ComplaintsforCapitol Broadcasting Company, Inc.

• Initial Complaint

  09/15/2021

  Complaint Type:

  Billing Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I am a small business owner who was approached by in June 2020 (during the pandemic) and was offered professional services of: Branding & Website Development On 6/22/2020, ******** *********, LLC (DBA *************) paid $17,125 for the above services (please see attached receipt provided by ******** ******** at WRAL). The Sales Order Form indicates the Terms and Condition Contract Dates to be June-September 2020 (four months). To date the website is still incomplete and I am still unable make sales.

  

  Business response

  10/08/2021

  Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2021/09/15) */ Contact Name and Title: ****************, VP & GC Contact Phone: ************ Contact Email: ******************************** On June 22, 2020, the customer and WRAL Digital Solutions ("WDS") entered into an agreement for rebranding and website development services (the "Project") related to the customer's business. Included with this response is the proposal which was attached to the Sales Order the customer provided with the complaint and the more detailed Scope of Work ("SOW") for the Project services to which the parties agreed. The SOW is clear that the timeline for delivery of the services was dependent on the timely provision of client deliverables, information and feedback. The proposal and SOW are also clear about the number of revisions that were included in the services, and that work outside the scope of the SOW would be billed at an hourly rate. The customer essentially asserts in the complaint that WDS is entirely responsible for the months of delay that occurred with the Project. It is clear that the Project took longer than the four (4) months originally outlined by WDS; however, the vast majority of the delays were the result of the customer making several material changes in the business plan during the course of the Project, including the customer's decision not to renew the lease for the brick-and-mortar storefront and to pivot to an online-only business model. WDS only became aware that the customer intended to close the physical storefront in November or December 2020, not at the commencement of the Project in June 2020. This business model pivot after the Project had been underway for months had a material impact on both the rebranding and the website design aspects of the Project and resulted in multiple sets of revisions and corresponding delays. An example of one of the material impacts of the business model pivot was customer's intention to begin sales of *** products online. Despite having sold *** products via a physical storefront, the customer was unaware that online payment processors apply a high level of scrutiny of medical and health claims made by websites selling *** products and do not allow their services to be implemented until their review is complete. This issue alone created significant delays which were not caused by WDS. Also after the Project was well underway, the customer (1) dropped business offerings that had been central to the business plan (e.g., nutritional counseling), (2) added offerings that were seemingly unrelated to homeopathic wellness (e.g., DJ music downloads), and (3) changed their mind about whether they would offer only their own products or offer third party products as well. For example, the SOW agreed to in June 2020 specified that WDS would upload up to 20 products to the ecommerce functionality of the website; however, by the time the website went "live" in July 2021, the customer had provided over 800 products (ranging from office supplies to beanbag chair covers) to WDS to upload to the site. There is no question this added to the delays. WDS maintains that the months-long delays in the Project were due to the customer's business model pivots and service offering changes which led to WDS providing services above and beyond what was originally agreed upon by the parties. Consumer Response /* (3000, 12, 2021/09/25) */ Please keep this case open as the complaint has not been resolved. This company stole more than $17,000 from me and I need further assistance. Because of this matter, I have been financially drained and I am working 80 hours per week to maintain my finances due to this matter with this company. ******************************* Business Response /* (4000, 14, 2021/10/04) */ The customer has provided no justification or rationale for re-opening this complaint and WRAL Digital Solutions stands by its initial response. Despite the accusation, WDS has not "stolen" from this customer and it respectfully requests that the complaint be closed (again).

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