Ackermans Fine Art-Dispute-#2967881 : $3,822.90

    • Status: In Negotiation
      This claim has posted for public comment and negotiation. It will remain posted until resolved to the claimant's satisfaction. Suggest a resolution to help these parties reach a settlement.
    • View response from: Ackermans Fine Art
    • Claimant Seeks: View.
    • Claim #: 2967881
    • Amount Involved: 3,822.90
    • Filed On: Nov 12, 2012
    • Posted On: Nov 23, 2012
    • Complaint(s):
      • Billing Problems
  • Review this case.
  • Propose your solution.
  • Win the reward (500 pts)

Complaint(s) Involved (1) Hide

Billing Problems

Claimant's opinion: Did not pay for the services that were rendered for this company.

View Ackermans Fine Art's response

Claimant's opinion:

Filed a fraudulent complaint with their credit card company and reversed the charges for doing the search engine optimization work for his company. This company had thousands of backlinks built for them. Onpage SEO was done for more than 100 pages on the website. More than 20 high end articles written (artist biographies). More than 50 high end videos. A website built as well. The owners name is Kenny Ackerman.

Two other complaints:$2,700.00

Another person with the same type of complaint:

Exhibits View

What Claimant Wants

  • Claimant agrees to resolve this matter under the following proposed terms of settlement.
  • Status: In Negotiation
    This claim has posted for public comment and negotiation. It will remain posted until resolved to the claimant's satisfaction. Suggest a resolution to help these parties reach a settlement.
  • Ackermans Fine Art is asked to agree and settle or make a good-faith counteroffer, offer a rebuttal, or request additional information.
What By When How Much
1. Damages: Reversed credit charges Nov 20, 2012 $3,800.00
2. Copy claim to regulators Dec 03, 2012 $14.95
3. Pay for claim posting cost Dec 03, 2012 $7.95
Cash total : $3,822.90

Response from Ackermans Fine Art Hide

  • Ackermans Fine Art to claimant
  • Status: Rejected
    Respondent has rejected claimant's terms. This claim will remain posted until mutually acceptable terms are agreed to.
The claimant's settlement terms were rejected with the following explanation:
  • I disagree with the explanation / grounds provided

    "The work done by Mr. Burk's was unacceptable because of extremely poor quality; was never completed; and was detrimental to my business. This is a fact not an opinion, which I received from a reputable SEO company. Mr. Burk's charges unsuspecting individuals excessive amounts of money for extremely sub-par SEO services that do nothing to help their businesses. In addition, his underhandedness is clearly evident in the fact that he had me pay him directly and not through the pairing company ( that I found him through, thus robbing them of their commission. "

This claim will remain posted until resolved.

You can help resolve this case by suggesting a resolution.

Additional Communication Between Claimant and Ackermans Fine Art View


The PeopleClaim community includes volunteers who are passionate about justice – consumer advocates, legal professionals, people with knowledge of specific industries and trades, and anyone who has useful suggestions to help disputing parties resolve a case.
  • Show:
  • Sort by:
  • Comment: Contributed by Jennifer S. - On: 11/25/2012
  • In this situation, the parties should sit down with a mediator or other third party neutral to discuss the terms of the contract and whether there was a material breach of the terms of the contract in regards to the services offered or whether there was performance of the contract. Because of the high level of technical knowledge associated with this particular contract, involving a third party neutral with a background in this particular area of expertise would be beneficial to both parties involved, as both parties are alleging that the contract was breached.

Need help resolving a dispute? Learn more.
Important: All information contained herein is the opinion of the posting parties, who are solely responsible for its content. PeopleClaim offers both free and paid services to help consumers, patients, employee, tenants, and others resolve disputes without lawyers or courts, through negotiated online settlement and public disclosure of wrongdoing or unfair treatment.
Claims against parties operating under bankruptcy protection, by law must be processed solely through the appropriate US bankruptcy court. Any claims against this party currently posted on PeopleClaim are available for purposes of public business review only and are not an attempt to collect money or recover assets subject to protections under the United States Bankruptcy Code.

*IMPORTANT: PeopleClaim is a public dispute resolution system, independent of the BBB, small claims court, or other dispute resolution services. PeopleClaim is not a law firm and does not provide legal services, opinions, or advice. PeopleClaim facilitates peer-to-peer negotiation and resolution and crowdsourced input on issues of fairness to help resolve complaints. Users should contact professional legal counsel on any matters of law or regulation regarding their claims. PeopleClaim does not review or evaluate the merits of claims submitted through its site, and users are solely responsible for all content filed in their claims.