Complaint Review: Peter Michael Martinez - minneaopolis Minnesota

Peter Michael Martinez and iNETDX are still at it, just look up his name to see the numerous reports of scamming people.

New websites:

facebook.com/petermichaelmartinez

unitedforawakening.com

youtube.com/unitedforawakening

newkingdom.org

petermichaelmartinez.brandyourself.com

and countless others...........

New phone #'s:

1-612-643-0448

From: iNETdx HQ <[email protected]>;

To: Christopher Schankowski <[email protected]>;

Subject: Re: Child Safety Application

Sent: Wed, Sep 5, 2012 9:30:07 PM

I hear you Chris and all I could do was offer. I understand your limitations and I apologize for the inconvenience that this situation is causing. I wanted to be long done with this by now. I'm so frustrated I don't know who to yell at.

No, it's not your fault. I don't appreciate being called names but I understand because believe me, I absolutely went off of my client when he couldn't pay his bill. So I know how you feel and frankly, I don't blame you one little bit.

I have been trying to find alternative financing and I haven't been successful. It is not for a lack of effort.

In order to get any of the files I have to pay this bill. I'm over a barrel. I just didn't see this one coming. Now you're threatening to sue I may as well put a gun to my head.

I remember your circumstances and I apologize. I expected to spend $10 - $15,000 on this app just to have a huge opening. You're not the only one disappointed.

My son is a double heart surgery survivor and he's only 1 year old. It's been a hell of a year Chris. It doesn't get any more real than that.

So please don't call us names or think us evil. We didn't want to tell you there was a problem for obvious reasons.

The last thing we wanted to do was get a client upset.

Thank you for your understanding. I'm going to continue to pursue solutions.

• [email protected]

 

 BRIAN J. SMITH

Attorney at Law

Telephone:  (817) 944-1654               P.O. Box 1435                         Facsimile:  (817) 382-5193

                   Fort Worth, Texas 76101

September 24, 2012

Peter M. Martinez

iNETdx Corporation

9298 Central Avenue NE

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55434—via regular and certified mail, return receipt requested

Re:  Child Safety Mobile Application Development Agreement

Dear Mr. Martinez,

I am writing on behalf of my client Christopher Schankowski regarding the contract he entered with your company for the creation, development, and sale of his child safety mobile device application concept (“Application”).  

On June 28, 2012 your employee Stephany Michelle Martinez emailed my client your Mobile Application Development Agreement (“Agreement”) dated effective June 26, 2012, executed by you.  The Agreement provided that Mr. Schankowski would pay iNETdx a total of $13,400.00, with an initial payment of $6,700.00 due immediately and iNETdx would provide complete design of the Application.  The Agreement additionally provided that no further payment would be due from my client until completion of the Application (a copy of the Agreement is enclosed for your reference).  Pursuant to the Agreement, my client made the initial $6,700.00 payment.  However, on September 17, 2012, you emailed my client requesting payment of $5,700.00, even though the Application was not completed at that time.  As of the date of your request, my client was under no obligation to make any additional payments.  iNETdx, however, was still obligated to deliver the completed Application to Mr. Schankowski as agreed.

Your demand for additional money from my client prior to delivery of a completed product in contravention of the Agreement amounts to a breach of the contract.  Additionally, my client has been disappointed with the level of communication he has received from your company, including the lack of status reports or progress updates.  In view of your breach, my client desires to rescind the contract, release you from any further obligation to develop the Application, and seeks full refund of all money he has paid.  Accordingly, Mr. Schankowski now considers any contractual relationship with you or iNETdx to be terminated and hereby demands full refund of his initial payment of $6,700.00.  Mr. Schankowski also demands you, iNETdx, and all affiliated entities cease any and all further work on the Application.

My client looks forward to receiving full payment as soon as possible.  Please ensure that payment of $6,700.00 reaches Mr. Christopher Schankowski, care of Brian J. Smith, at the above address no later than October 15, 2012.  If no payment is made within this time, my client is prepared to exercise all of his legal rights in pursuit of payment.  As you are no doubt aware, if this matter proceeds to litigation Mr. Schankowski is entitled to all necessary attorney fees as well as prejudgment and post judgment interest on the balance.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Very truly yours,

Brian J. Smith

First of all let me state emphatically that I can’t stand bullies of any kind. As a public person that works with people all around the world I encounter all types of personalities but the most offensive is the personality that seeks to inflict suffering upon another for entertainment or sadistic reasons.

When I read this “complaint” with my name on it, I could hardly believe my eyes. Here was someone who clearly had an axe to grind with no intention of being reasonable, civil, or honest.

When I see such things happen to others, I go on the offensive. I find it reprehensible that people resort to such tactics to “steal, kill, and destroy” with impunity.

If you’re a Christian, please take a moment to pray for this person because after all, we are called to pray even for our enemies. Amen.

Answering The Complaint

There are several things to note about this “complaint” that aught to make the average thinking person scratch their head.

1: If you have the person’s contact information and know how to reach them, why post something defamatory when you could just call them or send them an email ... or better yet, follow the resolution conditions as stated in the contract?

To date I have NEVER received an email from this complaintant and was completely unaware of this posted complaint until it was sent to me by someone who was concerned about my reputation being tarnished.

I would more than welcome a dialogue with the complaintant but again, no attempts to contact this person have been successful.

2: The Complaint lists the name of the Ministry and contact information inferring that his complaint is somehow related to the Church or Ministry.

While this may seem relatively innocent, it is actually quite insidious because the poster wanted this “complaint” to show up on the search engine with an intention of defaming not only Peter Michael Martinez but also United For Awakening which of course had absolutely nothing to do with this matter.

