C & H Financial Services, Inc.

Good afternoon, It is my understanding that you spoke with *** in our Client Services division today regarding the above account. This business was sent to collections as a direct result of an unpaid
cancellation fee. However, we are willing to absorb the cost and have removed Ms*** and Discount Masters out of collections. We consider that this matter is now resolved and I trust will be also closed on your end

C&H Financial Service, Inc.’s (“C&H”) Response to Revdex.com Complaint ID # *** As directed by the Revdex.com, for the privacy of the Merchant and third parties involved, the complainant will be referred to herein as “Merchant.” C&H Financial Services, Incstrives to offer
its customers the best services possible. The merchant raised a number of issues and although some of these issues have already been addressed with the merchant directly since the complaint was filed, we would like to use this opportunity to help resolve any remaining issues the merchant may be experiencing C&H is the Incorrectly Named Party in this Complaint The merchant is correct that C&H is a credit and debit card service provider. However, the merchant appears to be mistaking C&H with a different entity in the supply chain. The merchant’s grievance appears to be with this third party, not C&H. This Merchant obtained an account through a separate business named “*** ***.” This third party business is not owned or operated by C&H Financial Services, Inc. *** *** sold the account and provides all customer service While *** *** contract with C&H to sell C&H’s merchant services, it does so as independent contractor and is the sole party liable for any wrongful conduct *** *** (or its agents) may unilaterally commit. Given the above, it seems likely that at the time the merchant filed its complaint with the Revdex.com, the Merchant did not understand that any misinformation the merchant was provided came from the unrelated third-party, not C&H An analogy may be helpful to understand C&H’s position in the merchant services supply chain. C&H’s position is analogous to the position of an automotive manufacturer’s position in an automotive supply chain. C&H has resellers (in this analogy, dealerships) across the U.Sthat re-sell C&H’s services. When a problem arises between a consumer and a car dealership (through no fault or misconduct on the part of the automotive manufacturer), filing a complaint against the manufacturer for something a given dealership may have done wrong would not be appropriateThe dispute is only between the dealership and the consumerThe same is true in this instance. C&H is not a proper party to the Merchant’s Complaint Corrective Action C&H still wishes to help resolve this dispute amicably and positively. In that light, C&H staff have reached out to the merchant. The merchant’s account was closed as requestedC&H further agreed to wive any early termination fee involved in this instance, with the waiver of the termination fee being effective once the merchant returns C&H’s equipment Further Follow Up on the Issue We encourage the merchant to contact us directly with any further issues. We also ask that the Revdex.com refrain from any adverse notation in C&H’s record with the Revdex.com or other negative publication concerning C&H as this complaint should have more properly been brought against the third party, not C&H

Complaint: ***
I am rejecting this response because: You allowed Frida *** worked for youAt first, she was very nice saying that I am haing the lowest rate, best service everBut when she swithed the company, she never told me anything nor canceled the serviceThat was the reason why I had been charging since MarchShe told me there is no contract ever, just got the last page signedShe DID fill out the rest!!! It is a cheating!!! When you guys received the contract with different hand writings, you should have questioned your worker or contacted meI am a victim in this case and your EX-worker is stilling lying to me saying that I had the refund bACK in February 2017?? You guys should refund me the amount that I never used your service but still got chargedI tried to call you guys several times but every time, you tried to postpone the responsibilityI am dealing with the company who is behind its agent’s actionThey could not gain my trust if they do not work under your arm !!!that amount is nothing to you, but with small business like ours, it affects very badly
Sincerely,
Tien ***

The level of service and incompetence of this company is appallingWe cancelled services in December of We were then charged fees for January We attempted to call and email multiple times with no response until the end of January telling us that our representative was out of town and that the fees were non-refundableWe filled out the appropriate forms that we were never told about and then we were charged again for February feesI literally called every extension they had listed in their directory and nobody answered or would call me backAfter my third attempt at this I finally had someone answerIt took me calling and emailing him over a dozen times to get anywhere because he kept "forgetting" and then gave me a $refund when the fees that were wrongfully taken out were over $Do yourself a favor if you are reading this and run away from this companyIt is honestly the worst customer service I have ever experienced in my entire life

