ComplaintsforDef0x LLC

• Initial Complaint

  09/10/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  November 13th $4,000 was paid to ******** **** from Def0x in order to have a manufacturing test application made. The Statement of work is attached that stated he would completely the work within 4 weeks. Due to his refusal to get in direct contact with the **** supplier the work was un-necessarily extended for 9 months and the first milestone with branding and other basic requirements were not achieved. After third party audits, it became clear that the last code that was pushed to Git hub prior to the audit was in December of last year. Post the audit he pushed two updated on August 26th. During that push he did not take care of anything that was agreed to upon the last email. He has since been removed from ************** Play Store after it was established he did not complete the final tasks within a reasonable 8 days time. Due to Rite Innovations trying to maintain any goodwill that is left, we fully expect a refund of $3,000 and he may keep $1,000 for any of the work that he did complete. There was no fully functional test app available after 9 months, and the statement of work was never completed as agreed. His new address is here in ******** as of August 2024: ***************************************

  Business response

  09/10/2024

  Dear ****************,

  Thank you for your message regarding the project with Def0x LLC. I appreciate the opportunity to address your concerns.
  

  I would like to clarify that the core issue with the **** supplier remains unresolved due to their faulty hardware, which was beyond my control. Throughout the project, I maintained consistent communication with the supplier in an effort to address the hardware issues that caused delays.
  

  The decision to exclude certain code from the repository was based on the need to avoid further complications due to the faulty **** hardware. I pushed the code in August to demonstrate that the functionality was intact despite these ongoing issues.
  

  Regarding branding, the only request was to use black and white coloring. This requirement has been fulfilled as per the agreement.
  

  The audit process was affected by the auditors lack of basic software development knowledge, which impacted the review. Despite these challenges, I continued to work diligently and fulfilled the requirements within the scope of our agreement. The additional demands related to managing issues with the **** supplier were outside the original contract and were not compensated.
  

  As the features that were successfully developed, including Bluetooth communication and disconnection, have been pushed to ****** and the Play Store as outlined in our contract, and the branding requirements have been met, I consider the matter resolved. Given the work completed and the additional efforts involved, I will not be issuing a refund.

  Thank you for your attention to this matter,

  ******** ****
  Founder, Def0x LLC
  *************************************

  Customer response

  09/10/2024

   
  Complaint: 22260253
  
  I am rejecting this response because: 
  
  1. Def0x did not maintain consistent correspondence with the *** or the **** supplier. ******** spoke to them one time directly on March 19th, 2024 at 3:12pm and this was after multiple requests from the customer for you to start working directly in communication with the **** supplier and *** via their communication forum in ******. They responded to you adequately stating exactly what UUID needed to be used. The code that was not pushed to ****** was still at fault. (Attached is only evidence of any kind of communication to the supplier within a 9 month window)
  2. The **** uses the same code in other pcba applications with zero issues, thus the **** is not the problem. 
  3. Regarding the code being pushed, this was strictly after a third party auditor looked through ****** and discovered that the last code push was in December of 2023. Activity has been included from ******* The branding code is not present.
  4. Branding was black, white with our logos required to be added along with enhanced UI within the **** After audit, none of those features were included thus again not gaining completion for some of the most basic requirements. 5.
  5. The scope of the statement of work was to deliver a functioning APP, which required system integration within standard manufacturing settings and requires working with a **** supplier to ensure there is a good debugging process. 
  6. There was no work conducted from the time of January 2024 until August 2024 when the last activity of the code was conducted. 
  
  A refund of $3,000 is requested to close this matter. All other forms of responses are not acceptable as the work was not completed. The $1,000 is for the one month of work that was conducted in December 2023. 

  Sincerely,
  
  *************************

  Business response

  09/10/2024

  ****************,

  Thank you for your continued communication regarding the project in question. I appreciate the opportunity to clarify the details further.

