Rentacoder.com RIP OFF!! Arbitration is a PURE JOKE !!!

[C0rnholio]

Just like many other people out there that has had problems with RentaCoder.com I would like to tell my story. After 40 Completed projects on RAC, with a rating of 9.40 I lost one Arbitration that was first conducted by 2 Arbitrators and that later ended-up being finalised by Ian Ippolito himself.

Here's what happened. I was assigned to work on a project about a Flash Intro for a Mercedes Garage in UK. I have worked on the intro and while the work was being in progress I held my entire conversation with the buyer on RAC's message board. After the first mock I showed the buyer, he was very very happy with it ... and specifically wrote how excited he is, how good it looks and how "it's worth the money he's paying" ( his exact words ). However in order for the buyer to see the intro I used my server so he could see how it behaves online etc rather than uploading my work periodically on RAC's message board. Especially after I had his written acceptance I didn't figure there will be any problems in case of Arbitration. However ... after a few minor changes the buyer asked, the intro was in the PERFECT state according to his own messages. When I asked him if it's all good so I can upload it to the FINISHED WORK section so he can release the escrow, he never answered anything for 3 weeks... and then all of the sudden "This is not what I asked for .. I'm taking this into Arbitration". Knowing of the messages on the board I was so sure this was going to be a very easy and short one... Ohhhh I was wrong. I got the Rafeek dude to be the first Arbitrator ... thing is ... in his original bid request, the buyer wrote this :

Jazz up an existing web site with a multimedia rich
home page that maintains the sites theme.

The web site is for a specialist motor car mechanics
and the home page should consist of moving cars, engine sounds, and internal engine shots.

The website is www.mastertechassist.com

Basically its just an Intro page that i need that seamlessly integrates with the rest of the site.

My finished intro can be seen here : http://www.permisauto.ro/web/garage ( the ENTER SITE button links to my homepage cause I thought about using that last security matter before I get paid the money - and I was proven to be very smart to do so, so the buyer is now unable to use it )

Please note the huge gap in quality between the website and the intro I designed ( this is not relevant to the discussion however ).

It's is true that the buyer asked for "moving cars" in the original bid request, and in my intro there are only static pictures of Mercedes Cars flying around ... but he accepted the intro after seeing it completed, that means he also accepted the fact that there was this difference between what he asked and what he got ( RAC rules sais Everything stated in the Message Board becomes a part of the CONTRACT but in our case IT DIDN'T. Why??? I don't know ... ask IAN IPPOLITO ).

Rafeek started testing my deliverables versus the original bid request not giving a **** the buyer already accepted the intro as it was 4 TIMES, in 4 MESSAGES right on their BOARD !!! So he awarded him the wining ... I had the option of asking for a SENIOR Arbitrator and I did ( although I was risking loosing my account for trying to delay the Arbitration ) ... and I got mr. Ian Ipolitto himself ( CEO of RentaCoder ). After Ian actually read the entire message board ( cause Rafeek never did so, cause we kept asking stupid questions that had the answers right in the BOARD ... ) he found the buyer guilty of telling lies. He either lied when he told me he likes the intro or lied in the end when saying he doesn't like it. Either way it's still a lie no matter what. The buyer kept screaming about how he LIED TO ME because he was in a DURESS STATE, and out of time with the project ( that I admit got delayed a bit during work process but he never mentioned ANYTHING about it before ). But what happens if we all lie and then say we were FORCED TO DO SO ?? The thing is I never got from the buyer ONE SINGLE LINE saying he's not happy about the intro, or the project got delayed or stuff like that. He was always ASSURING ME that I would get paid and that he is very happy with the work. Let me quote some of his lines :

- I like the intro, great job man!! I would like to pay you more, as you got skillz, but i aint got much to work with.
- You've done what we agreed so you get the 200 regardless of anything else.
- I did like it, and i think its worth what i paid, and you stuck to your end of the bargain.

These are his own words, right on the message board, after seeing the job complete.

After proving the buyer a liar, Ian Ippolito still awarded him the win because my work did not met the original requirements ( cause of the moving cars issue ). But it didn't matter that the buyer canceled his own original requirements by accepting the work as I have showed him. That thing didn't matter to Rafeek and it didn't matter to Ian Ippolito himself. It didn't matter the buyer lied 2 times in the whole thing :
- once when first assured me I would get paid and then changing his mind
- and second in the first Arbitration when he said the intro I uploaded to RAC is not the same with the one I showed him ( like I would have been an idiot to upload something else knowing I will loose the Arbitration )
It didn't matter that it was proven by Ian Ippolito himself that the buyer is a LIAR. They just found me guilty cause I didn't upload the work periodically. I already admitted that my mistake right when the Arbitration began. But what more proof did they need other than the buyer SPECIFIC acceptance on their own website ???

