;
  • Report:  #260955

Complaint Review: VERICOMM - MBF LEASING - IPAYMENT - EZ CHECK - MICHAEL GREEN - VALENCIA California

Reported By:
- Yulee, Florida,
Submitted:
Updated:

VERICOMM - MBF LEASING - IPAYMENT - EZ CHECK - MICHAEL GREEN
27200 TOURNEY RD VALENCIA, 91355 California, U.S.A.
Phone:
800-361-8530
Web:
N/A
Categories:
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good? What's this?
After I had a really expensive bad check come back, a friend sent Michael Green of Vericomm to see me. I explained my problem, and Mr. Green made his pitch for Vericomm services. It sounded great, but I told him I had a lease for my current equipment which was a non-cancellable 48 month lease with 28 months remaining.

He stated that Vericomm would do a buyout if I accepted his offer for the same type of machine with a check reader and pin pad. The cost was ten dollars more than I was paying, which I thought (at the time) was not excessive.

After reviewing some of the rates (less or the same as current), I believed him about saving on the processing. Of course, all of the costs and fees were not immediately explained or known until my first statements were received and I saw just how much I was being ripped off.

Also, my previous lease company (CIT Leasing, LLC) was still charging for the old processor unit. Therein lies the second problem. Vericomm didn't buyout the old lease as promised and agreed to by Mr. Green. The customer service at CIT Leasing told me they had not been contacted by anyone regarding a buyout, and both of my leases were active.

When they said both, my ears perked up. CIT Leasing and MBF Leasing are the same company! Their customer service people can see both leases at the same time! Not only did I get ripped off for new equipment of the same type, it was with the same company, who could have notified me of this, but chose not to. The picture gets clearer.

Why would a company make a second lease if the first was still good? I most certainly would not unless the original were cancelled, which was promised.

When I contacted Vericomm about this, they professed no knowledge of a buyout promised by their rep, Mr. Green. They said they did not do this and were not responsible for lies made by their reps. The runaround by Vericomm could write a new chapter in "How Not to Treat Customers". They are not willing to modify my agreement or terminate it since they have already sold the equipment to MBF Leasing. And, naturally, Mr. Green will not return calls, Vericomm cannot (or will not) make him contact me.

I found out from different lawyers that the agreement is not valid since it was made based on fraudulent conditions (promises of a buyout and lower costs). A small claims court proceeding will terminate it legally. In the meantime, I plan to close the bank account used by these scam artists and let them know they really don't have a contract with me. I can hardly wait for the bellowing phone calls.

As far as I can tell, Ipayment and EZ Check are just sideliners falling in with the agreements and the terms of the application/contract. Of course, they will demand a cancellation fee, but they can get that from Vericomm, as far as I am concerned. I never talked to them before I was charged by them. The promise of two days from batch report to deposit in the bank has not always been fulfilled, however.

Kemmel

Yulee, Florida

U.S.A.


2 Updates & Rebuttals

Mike

Scottsdale,
Arizona,
U.S.A.
Good job Kemmel

#2Consumer Suggestion

Sun, November 18, 2007

Kemmel good job at making them eat some of the S&*t that they scam every day!


Kemmel

Yulee,
Florida,
U.S.A.
Vericomm, MBF Leasing, New York, Equipment Leases

#3Author of original report

Thu, November 15, 2007

After a few months of bantering back and forth, I convinced EZ Check and Ipayment to close my accounts without additional fees. They both understood where I was coming from, and accepted my explanation regarding the fraudulent agreements made by Vericomm. Meanwhile, MBF leasing and Lease Finance Group, LLC, who is CIT Financial and MBF Leasing under another name (plus many others), were repeatedly calling my home and business and hanging up or not responding to my answers to their calls. My wife and I started responding in kind and calling them every time they called us, and hung up or made them pass us off to another extension and then hung up. After a while, they recognized our number and just would not remain on the line. Incidentally, you have to press "1" to continue in English, or wait until a timer goes through the other languages they accept. That's ridiculous for an American company. Other language requests should have to push a number. I found the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC) judgement against Certified Merchant Services, Ltd., from East Texas, and sent them copies of the applicable results with letters stating my requests to stop the agreements and the calls. I also made a complaint to the Federal Trade Commission, who was quickly responsive to my comments. I got no response from MBF or LFG until late October (eight months after the beginning) when I decided to buyout the original agreement with CIT/LFG to preclude credit problems. After that was done, I was told that the agreement with MBF had been terminated due to a law suit. I had not filed one, but I guess someone had. I still do not know what the suit is. I hope the FTC has started a proceeding to really get them all. I intend to continue my case with the FTC and press for more action against Vericomm and the lease company even though my contracts have been terminated. To get the data for the FTC case, go to their web site and search for the Certified Merchant Services case by name. It is extremely revealing, and makes me wondr why these companies still do their scam without action being taken against them. We need to make more noise about this with the FTC. They will evenyually get them, I hope. Good luck to one and all in their actions.

Reports & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
Also a victim?
Repair Your Reputation!
//