not meant as an insult — it is simply the reality of this industry. Many companies convert leads even when lead quality is average because their follow-up and quoting systems are strong. This becomes relevant to the rest of your review.

1) “We only pay for leads but ads were run at almost double the agreed budget.”
This is not correct. Every client knows we manage paid Meta ads and that ad spend exists. The campaign was set at £20/day, as agreed, and we can provide proof of the budget settings. If you believe the budget was doubled, please provide proof. Also, Meta billing can show uneven charges (more one day, less another) while still averaging to the agreed daily budget over time. That does not mean the budget was doubled.

2) “£400 refundable… no invoice, receipt or refund.”
Our policy is simple: £400 upfront, refundable if within the first 30 days you don’t break even from the leads received after proper follow-up. You paid via bank transfer with a reference. The invoice and receipt exist and can be provided — they were never requested. A refund was also never requested during the working period. Instead, we were removed from the account with around two hours notice and without discussion. The recruitment calls you mentioned were an overflow/system error that I explained at the time and you confirmed was fine.

3) “They monitored everything and changed our phone number.”
We do not monitor invoices. We require our system because activity must be tracked for refund eligibility and performance decisions. We did not change your phone number and cannot do so. We provided a tracking number for attribution, which is standard in advertising. The 5–6am messages were an automation timing issue that was fixed quickly once raised. The intended window was 9am–9pm.

4) “Support within hours was a lie.”
Whenever you messaged me, I replied promptly. You also had multiple team contacts. Messages sent outside working hours or weekends may not receive immediate replies, but I personally responded quickly when contacted.

5) “£983 spent, 54k impressions, zero jobs.”
I understand the frustration. But ad spend and impressions alone do not equal booked work — conversion depends heavily on follow-up, speed and sales handling. An important detail is that an unsubscribe was clicked on the lead-forwarding emails, causing a large portion of lead notifications to be missed. This was acknowledged once identified.

Finally, after access was removed, we were told this was a trial and the channel didn’t work for Edinburgh. That is a fair opinion. What is not fair is turning that into claims of lies, double budgets, changed phone numbers and monitoring invoices.

If you or any reader would like proof of any point above, we can provide it. Vittorio, if you believe I lied, please specify where and provide proof so we can address it properly.

Sincerely,
Nick Vanson
Owner, Van Media

Risposta di Vanmedia

5 nov 2025

write the moving company you represent! - what services we have done for you?

⚠️ COMPETITOR ALERT? ⚠️


Thank you for your feedback. We are genuinely surprised by your comments, as we have no record of working with you and there are no details about your experience in your review.

If you are a real customer, could you please clarify:

The exact service or booking you had with us

The date of your service

What specifically went wrong and how we can fix it

We always take feedback seriously, but we can't investigate or resolve vague or anonymous claims. If you are not an actual customer, please avoid posting misleading reviews, as this can harm real businesses and mislead genuine customers.

If you'd like to discuss this further, you can reach me directly at Nick@vanmedia.co.

Thank you,
Nick, Owner – Van Media

Risposta di Vanmedia

21 set 2025

who are you and why are you ruining my reputation? - write the moving company you represent!⚠️ COMPETITOR ALERT? ⚠️


Thank you for your feedback. We are genuinely surprised by your comments, as we have no record of working with you and there are no details about your experience in your review.

If you are a real customer, could you please clarify:

The exact service or booking you had with us

The date of your service

What specifically went wrong and how we can fix it

We always take feedback seriously, but we can't investigate or resolve vague or anonymous claims. If you are not an actual customer, please avoid posting misleading reviews, as this can harm real businesses and mislead genuine customers.

If you'd like to discuss this further, you can reach me directly at Nick@vanmedia.co.

Thank you,
Nick, Owner – Van Media