PICS

Review: In February of 2013 a client of ours required that we use picsauditing.com in order to do their job. We signed up for a one time fee and the added the charge to the clients bill with they paid. Our cc was charged 2/5/13 $347.

On 3/17/14 an unauthorized charge of $797 was charged to our company cc. We notified [redacted]. According to Pics they had sent Erin an email of the upcoming charge however she had left our employment 6 months earlier. Also, she was never a signer on our business cc. Pics never notified us of additional charges and never received authorization from an authorized signer to charge our cc. Pics is not responding to requests for refund.Desired Settlement: Refund the charge for $797

Business

Response:

Terms of service, also known as PICS' Contractor Agreement, states that membership will automatically renew and that it is the customer's responsibility to notify us prior to membership renewal to cancel membership. Agreement, and set up for automatic renewal on credit card were agreed upon through online click through agreement by customer's admitted employee, Erin Rosso, on February 5th, 2013.

Review: PICS contacted Kauppi Wireline stating that we must become a member in order to do business with HilCorp. We obliged. However after a discussion with Hilcorp, they stated that they do all of their own safety managment in house and do not utilize 3rd parties such as PICS. We contacted PICS to cancel our account and receive back annual membership fee-yet neither of those options were granted. We did not ask for the full annual membership dues and we asked to cancel our account as of a specific date and to have our monies pro-rated. As of now, they are unwilling to work with us and state that we must continue to pay since our credit card is on file. Very shady business practices.Desired Settlement: Our pro-rated membership rate due back to us from the original date of cancellation.

Review: Unfair professional practice-PICS is a service provider that charges its client's subcontractors (like my company) for the service, but provides no service accountability to the paying subcontractor. PICS reportedly helps to manage the qualifications of its client's subs, but its online forms do not accommodate all forms of service providers, such as our company. As a result, their system repeatedly rejected our companies qualifications, causing us an egregious amount of time and expense to resolve, and jeopardized a long-standing relationship between our company and our (i.e., their new) client. Our client expressed regret for the trouble we were having with PICS, acknowledged that they were swamped with similar complaints, and assured us that PICS would not come between us and them. While we realize that we cannot recover the time and labor expenses expended trying to address their form requests, we have requested that they terminate our so-called "membership" and refund us for the unsatisfactory provision of services to us. They agreed to close the account, but denied the refund request citing a refund policy that was not brought to our attention when we signed up (under the duress of wanting to continue business with our client). We even learned that their system automatically withdrew renewal funds in December from a credit card account that we were required to have in their system. They appear to have created a fail-safe system whereby they have no accountability or liability to the paying entity (us). We believe this to be an unfair and, possibly, illegal business practice. Please help us to show them otherwise.Desired Settlement: Aside from the refund request (i.e., $347 from Jan. 2013 and $148 automatically withdrawn Dec. 2013), we would like someone to stop them from this unethical practice.

Consumer

Response:

Yes. I, [redacted] am a sole proprietor dba C [redacted] Associates. I am the only authorized representative of my consultancy. Thanks you.

Business

Response:

In response to the allegations that PICS did not provide a service as described by our contractor agreement and our responsibility to the operator (client sites) who mandates the hurdles to be overcome by contractors before they can work for the client sites.