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2015/07/22) */
Contact Name and Title: James A***, CLO
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: j***@chfs.us
C&H Financial Service, Inc.'s Response to Revdex.com Complaint Case #XXXXXXXX
For complainant's privacy, the complainant will be
referred to herein as "Merchant." Regal Payment Systems is a credit and debit card processorFollowing an acquisition, Regal Payment Systems continues to operate as an internal operating division of C&H Financial Services, Inc("C&H")Regal Payment Systems and C&H are referred to herein collectively as "Respondent." Respondent has taken multiple steps in order to remedy the issue before the Revdex.com
The complaint in issue was filed after Merchant began experiencing technical issues with Merchant's HioPOS (point-of-sale) systemThe system was pre-programed and was fully functional and operational when sent to Merchant a number of months ago
Merchant's HioPOS system began malfunctioning and Merchant contacted RespondentAfter Merchant informed Respondent of the issues, Respondent contacted the manufacturer/service provider, ICG Software Corp("ICG"), in order to determine the proper corrective actionRespondent learned that (i) the software/operating system on the HioPOS had become corrupted; and (ii) the only way to rectify the situation was to have Merchant send the unit into ICG in order for ICG to reset the system to the factory presets
ICG has completed the reset and is currently shipping the unit back to MerchantAs soon as ICG provides Respondent with the tracking information, Respondent will send this information to Merchant
If Merchant would like to contact me, I would be more than willing to explain to Merchant the occurrence, circumstances, and corrective actions set forth hereinI can be reached at (XXX) XXX-XXXXRespondent appreciates the efforts of all parties in resolving this situation and hopes that all parties can continue to work together in the future
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 8, 2015/07/30) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

Good afternoon,  It is my understanding that you spoke with [redacted] in our Client Services division today regarding the above account.  This business was sent to collections as a direct result of an unpaid cancellation fee.  However, we are willing to absorb the cost and have removed...

Ms. [redacted] and Discount  Masters out of collections.  We consider that this matter is now resolved and I trust will be also closed on your end.

C&H Financial Service, Inc.’s (“C&H”) Response to Revdex.com Complaint ID # [redacted].    As directed by the Revdex.com, for the privacy of the Merchant and third parties involved, the complainant will be referred to herein as “Merchant.”   C&H takes the Merchant’s false...

allegation that C&H was in anyway involved with “[redacted]” anyone very seriously, and C&H denies any knowledge of or involvement in any wrongful conduct Merchant alleges in its Complaint.  It is C&H's position that Merchant’s accusations toward C&H are at the very lease entirely unfounded or misplaced, and at the very most defamatory in nature and made with intentional malice.  In any case, these claims against C&H are false.  Any publication of the Merchant’s Complaint (whether by Merchant or any third party) will result in immediate legal action on the part of C&H seeking equitable relief and damages.  The merchant raised two issues (1) alleged service problems; and (2) billing issues.  We would like to use this opportunity to help the merchant understand the issues raised, so that both parties can work together and prevent future problems.  It seems possible that Merchant is unaware of the nature of merchant services, and hopes this response will shed further light on the situation.  A summary of which is provided below.    False Accusations Against C&H    The Merchant is almost certainly mistaking C&H with a third party, in which case the Merchant should withdraw its complaint against C&H and instead pursue its grievance with the proper party.  C&H provides credit and debit card processing services.  Unfortunately, not all matters are within our control.  An analogy may be helpful to understand C&H’s position in the merchant services supply chain.  C&H’s position in financial services is analogous to the position of an automotive manufacturer in an automotive supply chain.  C&H has resellers (in this analogy, dealerships) across the U.S. that re-sell C&H’s services.  When a problem arises between a consumer and a car dealership (through no fault or misconduct on the part of the automotive manufacturer), filing a complaint against the manufacturer for something a given dealership may have done wrong would not be appropriate. The dispute is only between the dealership and the consumer. The same is true in this instance.  C&H is not a proper party to the Merchant’s Complaint.   This Merchant obtained an account through a separate business named “[redacted].”  This third party business is not owned or operated by C&H Financial Services, Inc.  [redacted] sold the account and provides all customer service.  The merchant claims to have attempted to contact C&H on multiple occasions.  In fact, when the Merchant called for customer support, it was calling [redacted], not C&H.  While [redacted] contract with C&H to sell C&H’s merchant services, it does so as independent contractor and is the sole party liable for any wrongful conduct [redacted] (or its agents) may unilaterally commit.  Given the above, it seems likely that the Merchant does not understand that it has been contacting an unrelated third party for service and support, rather than actually contacting C&H.   Merchant may contact C&H directly for further assistance.     Change in Billing Rates   C&H has not wrongfully billed the Merchant in violation of the contract.  Based on the information currently available to C&H, the Merchant’s billings are in accordance with the Merchant contract.  C&H is not the principal party responsible for setting the baseline billing rates, fees, and credit card processing charges used in the industry.  [redacted], and the other members of the Card Association each set their own minimum merchant fees based on both (1) the merchant’s industry; and (2) per credit card sub-type used in a given transaction (examples of different card sub-types include an individual card, corporate card, rewards I card, rewards II card, travel rewards card, etc.).      While billing rates are partially set in the contract, as specified in the contract and corresponding merchant services guide, these rates are influenced by a number of factors, including the exact card type and sub-type used by a given consumer.  The discrepancies in rates charged are a reflection of different card types and subtypes used by the Merchant’s customers.  C&H has no control over the minimum fees the Card Association sets, nor any control over what card types the Merchant’s customers use.  While the Merchant may be struggling to understand the monthly processing charges, there is no fraudulent or misleading conduct on the part of C&H whatsoever.  Any claim otherwise is false and defamatory in nature.      Conclusion   Given the above, it is apparent that the Merchant’s Complaint to the Revdex.com against C&H is entirely misplaced, and should be resolved between this Merchant and the proper third party.  Please ensure that no adverse remarks or review about C&H is posted on the Revdex.com in relation to Revdex.com Complaint ID # [redacted].

