I have been charged, where do I find out what for? - page 12

New comment
 
the client should be frozen 100% of the amount, the contractor 5%
and charge the guilty party or both, as the case may be
 
Contender:

Wonderful, but why in a situation like this is paid for by the client and not by the agent who resigned?

The returnee, I would have fined him, because he took the job just to get hold of the work, outbidding others who could actually do it.
 
Yoschik:

Your post also has to be paid for. Electricity, people...

Pay

Wolverine is easy, in your case.
 
Armen:

Do I understand correctly that the money should be frozen after the developer has agreed the terms of reference? In this case, we have a situation where the money is frozen BEFORE the agreement?


Exactly.

and i don't understand, Mishek, what's so funny?

 

In general, if the service administration needs a really good service, some lessons should be learned from this situation.

If not, you can always blame the service user, and on any far-fetched grounds. The simplest one is "I want to".

 
sergeev:

Exactly.

and I don't get it, Mishek, what's so funny?

What's that? Look at the rules. They are not blocked by the CUSTOMER, but by the service itself. The CUSTOMER can do nothing but move on to the next step. Agree the TOR in the system without money? I will look at you. That's ridiculous, it's not possible.
 
Armen:

Am I right in thinking that the money should be frozen after the TOR has been agreed by the developer? and in this case we have a situation where the money has been frozen BEFORE the agreement?

If money was frozen, but developer did not agree upon TOR, then yes, the customer is a loser and he is punished by 5$ for unwillingness to read rules.

But in this case, customer was lucky and developer approved TOR

2013.11.27 14:01

DeveloperIm_hungry has confirmed TORapproval step. On the account of the customer (kylinar2012) 100.00 credits are frozen

At this step the customer has money frozen according to the rules.

so how would compliance with the rules help the customer avoid a fine in this case? what should have been done?

No not right, you are being misled, and shamelessly so. I actually submitted the TOR, the contractor looked at it, accepted it, I got a message from the system:

2013.11.27 14:01

DeveloperIm_hungryconfirmed the step "Agree ToR". There are 100.00 credits frozen inthe account of the client (kylinar2012)

I.e. the TOR was there, the contractor confirmed (by hardware) that it was accepted, the system then froze the money, and not the other way around.

 
sergeev:

Exactly.

and what do you say about the second part of my post?

Just if the money was frozen and the developer did not agree to the TOR, then yes, the customer is a loser and punished by 5$ for not reading the rules.

But in this case, customer was lucky and developer approved TOR

2013.11.27 14:01

DeveloperIm_hungry has confirmed TOR approval step. On the account of the customer(kylinar2012) 100.00 credits are frozen

At this step the customer has money frozen according to the rules.

so how would compliance with the rules help the customer avoid a fine in this case? what should have been done?

 

sergeev:

It is not good for you to deceive people like that, making me look like a fool who gave the money himself and is now unhappy about it.

The money was blocked by the system and the algorithm of the system. And not because of my stupidity.

 
kylinar2012:

sergeev:

It's not good for you to deceive people like that, making me look like a fool who gave away the money himself and is now unhappy about something.

Well, how do you explain the fact that

DeveloperIm_hungry confirmed the step "Agreement of TOR". There are 100.00 credits frozen in the client's account(kylinar2012)

there was no agreement on the terms of reference


you and the proger decided to skip the most important step.

That actually determines the price of the work and the timing.

1...5678910111213141516171819...57
New comment