• Report: #884310

Complaint Review: SynapseIndia

Thank You

Read how Ripoff Report saves consumers millions.

  • Submitted: Thu, May 17, 2012
  • Updated: Thu, May 17, 2012

  • Reported By: Dr. Miller — Charlottesville Virginia United States of America
SynapseIndia
441 Logue Avenue, Suite 150 Mountain View, California United States of America

SynapseIndia Elance Conflict of Interest Mountain View, California

What's this?
What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

Complete documentation of the following account is available from the email address below.  On July 30, 2010,  Empirical Wellness, Inc. hired SynapseIndia through Elance to build a website/app that would assist healthcare providers and researchers to work with patients through cellphone services.   Almost a year after the project due date,  and after receiving the majority of payments, SynapseIndia demanded  the final payment even though they had produced only an incomplete and defective website. Empirical Wellness was forced to filed a Dispute with Elance which escalated to
arbitration.    

Elance allows only the services of Net-arb.com for legally binding arbitration, and SynapseIndia is Elances most profitable provider.  Throughout the 4 months of arbitration, Empirical Wellness  proved that Kapil Gupta (COO of SynapseIndia) repeatedly lied under oath to the arbitrators.  Nonetheless, Empirical Wellness was awarded only a small refund along with the incomplete and deeply flawed code for their website.   Elance paid the financial award for SynapseIndia, but the site went offline on the day it was supposed to be delivered.  Instead of providing the code as ordered, SynapseIndia had sabotaged the  website and subsequently provided only useless sabotaged code.  Net-arb imposed no penalty for perjury, and despite promises from Michelle in Elance's "Dispute Assistance" there were no consequences from Elance for the contractor's refusal  to comply with the "binding" arbitration.  The undersigned personally lost about $30k and two years of work.   

 BTW, most of the reviews of SynapseIndia on Elance are positive.  So is mine. This is because when the due date for the project arrives (and the project is still far from complete), the client  is pressured to provide a positive review.   Not wanting to alienate a contractor who already has our money for an unfinished job,  clients like myself post positive reviews.  Then, when the work goes bad, Elance absolutely prohibits any modification of the review. Journalists interested  in this extensively documented case of perjury, abuse, conflict of interest, and possible corporate collusion,  please contact me at (((REDACTED))) .org. 

Robert P. Mxxxxx, PhD
  CLICK here to see why Rip-off Report, as a matter of policy, deleted either a phone number, link or e-mail address from this Report.

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 05/17/2012 04:46 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/SynapseIndia/Mountain-View-California-94043/SynapseIndia-Elance-Conflict-of-Interest-Mountain-View-California-884310. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on SynapseIndia

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.



Ripoff Report Legal Directory
decisions