Thans for you post. Yo said it is rare for aebitration to award money to the client. Then what is the point for arbritration then?
So freelancers can dupe unsuspecting clients?
re: "You said it is rare for arbitration to award money to the client. Then what is the point for arbritration then?"
The main purpose of arbitration is to give freelancers a chance to get the money in escrow when a client won't release that money.
Generally speaking, there isn't really a good reason for a client to use arbitration. Because the client controls the money in the escrow account. Clients review the work submitted by freelancers and simply refuse to release the money if they aren't satisfied.
Strategically speaking, what you should have done was this:
You should have changed the username and/or passwords related to the Shopify account after the freelancer did the work, and before you left feedback.
Then the freelancer would not have been able to do anything to the site, and then there would be no issue.
This doesn't justify what the freelancer did. But if I personally had worked with a freelancer who was demanding more money than originally agreed and/or was making demands about feedback... then I wouldn't trust that person. So I would make sure they couldn't access the work I paid for... before taking an action that might make them angry.
But this freelancer delivered the work, I relaesed the money. Please remeember i cannot give a review until i release the funds and close the contract. He still had access to my store as he said he will give ongoing support should i need it.
Then boom, he saw a 4 star review, got mad and deleted my store..all this happened with 30 mins of me paying in full.
I didnt give him a bad feedback. I didnt anticpate him being mad at me for a 4 start review instead of a 5.. I didnt even use comments, only stars.... They was no way for me to know especially when he promised me support
4 stars is NOT bad feedback.
This freelancer is completely unhinged.
You had no way of knowing he would do something like this. It is extremely rare to hear about something like this.
Nobody here is defending anything he did.
We're just trying to provide information.
I'm sorry you're in this situation.
If it was a hacker and this person is any kind of professional webite builder, then he should have a backup on his own computer and should be able to restore the site, no?
Nobody here thinks there was really a hacker.
That's a ridiculous claim.
Kelly is simply pointing out that even if there was a hacker, the freelancer is still the person responsible.
The freelancer is either:
a) lying about there being a hacker
b) incompetent because he set up a system that was so easily hacked and which could not be recovered