C&H Financial Services, Inc. Supplemental Response to Complaint ID [redacted].   This Response is being submitted in supplement to Complaint ID [redacted] (the “Complaint”).  The complaining party (the “Merchant”) makes a number of claims in its Complaint.  C&H Financial Services, Inc. ("C&H") takes Merchant’s allegations very seriously. C&H denies any wrongdoing and is the innocent party in this dispute.  It has been and remains C&H's position that at the very least, the Merchant’s accusations toward C&H are entirely unfounded or misplaced.  Alternatively, the Merchant’s allegations against C&H are intentionally deceptive and defamatory in nature.    C&H provides credit and debit card processing services.   One analogy that may be helpful is for someone to think of C&H as analogous to an automotive manufacturer.  C&H has resellers (in this analogy, dealerships) across the U.S. that re-sell C&H’s services.  When a problem arises between a consumer and a car dealership (through no fault or misconduct on the part of the automotive manufacturer), filing a complaint against the manufacturer would not be appropriate. The dispute is only between the dealership and the consumer. The same is true in this instance.  C&H is not a proper party to the Merchant’s Complaint.   The facts are simple.  The merchant admits to executing a contract with C&H for credit card processing services. The "one page" the Merchant admits to signing is the signature page to the application and contract.  The contract had a 3 year term length, and included clear language setting out the cancellation procedures and specifying the early termination fee.  The Merchant cannot deny that it had an obligation to read a contract before signing it. Claiming otherwise would defy common sense.  If the Merchant failed to do so, that would be the Merchant's severe negligence.  The Merchant itself states that its true Complaint exclusively relates to an issue that arose between three parties: the Merchant, an individual named Frida [redacted], and [redacted] Payments LLC.     The Merchant claims that in April of 2016, “There was a lady name Frida [redacted] who was in charge of the Credit card terminal processor. At that time, she was with C&H Financial Service INC.“  First and foremost, this individual, Ms. [redacted], is not and has never been an employee of C&H Financial Services, Inc.  Instead, upon information and belief, she was at the time in question an employee or contractor of an entirely different company that was also not under the ownership or control of C&H.  Second, the Merchant does not claim that Ms. [redacted] took any wrongful action for the benefit of or on behalf of C&H.  Instead, the Merchant claims that Ms. [redacted] undertook activities to convert the Merchant to [redacted] Payments LLC ( a competitor of C&H).  Specifically, the merchant claims that:     “In March 2017, she [Ms. [redacted]] switched the company [Merchant] to Unified Payments/[redacted] Payments LLC. BUT SHE [Ms. [redacted]] DID NOT TELL ME, JUST ASKED ME TO SIGN A NEW CONTRACT WHICH WAS STILL 2 PAGES. I did not know that until September 2017.”   The Merchant admits that C&H was not a party to the misconduct, and even indicates that C&H is a victim to misconduct perpetrated by Ms. [redacted] and one or more third parties.     It is important to note a number of additional falsehoods/discrepancies within the Merchant’s allegations.  The Merchant claims that Ms. [redacted] had the Merchant sign a new contract with a competitor of C&H in March 2017 (which he Merchant says it in fact signed), but also alleges that the Merchant did not know until September 2017 that the Merchant was contracting with this third party merchant service provider ([redacted] Payments LLC).  This is an overt contradiction.  If the Merchant signed a contract with this third party, then the Merchant would have known it was contracting with such party as that party’s name would have been listed on the contract.     Additionally, If the merchant had switched to another payment processor (whether to [redacted] Payments LLC, or any other party), the Merchant’s monthly merchant statements and bank statements would have indicated the same since March 2017.  The Merchant’s Complaint admits the same was in fact reflected each month in the Merchant's banking and billing statements.   A business would or should notice that for a period of 6-8 months (beginning at some point in March through some point in September or October based on the Merchant’s allegation) the Merchant was being billed twice for merchant processing services.   These items further undermine the Merchant’s credibility and call into question the real motivation behind the Merchant’s complaint to the Revdex.com.     The Merchant does indicate any desire to cease processing through the competing processor (whether [redacted] Payments LLC, or another party).  C&H offered the Merchant the opportunity to remain with C&H (and avoid the early termination fee), and the Merchant rejected this offer.  This action, in combination with the Merchant’s willing execution of a new contract with the competing processing service provider, demonstrates that the Merchant had a clear intent to switch to the third party competitor.  This indicates that the Merchant was complicit in Ms. [redacted]'s conduct.  If the Merchant did not intend to switch parties, it should not have signed a contract with that processor, and then after elected not to process its payments with C&H when given the opportunity to return to C&H.   The basis for the Merchant’s requested refund was simply that the fees, while proper and expressly permitted under a contract (which the Merchant admits signing), should be waived by C&H because third parties (having no relationship to C&H and in fact those third parties being competitors of C&H) allegedly harmed the Merchant through fraudulent or otherwise wrongful conduct.  This is not the reason the Merchant has filed this Complaint.  The Merchant is simply trying to compel a refund and release after breaching its contract with C&H.     In short, the merchant is using this Revdex.com complaint against C&H as an attempt to wrongfully pressure and extort C&H into refunding properly collected fees.   The Merchant is using the Revdex.com complaint process abusively and this conduct cannot be tolerated by the Revdex.com.  False statements of this nature are unacceptable and C&H must act to protect itself.  C&H requests that the Revdex.com resolve this matter in C&H’s favor.  Any public posting of the Merchant’s defamatory statements will leave C&H in a position that requires it to seek legal and injunctive relief  in order to prevent the professional repetitional harm that a false statement of this nature could bring about.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 6, 2015/07/22) */
Contact Name and Title: James A. [redacted], CLO
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: j[redacted]@chfs.us
C&H Financial Service, Inc.'s Response to Revdex.com Complaint Case #XXXXXXXX
For complainant's privacy, the complainant will be referred to...

