Certification invalidated after only six weeks - escalation options?

[wasabi019]

Hi,

I took the Utah CSA exam in May. I was notified yesterday that my certification has been invalidated, and that per the certification agreement they will not tell me why. The only resolution they're offering is that I pay a "$200 re-entry fee."

I have opened a support case as I see in the forums others have gone through similar issues when migrating their corporate NowLearning accounts to personal ones, and my courses were taken during Tokyo which could be an issue (prior to the April blackout)... but they're flat-out stonewalling me. 

I'm feeling like I've been robbed; I paid ServiceNow $300 for an exam six weeks ago and now they're like "we're taking this away, we won't tell you why, and if you want it back you have to pay $200." If I were to pay the fee (which is absurd unto itself) there's no guarantee they don't pull the same thing on me in the future.

My question: what escalation options do I have within support or ServiceNow as a whole?

[jMarshal]

Did you open a support case with Now Learning or Now Support? If the later, try the former & if the former, do not try the later, that is where your case should be.

I'm not sure the certification agreement states that you can have your certification invalidated without disclosing a reason to you...but the reason could be a violation of the certification agreement...and as per the agreement if your certification is invalidated, you do need to pay a re-entry fee to get back into the program.

Now Learning should be able to tell you what you did as a violation, so that you can avoid that after re-entry into the program...but I also wouldn't be surprised if the policy is that you pay $200 to get back into the program, and then you can learn why your previous certification was invalidated...and it is at that point, they will offer you an avenue to appeal, potentially being reimbursed the $200 re-entry fee if your appeal is approved/validated.

[wasabi019]

Hi,

Thanks for your reply. Per my original post, I have filed a support case (NowLearning). EDIT: I'll open one with NowSupport as well, I thought they were the same thing.

They're stonewalling, because in the certification agreement it says they don't have to tell me why. Section 11.1 of the agreement says "Proof of misconduct is not required to cancel scores." Agreement PDF

Per this article there is no appeal process.

[jMarshal]

Yes, I saw that -- was just letting you know that there are 2 support teams and one will be equipped to help and the other won't...so make sure you're filing the support case with the correct team (Now Learning, not Now Support - fka "HI").

....and based on the additional information you've provided, you already have your answer. My previous comment was on the assumption that you violated the general agreement -- and that you may find out what that specific clause was through recourse with Now Learning...but you already know, based on what they've told you.

ServiceNow's security vendor has determined that your test results are "suspicious enough" (for lack of better phrasing) to warrant action. ServiceNow has gone so far as to inform you that the vendor-in-question's methods are defensible, meaning that they've already proven (in court, likely) that they are not wrong (your test actions/results are "suspicious enough")...so appealing is a waste of everyone's resources (yours and theirs).

They also won't tell you what it is to cross the threshold of "suspicious enough" as that would compromise the work being done by the security vendor, likely they have an agreement with that vendor which prohibits them from detailing such information -- even if they wanted to.

"Stonewalling" would be if they didn't provide you any rationale and then ghosted ya...but the rationale here is sound, from my perspective & TBH, allowing re-entry for cash is arguably better than what some other organizations might do for a situation like this (remove your license and ban you from practice)...I suspect ServiceNow's use of automation with the security vendor is why re-entry is an option and that repeat violations likely will result in your inability to re-enter, at all.

[wasabi019]

Unfortunately it appears I don't have access to Now Support as I'm not attached to a ServiceNow partner currently.

Stonewalling would also include replying with copypasta answers that don't address the complainant's concerns until the complainant eventually tires and goes away, which is what they're doing. I've requested escalation, we'll see if they play ball or continue with the stonewalling.

As an aside, I wouldn't read too heavily into "legally defensible" because it doesn't imply impervious, and as a claim there's no liability/penalty for its use (e.g. it cannot incur a case of primary estoppel) nor is there an obligation to perform associated. Perhaps they've successfully defended against similar complaints in a court, or perhaps it's smoke and mirrors.

My underlying concern is that:

* I paid $300 for the cert.

* ServiceNow has snatched away what I paid for, for reasons they will not share.

* ServiceNow will give it back if I pay an additional $200.

* ServiceNow makes no guarantees they won't do the same thing again as a means of extracting another $200 from me (or anyone, judging by the other community threads with the same issue) in the near future.

If you bought a sandwich for $3, and shortly thereafter the sandwich maker takes it from you and says "pay us another $2 if you want your sandwich back," you'd likely be unhappy with the experience, and concerned that if you cave to the demands for an additional $2, that the sandwich maker might come back in a few minutes and demand yet another $2.