John H.

I was quite surprised and aggrieved to read Scott's feedback attached to this job in which I fixed more than half of the bugs specified (not 'a few' as he writes) and which was 'completed' to his satisfaction. Since he has seemingly decided to ignore this fact with regard to this feedback, I should like to respond in kind.

It became clear that the budget Scott had allocated for fixing these bugs was inadequate due to the very poor code quality and only 7 days after he accepted my bid (not 'a couple of weeks') I recommended a complete rewrite of the website. I stand by that recommendation; it was the right call in my opinion and the end result would have been well-structured, maintainable and secure code of a high standard.

My only shortcoming was to greatly underestimate the time needed to complete the new website; something for which I apologised on numerous occasions.

It might have taken three months in total to build the new website, but this would have been rather less than the year that, in Scott's words, it took to build the buggy website he currently has.

I worked with Scott to produce a formal specification for the website and did my best even with the lack of interest, on Scott's part, in contributing to the document. Toward the final stages of the job, Scott modified the specification document and I made it clear that I would not accept the changes on the tight budget of £900 for a complete and working business directory website. At this point, Scott began to make excessive demands, including insisting that I would maintain and provide emergency support for the website, when built. When I refused to accede to such demands, Scott informed me that we could no longer work together and that he was re-posting the job. Shortly after that, he changed his mind and I asked him to make any changes to the specification that he needed to and that I would then review the document and we could renegotiate the terms of the job. Before I'd had chance to do so, Scott demanded a completion date for the job, effectively ignoring the fact that he'd 'sacked' me - and that we hadn't yet renegotiated the terms.

I was so busy with the work of other clients at that time that I didn't respond to his final demands - I hoped that he would remember that I wasn't actually working for him any longer. Scott cancelled the in progress work and the 160 hours I've put in to his project have gone unpaid.

In the two months I was working with Scott, we had numerous Skype calls and I sent 89 emails to him and I, personally, do not think that this constitutes a lack of communication.

I shall, in future, be far more cautious, careful and thorough when estimating completion times.