herein as "Merchant." Regal Payment Systems is a credit and debit card processor. Following an acquisition, Regal Payment Systems continues to operate as an internal operating division of C&H Financial Services, Inc. ("C&H"). Regal Payment Systems and C&H are referred to herein collectively as "Respondent." Respondent has taken multiple steps in order to remedy the issue before the Revdex.com.
The complaint in issue was filed after Merchant began experiencing technical issues with Merchant's HioPOS (point-of-sale) system. The system was pre-programed and was fully functional and operational when sent to Merchant a number of months ago.
Merchant's HioPOS system began malfunctioning and Merchant contacted Respondent. After Merchant informed Respondent of the issues, Respondent contacted the manufacturer/service provider, ICG Software Corp. ("ICG"), in order to determine the proper corrective action. Respondent learned that (i) the software/operating system on the HioPOS had become corrupted; and (ii) the only way to rectify the situation was to have Merchant send the unit into ICG in order for ICG to reset the system to the factory presets.
ICG has completed the reset and is currently shipping the unit back to Merchant. As soon as ICG provides Respondent with the tracking information, Respondent will send this information to Merchant.
If Merchant would like to contact me, I would be more than willing to explain to Merchant the occurrence, circumstances, and corrective actions set forth herein. I can be reached at (XXX) XXX-XXXX. Respondent appreciates the efforts of all parties in resolving this situation and hopes that all parties can continue to work together in the future.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 8, 2015/07/30) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2015/06/18) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted]
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@chfs.us
C&H Financial Service, Inc.'s Response to Revdex.com Complaint Case #XXXXXXXX.
For the privacy of the Consumer and Merchant, the complainant...