  Communication Responsibility: It is important to clarify that my role did not include maintaining consistent correspondence with the **** supplier or the **** As per the initial agreement, communication with these third parties was to be facilitated through you, as you were their direct client. When I began work, the Bluetooth protocol necessary for the application was incomplete. At your direction, work was halted until the protocol was finalized. Despite this significant deviation from the original contract terms, I agreed to pause work to accommodate your situation. Once I received the final protocol, I reengaged promptly and began working with the provided specifications. It was never indicated that I would be responsible for troubleshooting hardware issues from a third-party supplier. My expectation was to receive a fully functional Bluetooth protocol and hardware before commencing work.

  **** Code Usage: While you assert that the **** is functioning correctly in other applications, I was not privy to those codes or applications. My debugging efforts revealed errors when using an approved Bluetooth library, which indicated issues with the hardware or protocol provided. Any assertion that no work was done between December and ****** is inaccurate. Considerable time was spent debugging and attempting to resolve the issues related to the provided materials.

  Code Pushes and Audit: The request to withhold certain code from ****** was made by you, pending further information from the **** supplier. This information was not received until March and was not a conclusive fix. In ******, after a third-party audit was conducted without my prior knowledge, I promptly restored the withheld code once the issue was identified. It is also pertinent to note that this so-called "third-party auditor" was a personal acquaintance of yours, which raises concerns about the impartiality of the audit. Furthermore, the scope of work did not include any enhanced *************** it was explicitly communicated that UI enhancement was unnecessary until the next round of feature developments.

  Branding: The omission of your logo was an oversight, and steps were being taken to correct this when I was abruptly removed from ******. Given the escalating and inflammatory nature of our interactions, I interpreted my removal as a clear signal to cease any further work on your project.
  Scope of Work: The original scope of work, as agreed, was to deliver an application for testing purposes in collaboration with the **** supplier. It was not my responsibility to resolve all issues arising from a third-party supplier's hardware or protocol, which were outside my control. I was expected to be provided with the necessary materials to complete my work, which, unfortunately, was not the case.

  Timeline and Deliverables: As you noted, the initial timeline was four weeks. During that period, I completed all outstanding tickets available to me. Work was only paused at your request due to the inadequacies in the provided materials and the non-functional hardware.

  Inconsistencies in Claims: I would also like to bring to your attention a concerning discrepancy in your statements. Initially, it was claimed that no work was done between December and ****** due to my refusal. However, this has now been amended to acknowledge instances of work performed in March and ******, as well as communication with the **** supplier in Marchcommunication which was allegedly the cause of a nine-month work hiatus. This discrepancy raises questions about the consistency and accuracy of the claims being made, and I trust that anyone reviewing this response will take that into consideration.
  

  In conclusion, the request for a $3,000 refund is unjustifiable. I have gone beyond the scope of the original agreement by attempting to resolve issues related to the third-party hardware and have delivered a functional test application with Bluetooth connectivity and temperature controls as required. The performance of the third-party device does not negate the work I performed or the deliverables I provided. My services were provided in full, and therefore, no refund will be issued, nor will any further work be completed on this project.

  Thank you for your attention to this matter.

  Sincerely,
  ******** ****
  Founder, Def0x LLC
  *************************************

  Customer response

  09/16/2024

   
  Complaint: 22260253
  
  Dear Better Business Bureau,
  I am submitting this formal complaint regarding a project commissioned by Rite Innovations, LLC, with Def0x LLC and its representative,******** ****, on November 13, 2023. While I understand the BBB does not facilitate refunds, I am providing this information so that the reviewer may keep these infractions in mind when judging the rating for Def0x LLC. The project involved developing a Bluetooth-based manufacturing test application for the Mixturus device, with a completion timeline of four weeks.Unfortunately, after nine months, the project remains incomplete, with numerous deliverables unmet.
  Below is a detailed account of the project's failures,supplemented by audits from ***************************************** of **************** and *********************, a **** and App supplier based in *****, who have both confirmed the suspicions regarding the incomplete work.
  