I really had hoped Ian would have been different than Rafeek ( who didn't read carefully everything being said in the Arbitration ). But I was wrong. They all care more for the buyers who supply work rather than the coders, which are already 200.000 in number so they wouldn't care loosing one by one ... there are still LOTS AND LOTS MORE...

I am honestly very dissapointed in how this whole thing was resolved. Although I am sure that beeing from Romania I have no legal power against RAC or the buyer, and it's not a matter of the 200$ I lost, it's a matter of JUSTICE and the fact that I have worked a product, I have that product ACCEPTED by the buyer ... and I still get BACK-STABBED. I want this to be read by everybody so you know who you're dealing with.

In a similar posting on this forum I have seen that a RAC member is already registered here and gives answers. I would like him/her to answer my thread also because how this was resolved is simply OUTRAGEOUS!!!

Thank you very much RENTACODER.

 

[Rod.Smith.RAC]

Response...

Mario,

My name is Rod Smith from Rentacoder. You have the right to express your opinions about RAC. However some of what you posted does not seem to be accurate, and I am hoping this is because of a miscommunication. I’m going to post here what happened in your arbitration, and hopefully we can clear this up. If necessary, I will post up the entire arbitration as proof that everything I’m about to say is verifiably true.

I reviewed all of the communication between you and your buyer as well as the arbitration. The rating you received sums up the decision that was made at the time:

“Cornholio (the seller) alleged that the deliverables were 100% complete by the deadline and Sol1 (the buyer) alleged that they were not. Rent a Coder tested the deliverables and found one or more non-cosmetic flaws in the deliverables. Cornholio alleged that the contract had been amended during the progress of the project. However, since they had not uploaded the interim work to the RAC site, RAC could not verify this. And the final work did not meet the contract that was stated onsite. All funds in escrow were returned to Sol1. Both the parties were warned, if they try to delay the arbitration by extensive arguing, then their account would be closed.”

Ian did explain to you that when a buyer actually accepts work through the Rentacoder website GUI, it is 100% binding. However this buyer didn’t do that. He said he liked your work in the postings and would pay for it. Then he changed his mind and said he didn’t like it and wouldn’t pay for it. Ian explained to you that the buyer sometimes does have a right to do this. For example, if they find that you didn’t do the work properly that is a very good reason to NOT accept your work, and RAC would honor that. On the other hand, simply being too cheap to pay, would NOT be a good reason and would not be honored. Coders who follow site rules have no problem proving this, but it turned out that you couldn’t prove this because you skirted a few rules (which I’ll talk about in a moment).

The deadline for this project had been implicitly extended; however, you claimed that the work was 100% complete so that is why testing proceeded as such. Your argument in arbitration was that the buyer had amended the contract by stating that the work was done. But since you did not follow site rules (which require you to upload to RAC your deliverables as well as document contract changes onsite) we could not confirm what the buyer agreed to (the changes). You were warned in advance that if you chose to do this, you would be breaking site rules and taking a risk that something bad would happen to you. It’s surprising that you would have done this…but that is exactly what you did. Unfortunately it came back to bite you.

Mario, it’s much simpler to simply follow the rules and upload your work and document contract changes on site. Then you are guaranteed on RAC that you will always get paid for completed work. When you break the rules, you are responsible for the negative consequences…not RAC. It is not fair to blame RAC for this.

Anyway…due to the lack of onsite materials, the contract analysis in arbitration was forced to be based on the original requirements. And based on that, there was a non-cosmetic flaw found in the deliverables which you admitted to in your posting. That is why you lost.

I also wanted to address another allegation in your post. You said “they all care more for the buyers who supply work rather than the coders.” This can easily be proven as false, by the presence of a former RAC buyer who lost arbitration and has complained very loudly in this same forum (and posted on this thread). Obviously there is more here than simple “buyer versus coder”. If you think about it, if we favored either buyers or coders, the other parties would suffer and leave the site. However, as you can see from our stats page, the site is growing very rapidly because we do not do this.
https://www.rentacoder.com/RentACoder/Dotnet/misc/About/ThePulseOfRentACoder.aspx

Mario, I hope that next time you will simply upload your deliverables and all requirement changes to the site, and then you won’t have any problems.

If you have any questions on how to do this, just contact one of the facilitators. They are available 7 days a week at 813-908-9029 to assist you.