will be referred to herein as "Merchant" and the merchant's customer will be referred to herein as the "Consumer."

While C&H Financial Services, Inc. ("C&H") empathizes with both Consumer and Merchant's situations, the company takes Merchant's allegation that C&H "seems to have stolen" Consumer's money very seriously (See Merchant's Revdex.com Complaint Case #XXXXXXXX). It is C&H's position that Merchant's accusations toward C&H are at the very lease entirely unfounded or misplaced, and at the very most defamatory in nature. It seems possible that Merchant is unaware of the current status of the matter, and hopes this response will shed further light on the situation. A summary of which is provided below.
(1) On or about May 1, 2015, Consumer attempted to make a debit card purchase at Merchant's store in the amount of $306.09. The transaction declined on the terminal level due to an interruption in Merchant's phone line.
(2) A phone line interruption is an issue either within Merchant's (and/or Merchant's phone/internet service provider's) exclusive control, and is a problem over which C&H has no involvement, nor any ability to anticipate or correct.
(3) Despite the phone line issue, the sale went through and the amount was debited from Consumer's account. Consumer and Merchant understandably desired to rectify the situation.
(4) This issue was brought to C&H's attention, and in collaboration with the bank, C&H staff was told that the transaction should be reversed within a few days because the debit was never settled.
(5) On May 4, 2015 Merchant contacted C&H again in order to check on the status of the issue. C&H spoke directly with the Consumer at least three times and informed Consumer that C&H was continuing to work to resolve the issue.
(6) The reversal ticket was resolved on May 8, 2015. On May 8, 2015, C&H staff informed Merchant that it would take 7 to 10 business days in order for Consumer to see the transaction removed from her statement.
(7) Despite C&H's communications with Merchant, Merchant repeatedly called C&H staff multiple times within the subsequent week. Merchant was told that (i) it had not yet been 7 to 10 business days; (ii) Consumer should see the money returned to her account by the end of the following week (May 22, 2015); and (iii) the timing of the issue resolution was within the purview of Consumer's bank and outside the control of C&H.
(8) On May 19, 2015 C&H staff followed up again with the bank and was informed that the transaction was successfully reversed, and no further action was required.
(9) C&H staff received voicemails from Merchant on May 21 and 22, 2015 and returned Merchant's calls, however, C&H staff's calls were not answered and C&H staff left a voicemail informing Merchant of the resolution.

Merchant has requested a resolution through which (i) the Consumer is issued a refund; and (ii) for someone from C&H to personally talk to the customer and make amends. The Consumer's bank has already confirmed that the issue is resolved. Since C&H has no access to the Consumer's bank statement, and has not heard back from the Merchant or Consumer since May, all C&H can rely upon is the information the bank provided. If the Consumer would like to contact me, I would be more than willing to explain to Consumer the occurrence, circumstances, and corrective actions set forth herein. I can be reached at (XXX) XXX-XXXX. C&H appreciates the efforts of all parties in resolving this situation and hopes that all parties can continue to work together in the future.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 9, 2015/06/22) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

Hello Mrs. Tien [redacted], Our sincerest apologies for your adverse experience with an outside agent associated with C&H Financial Services, Inc.  We strive for excellence and take complaints very seriously.  Our policy of 100% full disclosure is supported throughout the application...

process, which outlines merchant responsibilities including account cancellation.  Please refer to the following sections of your signed merchant application:Merchant Application, Page 1:  Important Merchant ResponsibilitiesMerchant Application, Page 4 (Confirmation Page):  Sections 8 and 10Merchant Application and Agreement Booklet:  Section 16.1We would be happy to reinstate your account with us, however, we cannot waive the cancellation fees for which you agreed to pay as witnessed by your signature.  We wish you a successful 4th quarter of 2017. Thank you,C&H Financial Services, Inc.

Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because:I have called multiple times to both parties and they both say to call the other one. Im  not trying to be negative just want to know where to send it and them to stp charging me thank 
Sincerely,
Ramon [redacted]

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 7, 2015/06/18) */
Contact Name and Title: [redacted]
Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX
Contact Email: [redacted]@chfs.us
C&H Financial Service, Inc.'s Response to Revdex.com Complaint Case #XXXXXXXX.
For the privacy of the Consumer and Merchant, the...

complainant will be referred to herein as "Merchant" and the merchant's customer will be referred to herein as the "Consumer."

While C&H Financial Services, Inc. ("C&H") empathizes with both Consumer and Merchant's situations, the company takes Merchant's allegation that C&H "seems to have stolen" Consumer's money very seriously (See Merchant's Revdex.com Complaint Case #XXXXXXXX). It is C&H's position that Merchant's accusations toward C&H are at the very lease entirely unfounded or misplaced, and at the very most defamatory in nature. It seems possible that Merchant is unaware of the current status of the matter, and hopes this response will shed further light on the situation. A summary of which is provided below.
(1) On or about May 1, 2015, Consumer attempted to make a debit card purchase at Merchant's store in the amount of $306.09. The transaction declined on the terminal level due to an interruption in Merchant's phone line.
(2) A phone line interruption is an issue either within Merchant's (and/or Merchant's phone/internet service provider's) exclusive control, and is a problem over which C&H has no involvement, nor any ability to anticipate or correct.
(3) Despite the phone line issue, the sale went through and the amount was debited from Consumer's account. Consumer and Merchant understandably desired to rectify the situation.
(4) This issue was brought to C&H's attention, and in collaboration with the bank, C&H staff was told that the transaction should be reversed within a few days because the debit was never settled.
(5) On May 4, 2015 Merchant contacted C&H again in order to check on the status of the issue. C&H spoke directly with the Consumer at least three times and informed Consumer that C&H was continuing to work to resolve the issue.
(6) The reversal ticket was resolved on May 8, 2015. On May 8, 2015, C&H staff informed Merchant that it would take 7 to 10 business days in order for Consumer to see the transaction removed from her statement.
(7) Despite C&H's communications with Merchant, Merchant repeatedly called C&H staff multiple times within the subsequent week. Merchant was told that (i) it had not yet been 7 to 10 business days; (ii) Consumer should see the money returned to her account by the end of the following week (May 22, 2015); and (iii) the timing of the issue resolution was within the purview of Consumer's bank and outside the control of C&H.
(8) On May 19, 2015 C&H staff followed up again with the bank and was informed that the transaction was successfully reversed, and no further action was required.
(9) C&H staff received voicemails from Merchant on May 21 and 22, 2015 and returned Merchant's calls, however, C&H staff's calls were not answered and C&H staff left a voicemail informing Merchant of the resolution.

Merchant has requested a resolution through which (i) the Consumer is issued a refund; and (ii) for someone from C&H to personally talk to the customer and make amends. The Consumer's bank has already confirmed that the issue is resolved. Since C&H has no access to the Consumer's bank statement, and has not heard back from the Merchant or Consumer since May, all C&H can rely upon is the information the bank provided. If the Consumer would like to contact me, I would be more than willing to explain to Consumer the occurrence, circumstances, and corrective actions set forth herein. I can be reached at (XXX) XXX-XXXX. C&H appreciates the efforts of all parties in resolving this situation and hopes that all parties can continue to work together in the future.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 9, 2015/06/22) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

They have to be one of the worst CC processing companies.
1. Very difficult to find merchant fees on website
2. Cant email them
3. They don't return calls
4. Improperly train staff. Every other answer is I don't know.
5. Even when calling them, if you are the 1st in phone line nobody answers the phone.

DO NOT USE THIS COMPANY!!!!!!!!!!!!

Talked with a [redacted] with [redacted] and was to get set up with them to process credit cards. He was to get information and machines to process the credit cards, never received them, talked with him several times, never got any information from them on how to process cards, phone or swipe machine.
--------------------------------------------------
9-6-13 additional info from consumer:
We have not heard from this company. They got their money and ran, what a joke of a company. We are glad not to have them processing our credit card transactions.