  1. Failure to Meet Deadlines
  The initial agreement set a project deadline of four weeks, which was significantly exceeded. ******** **** failed to deliver a working application after nine months, with basic deliverables such as Bluetooth functionality and branding left unaddressed. This delay was worsened by ********** refusal to communicate directly with the **** supplier, which is essential for resolving hardware-software integration issues. He only made one attempt at direct communication on March 19, 2024, several months into the project, despite multiple requests to use more direct communication channels.
  Additionally, it was agreed in the Statement of Work (SOW) that a set price would cover the entire project. However, ******** **** hinted that additional consulting fees would be required to communicate with the *** and **** supplier, an act that I consider unprofessional and made in bad faith. These communications were critical to completing the project and should have been included within the scope of the original agreement.
  
  2. Incomplete Bluetooth Functionality
  After reviewing the source code, it is clear that Bluetooth functionality was never fully implemented. This conclusion is confirmed by audits conducted by ***************************************** and *********************. Key issues include:
  Missing Logic: The Bluetooth code lacks critical logic for handling device connections, disconnections, and data exchanges between the app and the hardware. Both auditors highlighted that essential code sections were commented out, preventing the app from receiving or sending data to the Mixturus device.
  Incorrect *****: The ***** used in the code do not match the protocol provided by the **** supplier, further inhibiting communication with the device. The audit identified that the app only allows for initial connectivity but not the actual exchange of device-specific data like temperature readings.
  No Real Temperature Control: ******************* audit shows that although the app displays a temperature adjustment feature, it is a non-functional control. The Bluetooth protocol for modifying the devices temperature settings was never implemented. This means the app only simulates the feature without actually adjusting the devices temperature.
  
  3. Lack of Communication and Transparency
  Throughout the project, ******** **** failed to engage directly with the hardware supplier, which was critical to resolving Bluetooth issues. Despite repeated requests to facilitate communication via WeChat, he refused, causing significant delays. Furthermore, the developer failed to push regular updates to ******* with a nine-month gap between code updates.The last meaningful code push occurred in December 2023, and it wasnt until August 2024, following multiple requests and audits, that any additional code was pushed. This behavior is unprofessional, and the lack of transparency prevented proper project oversight and issue resolution.
  4. Incomplete Branding
  One of the fundamental requirements was to integrate specific branding elements, including black-and-white logos and a custom user interface (UI). ******** failed to deliver this, and the app still displays the default Android icon instead of the required branding.Despite repeated requests and ample time to implement this, the branding requirements were entirely neglected.
  
  5. Additional Audit Findings by *********************
  The additional audit conducted by ********************* provides further evidence of the incomplete state of the app. His findings include:
  1.The app is only capable of searching for and connecting to devices and switching the temperature display between Fahrenheit and Celsius, but these features are purely cosmetic and do not affect the devices operation.
  2.There are no features for reading the device's model, serial number, firmware version, or manufacturer information, all of which are critical for a functioning app in a production environment.
  3.The app lacks any functionality for updating the firmware of the device, a standard feature that should have been included.
  These missing elements further demonstrate the developer's failure to meet the basic requirements outlined in the SOW.
  
  Conclusion
  This project has been characterized by delays, incomplete work, and a lack of professionalism on the part of ******** ****. Despite having ample time and repeated requests for progress, the developer failed to produce a functional app. His refusal to communicate with key stakeholders,unprofessional behavior in suggesting additional fees for essential tasks, and failure to implement basic features leave Rite Innovations with an unusable product.
  
  I trust that the BBB reviewer will take these serious infractions into account when evaluating Def0x LLC's rating.
  
  Recommendations to the Public:
  I strongly recommend that anyone considering doing business with ******** **** and Def0x LLC should only agree to milestone-based payments. Based on my experience, I suggest the following:
  1. Request Regular Progress Reports: Ensure that you receive regular updates, including code pushes, and insist on open communication channels between the developer, suppliers, and key stakeholders.
  2. Clarify Communication Responsibilities: Make sure the developer agrees to handle all necessary communications with third parties, such as hardware suppliers, to avoid delays.
  3. Audit the Developers Work: Engage a third-party auditor early in the project to verify that the work is progressing as promised.
  4. Only Pay in Milestones: Break payments into clear milestones that are contingent on deliverables being completed and verified.
  

  Thank you for your time and attention to this matter.
  Sincerely,
  *************************
  Founder & CEO, Rite Innovations, LLC
  Contact: ***************
  Email: ********************************

  
  

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