Rod Smith
http://www.RentACoder.com

 

[MisterD]

issshhh... when a rep of RAC get's to "google" around about what's the word going on concerning RAC... I wonder what that means...
Worried about reputation or simply taking care of what's being said about "that" reputation... Think that the first opion is more valuable...

Anyhow.. my 2 cents here...

Good luck whit this issue to both.. :hehe:

 

[psalzmann]

In all reality, he didn't have to come here to reply and it's best he did to ensure that others using the RAC service will understand that sometimes this happens. It gives us a sense of a two sided story rather than one side.

It would be absurd for a REP of RAC to come here and talk nonsense. Wouldn't look very good with a community such as this with over 100 thousand IT pros. This is the community that will eventually head over to RAC to get your "purchased" domain names some active development

I know I've used RAC for roughly 3-5 projects with total success for each one. The problem with coders is they usually take on too much and cannot meet proper deadlines. Running a software development company myself, I can totally respect and understand that but there comes a time when you must really find a reusable coder that can be trustworthy and loyal to your needs.

 

[C0rnholio]

Hello Rod,
First of all let me thank you for your time taken to answer me. I know there are always people that loose and unsatisfied people and you can't answer them all.
Second of all ... I posted this message here, knowing there is a RAC representative on the forum and he usually answers these type of threads. The reason why I posted on a public forum and not contacted one of your arbitrators is that my Arbitration was solved by Ian Ippolito and I knew there was no way one of his arbitrators would ever go on braking his decision and most important : I wanted to tell my opinion and let RAC give his answer but in a transparent way so everyone can see what is going on. Not just your internal Arbitration system. Why isn't that made public so if there is a problem, anyone interested can check it out if they want.

I am not saying I am 100% right, I might think I am right but I might be wrong. This is your chance of proving me I'm wrong, and if that's the case then my hat if off in front of you. I want this to be public so the users of this forum can realise for themselves if I am right or wrong.

Let's put down the facts : I designed something ... and YES I did not upload work while I was doing it. I admitted that. The way I usually work is upload the work on my server and give the buyer a link so he can see how it works online, how fast it loads, how the preloader work etc. I know that is my fault on this whole thing. But that doesn't mean I automatically loose the Arbitration.

After I designed it, the buyer specifically told me that it's what he wants, it's even better than he expected and it's worth his payment. He also assured me in 3-4 messages he would pay me for THAT intro. After that I asked him if there is anything he wants modified to it so I can upload it to the Finished Work section so we get it over with. I did not get an answer for a few weeks and after that, he said he wants to arbitrate. I did not ask the buyer to say HE LOVES IT, I did not ask him to ASSURE me he would pay me REGARDLESS OF ANYTHING ELSE ( his own words ).

What is very important here is that the buyer is a liar. Why? Well he lied when saying the intro showed is not the one uploaded and far most important thing is that he is a LIAR for going back on his word in the message board. This was proven by Ian Ippolito and it's very simple to see : first he sais he likes it, he gives me some changes to do ( which I did of course ) so he continued asking stuff related to that INTRO and he also assured me it's exactly what he wants. And later he said "It's not what I want". So he either lied the first time or the last time. It's very simple. It's also told in your own rules that everything a party says in the Message Board becomes part of the CONTRACT. In the message board he could have said he changed his mind and he only wants a blank page with a text on it. That means he automatically cancels his original requirements ( if I also agree to it of course ). So with his acceptance he changes the CONTRACT and I am assured "I kept my end of the bargain" ( his own words again ). He even admitted DURING the arbitration it self he INDEED ACCEPTED MY WORK, cause he was in a DURESS state ( which I have had NO IDEA ABOUT as he never said anything else except HOW GOOD IT ALL LOOKS ).

IF indeed I wasn't on the right track and what I was doing was not as he wanted it, why the hell did he kept assuring me everything is PERFECT and kept giving me changes to the "AWFUL" work ??

Regarding the onsite work acceptance procedure, he couldn't have accepted it through that because he had a few minor adjustments to me made ( some words changes and the background color ). And I did those changes so it meant it's complete and he NEEDS to accept via the website's GUI. But when asked to do so, he answered weeks later saying he wants to Arbitrate. How is it my fault there ?

It is proven very easy he lied to me and the Arbitrators, what more do you need ? Just for the fact that YES I did not upload the work while on progress it doesn't make me loose. He has WAY MORE IMPORTANT faults in the development of the project and the Arbitration it self. It's also said that if a party if proven to give inacurate facts during the Arbitration intentionally, it automatically means HE LOSES THE ARBITRATION AND MAYBE HIS ACCOUNT.