3: The complaint offers no PROOFS of any kind other than the complaint itself and calls into question the character of another while demonstrating considerably poor character in the process!

If you’re seriously trying to resolve a conflict, let’s all just say that Cyber Bullying is probably NOT the best solution. If you know how to reach someone as clearly this complaintant could do, then picking up the phone or sending an email is 100x more reasonable and likely to result in an amicable solution for the matter.

Clearly that was NOT the intention of this complaint. It was meant EXCLUSIVELY to defame, discredit, and attack Peter Michael Martinez personally and by extension all those involved in our ministry.

4: Did you notice there is NO contact information for the complaintant?

While BLASTING our contact information, again for SEO purposes and with a malicious intention of defamation, this person just happens to leave THEIR CONTACT information off making resolution very difficult. It makes you wonder if perhaps, that’s the whole idea.

This is what Cyber-bullying is all about. It leaves the victim powerless, defamed, and at the mercy of someone demonstrating serious malicious intention.

The Merits Of The Complaint

According to the complaintant’s own words …

I placed an add to have a mobile app developed, Stephanie Martinez reached out to me and set up a call back with Peter Michael Martinez.

He then proceeded to con me into a deal where the app was going to cost $13,400 to develop which we would split the cost $6700.00 from me and $6700.00 from him and in return he would get 50% of the return profit.

He sent all contracts over to me by email, i signed, he signed and i sent my $6700.00 to him by way of wire transfer.

He and Stephanie kept in contact up until after the first deadline was missed. About 2 weeks after the first deadline was missed they began with the excuses.

I decided to give them a one month extension, which they also missed backed by more excuses.

The final straw was when i called to get a refund and he asked me for the $6700.00 that he signed a contract to be responsible for.

That was followed up by another excuse that another client didn’t pay him and his baby is having heart issues. Not sure if any of this is true as communications had ceased all together.

1: Did you notice any attachment to a contract?

I didn’t either. The reason is because the terms of the contract were quite specific and were not as this person alleged or I would think they would quote the actual contract itself. As the contract required the person to pay the entire amount they don’t want to talk about that.

2: Were there any terms of the contract shared?

No one orders a $13,400 custom mobile application without thoroughly reviewing the terms and conditions of such a transaction and for this person to infer that they were “conned” is ludicrous.

The nature of that business is such that many contractors BID on a project and the buyer selects the bid they want. This is not something anyone can “con” you into.

At the time I represented a team of very talented custom iPhone and Android mobile application designers and developers that could design the application.

We quoted on the job and left it at that.

We were called back by the customer and they agreed to make the purchase. We answered ads routinely and quoted projects and left it at that. As I recall the customer hoped we would be interested in a stake in the finished product so, that was written into the contract as an OPTION that we could execute should we elect to. We declined.

This was all done over the phone and was 100% above board in every respect.

3: Did you hear that a district court case was filed? Neither did we.

If, as a business person you are defrauded, the manner of redemption is relatively simple, you sue. By taking the matter before a judge in district court, the arguments are presented in a civil manner and the case is adjudicated by an impartial judge or jury.

Clearly this person has no difficulty in finding the person they believed responsible for their financial loss so, why not sue?

This is America where we settle disputes in civil ways, not with disparaging and defaming statements meant to exact some form of revenge upon another who was not at fault.

Cyber bullying like this has one intention … damage.

This person is skipping the terms of the contract, skipping the judicial process for civil matters and has decided the punishment for Peter Michael Martinez is a public flogging. This is neither rational nor civil. It is malicious with intent and forethought intended to do irreparable harm to reputation and ministry.

I suspect the real target is … Christianity.

This is clearly slander and libel with a clear intention of defamation. See http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Libel+and+Slander

For Clarity Sake …

As is customary in any custom work performed by web/graphic designers, the buyer places a 50% deposit on the work to be performed and then upon completion pays the balance of 50% to receive delivery.

In this case this person was hoping we would be so enthralled with the mobile application’s profitability that we would finance the final 50% FOR HIM.

While we appreciated that option, when the contract was due it was not something we could afford and we informed the customer that they needed to pay the balance of their contract for the work to be released.

As this was custom work, once we initiated the work, we pay whatever fees are needed to get the project started so there is no going back.

When we informed the client that he would have to pay his balance and that while we appreciated the offer to partner with him in that business opportunity, we could not finance it. We would have to pass.

He then told us he did not have the balance and had no means of completing the contract. While regretful, final payment for the work was his responsibility. We were left between the contractors and the client holding the bag.

In fact it was US that extended an additional 30 days to allow him time to seek alternative financing and when that was unsuccessful the client wanted a refund but as any business person understands, when you order custom work and only pay half the cost you have agreed to, you have only paid for hard costs.

This was NOT something we could refund and we even attempted to help find other potential partners or investors that would partner with this person but we were unsuccessful in finding a solution.

Unfortunately the custom designers cannot keep unpaid work pending indefinitely and eventually the project was scrapped.

While it was regrettable that this project was unsuccessful for this person, to then turn around and blame Peter Michael Martinez or anyone else for his own inability to complete his contract requirements is disingenuous at best. To then go online and post a defamatory complaint meant specifically to slander and assassinate character is reprehensible.

If I could have found an alternative solution for this person, I would have.

We all have to “count the costs” when we endeavor to do anything. We have to learn to live with our failures as well as our successes. That is life and hard on us all but we live, we learn, and we grow.

Had this person simply paid the second half of their contract as agreed, there would not have been a problem and they would have been selling their application on the apple store along with millions of others.