Dear Paul,
Just to let you know of a problem with one of your advertisers. I purchased a DC2030 cash register from Datacap that was advertised in your Green Sheet. Datacap was given all the merchant's information including mid number, check mid number and American National Bank's information.
During installation it was discovered that debit and check guarantee did not work. Working with Datacap tech support on three consecutive days it was finally determined that Datacap did not support Checktronics format or the debit format. Datacap made promises that their engineers were working on the debit format and that it would be ready before the end of January. This all started on December 13, 1997. To keep from losing the sale I installed a Tranz 330, Pinpad, and printer for debit and check guarantee.
On follow up calls Datacap said they were working on the problem but had not finished. On February 3, 1998 I was served papers indicating I was being sued by my customer for breach of contract. To keep my company from going to court for a reason I had no defense for, I picked up the equipment and repurchased the contract from my lease company. Datacap agreed to refund my money for the cash register. Datacap also said they were willing to give my customer their new register at no cost. Only one problem is their new register does not support debit either. I also asked for the $400 I paid my sales rep. Datacap refused this request and said they were only willing to take the register back and that was it. I believe I gave Datacap plenty of time to solve this situation. I also spent a lot of time and long distance phone calls trying to resolve this. Datacap has been running misleading ads in your paper and their sales people are making claims their product does not live up to.
Thank You
Karl Scheele
Owner
Merchant Services
The Green Sheet, Inc., forwarded a copy of this letter to Terry Zeigler at Datacap. Their response follows:
Dear Green Sheet,
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the letter from Ken Scheele. I am really disappointed that we could not meet Mr. Scheele's needs. Our reputation as a quality supplier has been built on having delighted customers, and if our customers are not delighted, we do the right thing by taking back equipment for a full refund.
Although we are not able to make Mr. Scheele a happy customer, his version of the facts are a bit distorted. Here's the reality:
On November 26, 1997, Irene Scheele contacted Datacap indicating an interest in purchasing our DC2030 ECR for a small gift shop. Information was forwarded, including a listing of Datacap certified network applications. On December 9 Irene called and said she would buy the unit if it would work with her customer application. She said she would know within the first few days. Based on her request, Datacap approved a 7-day trial period, during which time they could return the unit without stocking charges if it did not meet their needs.
On December 12, Mr. Scheele called and ordered the unit. The unit was configured to operate with Paymentech's network. This is where the problems start. When the unit was purchased, there was no mention of needing check processing or debit. Had this been mentioned, we would not have been able to configure the unit to meet his specific needs and the process would have stopped there. Because he was not trained in the sale or use of cash register, we spent the next week training him by telephone. During that time, Mr. Scheele indicated that he wanted to process checks. We subsequently found out (through his bank) that the check service was Checktronics. We had to deal with his bank because he was unable to fill out the parameter sheets properly and our tech support people volunteered to contact his bank to get the information. Ultimately this information was provided verbally. We told him that we did not support Checktronics, but that we would spend some time seeing if our other check protocols could be used to handle Checktronics to meet his specific needs. After two days of engineering time, we determined that it would not work reliably and suggested that he use CrossCheck instead, as that is a fully supported split dial application. He then said that he wanted to do debit through Paymentech. Datacap is currently in development on the latest Paymentech application that supports debit, but it is not yet fully complete and tested. We told him that completion was estimated to be 4-6 weeks, and that upon completion we would make it available to him at no charge. At his request, we agreed that if the Paymentech debit application was not available with 6 weeks, we would take the equipment back and refund 100% of his purchase price. He was satisfied with that commitment.
On February 3, 1998 Ken called and said his customer was suing him for not delivering debit within the six weeks. We apologized, told him the new debit application was still a few weeks away, but said to return the unit for a full refund as we had earlier committed. He told us that the agreement wasn't good enough, that he wanted additional monies to cover his salesperson commission. We simply said that we would not be involved in his operation costs, without having been advised ahead of time. He browbeat my salesperson a few times, then wrote you a letter.
So, in summary: the problem here was that Mr. Scheele did not adequately represent his needs at the purchase point. When it became clear that we couldn't fully meet his needs with his choice of network and check processor, we tried to work with him (at significant cost to Datacap) to satisfy his customer. During the period that the unit was used, there were no operational problems with the register reports. Datacap has not in any way misrepresented our equipment. We currently support 6 full debit applications and seven check processing applications. Our certified network application listing (copy attached) clearly shows that debit is not supported on Paymentech. It is in development and will be available shortly. We feel as though we acted honorably with Mr. Scheele, and made extraordinary efforts to train, install, and support him. I simply will not be involved in paying additional operational costs, without that having been made a part of the business deal. It seems as though he is willing to inflict as much pain on Datacap as he can to cover his additional costs. It is unfortunate because Datacap did nothing but turn handstands trying to meet his needs, without charging him one cent for any of the extra services. Truly an unfortunate situation. The right thing for Datacap would have been to pull the plug back in December and return the equipment before the customer had been installed. My salespeople have learned a valuable lesson.
I know its is your policy to print letters from your readers. I don't know if it is your policy to print all letters. Hopefully you will consider the circumstances of this situation, and not give Mr. Scheele an easy forum to harp on Datacap for an additional $400. I wasn't sure that the request was going to stop at $400, and since we did nothing wrong, I don't want to be extorted by Mr. Scheele through The Green Sheet. Although this response is longer than I would like, I wanted to be sure that you and Paul were comfortable that I had all the facts in the situation, and had honored all commitments to Mr. Scheele. If I can be of further assistance please contact me.
Terry H. Zeigler
