I do not recommend cooperation.
Throughout the entire project implementation period, communication with the client was constructive. All agreed tasks were completed in accordance with the technical assignment, reports were provided, campaigns were set up, initial results were obtained — applications, calls, increased efficiency compared to the previous period. The client repeatedly confirmed in personal correspondence and phone conversations that they were satisfied with the results and planned to leave a positive review.
However, after the project was completed and all work was handed over, instead of the expected project closure, the client began to change their position, although they did not provide any specific claims or errors. Initially, they wrote that they were still "sorting it out," then — that "better results could have been achieved," although they previously said the opposite. After a few days, without explanation, they marked the project as "not completed" and left a negative review, describing a situation that does not correspond to reality.
Fortunately, the arbitration objectively clarified the situation: it was confirmed that all work was fully completed, and I am entitled to full payment, which was made.
I consider the client's behavior unconstructive and emotional. If a specialist does not suit you — that is one thing, but denying the fact of project completion after its acceptance and confirmation from your side — is quite another.
I do not recommend cooperation without clear documentation of all agreements in writing.
Throughout the entire project implementation period, communication with the client was constructive. All agreed tasks were completed in accordance with the technical assignment, reports were provided, campaigns were set up, initial results were obtained — applications, calls, increased efficiency compared to the previous period. The client repeatedly confirmed in personal correspondence and phone conversations that they were satisfied with the results and planned to leave a positive review.
However, after the project was completed and all work was handed over, instead of the expected project closure, the client began to change their position, although they did not provide any specific claims or errors. Initially, they wrote that they were still "sorting it out," then — that "better results could have been achieved," although they previously said the opposite. After a few days, without explanation, they marked the project as "not completed" and left a negative review, describing a situation that does not correspond to reality.
Fortunately, the arbitration objectively clarified the situation: it was confirmed that all work was fully completed, and I am entitled to full payment, which was made.
I consider the client's behavior unconstructive and emotional. If a specialist does not suit you — that is one thing, but denying the fact of project completion after its acceptance and confirmation from your side — is quite another.
I do not recommend cooperation without clear documentation of all agreements in writing.