It's clear like daylight what really happened here : buyer asked for something for a client of his, got his product, accepted it ( yes only written ), but the client probably didn't need it or who knows, and he suddently decided HE DOESN'T LIKE IT ANYMORE.

These are the facts I want answers to, and I want all the users to read them carefully and decide for themselves if I am right or not, that's all. OR you can simply prove I am not right and then it's ok with me. How about this : how about I wait until the buyer finishes his 3.500$ project so you can get your FEE correctly, and THEN you can give me an honest and straight answer on my issue. How does that sound ?

 

[C0rnholio]

As it looks now, buyer knew from the start I wasn't going in the direction he wanted and so this means he intentionally pretended to like the intro and so he lied to me, and kept misleading me and making me continue working and finishing up a product he knew he would not accept in the end.

This is is even a more serious unfair behavior towards me and the whole RAC community. This is the reason why I think he should at least pay what he ordered, if not have his account blocked.

I am still waiting for my answers, I suppose he had the time to complete the 3500$ project and RAC got it's FEE so it wouldn't be a problem to "upset" the little buyer now.

What do the rest of you guys reading this think ?

 

[amirata]

C0rnholio..You are absolutely right

C0rnholio..You are absolutely right ..
Only it happened to me after 175 completed Projects within the last FIVE years!!
http://www.rentacoder.com/RentACoder/SoftwareCoders/showBioInfo.asp?lngAuthorId=750872

The arbitrators don't know anything about programming or e-commerce.
Rentacoder was supposed to hire qualified arbitrators.

If you checked my only "two" poor and horrible ratings, you'll find out that they were placed by RAC arbitrators!! never by buyers.

*The first one- was not my fault because the buyer had not set up clearly the project description..me and the buyer asked many times "Rafeek Kulkarni" not to hurt me and the buyer was honest and told the truth to Rafeek that it was not my fault...Rafeek Kulkarni insisted on putting "3 poor rating" !!!

*The second one was relating to a project that I was nearly subjected to theft and manipulation for 3 consecutive months, doing outside the contract requirements.
The first arbitrator Rafeek "again", did not test any deliverables and decided that I should lose !!
The second arbitrator Monica Fitcher, made some effort to test the deliverables but I doubt that she knows anything about e-commerce stores and she was very lazy to refresh her browser.Files on server were write-protected, when I changed the write-protection, she accused me of editing the files!!

while the buyer at the end [after some insults to me and of course ignored by the arbitrator] admitted that I had worked hard and released the 100% payment.Again the arbitrator insisted that I take "horrible" rating and closing of account because I dare to bother them and asked for another arbitration!!

The story has not ended yet...................
The finance department for no reason sent me an email that she will hold "$300" from my account for one full year because they don't want me to leave RAC!!..added to that they hold another $30 to keep account open!!!....added to that they hold $150 expert guarantee for the last completed project..........added to that they held $30 "Payout holdback/carryover (credit)" !!!!

This sums up to $510 held up to keep my account open..though I have many buyers in USA who are very angry right now from RAC since "as they say" they sent this money to me not RAC and some are willingly offering to go to their Florida building to get me the money.

I emailed the finance department and still waiting for their response l!!!

Here is my opinion about RAC:
They should really considering to hire certified arbitrators, otherwise RAC will lose its rank at the end because this site was a success from talented top coders' hard work.

Kind Regards
Amira Taha

 

[amirata]

Good News after all from RAC

Hey all,
I just checked my payment account on RAC. The finance department just released the money to me.After all there are still some fair and honest individuals in the Finance department on RAC.
While leaving their site, I really wish for them to consider their arbitrators qualifications.
Hope you all the best
Kind Regards
Amira Taha

 

[myusername]

Special thanks to rentacoder.com:

I was at my hospitalized week (not allowed work at the hospital)
Trying hard to get back on continuing work on the projects again after but I got the projects are went to arbitration and I've lost them cause RAC said that I was forfeit the arbitrations.

The buyer has got full refund of the projects

The buyer was gave me more and more contents and other things that out of project tasks and asked me to update.. till months! even they extend the deadline and promise for bonuses. OR my 100% work completed I've post will not accepted by buyer.

Now I've got nothing.........
The buyer happy using my hard-works at his websites for free
Now.. I can't even access the rentacoder.com.. they (RAC) blocked my account & my IP

I don't know what will happen to my other one last project from the other buyer that still waiting for buyer acceptance.

Thank you rentacoder.com!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

From: Speechless and anger in mind guy