It must take a very special person... to have a falling out with a business coach before the coaching has even started!

Unbe-flamin-leavable!

So I express interest in an innovative program.  Met the person who I would be doing the sessions with.  Nice character - should be great to work with.  The program is at a fixed price...  so much per month.  No commitment term - they live and die by their satisfaction levels.  I probed this subject more than once, as I don't like surprise charges.  I ask for limited access to a particular resource to let me determine whether I felt this program would be worthwhile for me.  They are hesitant to agree to this unusual request, but agree if I'll sign a NDA which I was more than happy to do so.  I utilise that resource, like it, and advise that while I'm fully committed for the next 6 weeks, I would be happy to start the program on Date X.

A fortnight before Date X, the rep drops in to sign the paperwork.  I don't look too closely at the first page of the form.  The second page of the form is a credit card authorisation sheet, authorising $Y per month to be charged to the credit card.  I sign both pages.

A couple of days later, I receive 2 invoices by email, both for $Y, and both dated Date X which is still a week away.  One is the monthly fee, and one is the 'getting started' costs.  I very politely query this, as I has understood the charges to be $Y per month.  The response is that the initial sign-up fee covers this, this, and this, and is normally charged immediately on signup.  The monthly membership changes go out on the same date each month which happens to be Date X, and because of this coincidence I am seeing the two invoices.

If I understand correctly, had I nominated my start date as being the next day after Date X, I would have received only one invoice for that month and received almost a month's benefit of the coaching program with that one charge.  If my start date had been a fortnight after Date X, then the same startup fee of $Y would have applied but I would only have got 2 weeks benefit from the program before the month rolled over and $Y was charged again.

I believe I was very polite when advising I had agreed to one charge per month, this had been discussed more than once, this was what I had signed on the credit card authorisation form, so this is what I was prepared to pay.  I was directed to review Page 1 of the form (which I had not paid enough attention to obviously) advised there was $Y setup fee charged at signup time and then $Y per month from there charged on Date X (for example, the 5th of every month).  I reaffirmed my position very politely by email, reminded them that this is what I had agreed to verbally and with the credit card authorisation form, and I looked forward to their prompt agreement so we could move forward (otherwise I would not be taking part in the program).

The response from the rep included the address to return my materials.

This floored me.  I was expecting a business coaching person to take the position that the customer is always right (even though business people know that sometimes the customer is a PITA), or at least take the long term position that waiving one invoice in order to secure at least half a dozen more in the future was a worthwhile trade-off.  (To me, that would be practising what you preach - or what I would have likely heard had I taken part in the program.)  If in my own business I had not met the billing expectations of a regular client (or a new client who was signing up to a monthly service), I would normally apologise, trim the charges, and take the long term view that keeping the client happy long term is better than receiving full payment for one invoice.

I'm aware that I am opening myself up for potential flaming by posting this rant, but based on the obviously one-sided view above, am I being unreasonable?  Normally I'm the one to roll over.  In this case there was zero doubt in my mind.

One
Bill
Per
Month

Thoughts welcome.  I am not above apologising to the firm if most opinions are that I got it wrong in this case.

(edit - mostly spelling)