I told you I'd pay 300 for the work you did and then you said you wanted 500 which I told you wasn't good since you told me 300. You then told me you were just going to take everything back and messaged me about removing the root etc via DM.
I will upload all of the conversation. We agreed on 300, if it was too much work you could have said no.
I offered to pay thr 300 we agreed on for the project even though it was still broken and I'd have to pay someone else.
We are still waiting. Where is the conversation? If you do not make an active effort to counter the allegation with some sort of proof, you will find yourself with an appropriate tag and the flag will be supported too.
Can you either upload the conversation or explain what is stopping you uploading it?
It does not matter if the amount in question is $3 or $300 or $3000, it is a matter of principle that you be paid if the work was completed as per the requirements. One of the most obvious questions to mind here. Why was a mutually agreed escrow not used when it would have been the safest way to ensure payment?
Yes, exactly mate! Considering the previous accusations, I can see this user follows the same pattern. I usually avoid escrows for amounts less than $500 but I guess I'm wrong. Can we please have right flags and feedback in place so we can prevent other developers from wasting time and effort? Thank you!
I would recommend you change your approach with regards to payments.
Plans could change (as they have done for many people) but as long as mutually agreed roadmaps are altered then it should not matter. At the end of the day you are giving your time to accommodate whatever the arrangement is between yourself and your client therefore you should be paid as long the work is delivered according to the agreement.
If having an escrow for that is the best way to ensure payment, you should think about it after this incident.
