When Clients Ghost: ERP Focus Exposes Fourth Generation Software’s Evasion Tactics

In an increasingly digital marketplace where business partnerships span borders and trust is currency, the experience of ERP Focus—a small UK-based lead generation firm—offers a stark warning about the fragility of ethical conduct when the balance of power tilts too far in one direction.

The company, owned by Converted Media Ltd, finds itself ensnared in a protracted and deeply troubling dispute with a U.S.-based client: Creosen Inc. DBA Fourth Generation Software of Vista, CA. At the heart of the matter lies an unpaid invoice, evasive executive conduct, and a pattern of retrospective repudiation that ERP Focus alleges is not just financially damaging, but ethically reprehensible.

A Contract Clearly Understood—Until It Wasn’t

In early 2024, Creosen entered into a straightforward commercial agreement with ERP Focus to purchase desk- and telephone-qualified sales leads for their software solutions. The contract, like all others ERP Focus signs with clients, contained clear terms: qualified leads would be invoiced monthly, with payment due within 45 days. Refunds were allowed under a narrow, predefined set of conditions—such as incorrect contact details or project ineligibility—provided disputes were raised within 10 days of receipt.

The leads were delivered as promised. According to internal documentation and a trail of client communications reviewed by this publication, not only did Fourth Generation Software fail to flag the majority of leads within the 10-day review window, but they also provided no substantive evidence that would merit a refund even had they done so.

Nonetheless, after months of silence, the company—represented by founder Sundar Kumarasamy—initiated an effort to dispute charges long after their due date, declining to pay and attempting to rewrite the terms of engagement.

Executives Unreachable, Staff Dismissive

ERP Focus alleges that attempts to resolve the issue were met with hostility, indifference, and in some cases, overt rudeness. Email logs show polite follow-ups from ERP Focus’ support staff being stonewalled. Internal notes document phone calls where Creosen representatives refused to acknowledge previous agreements or engage constructively.

Efforts to escalate the matter to Sundar Kumarasamy were futile. “We were met with silence,” said a ERP Focus spokesperson. “And when responses did come, they were dismissive and unprofessional—completely inconsistent with what we expect from a business relationship.”

A Pattern of Retrospective Excuses

Perhaps most concerning is the strategy Creosen appears to have adopted: initiating retroactive objections to a clearly defined and executed service agreement, despite having had ample opportunity to raise timely disputes. Several leads they now object to were invoiced over 90 days prior to their first complaint—far outside the contractual window.

The retrospective nature of these objections not only contradicts industry norms but also raises questions about the company’s intent. “It’s hard to escape the conclusion that this is a tactic to avoid payment, not a legitimate concern about service delivery,” said a person familiar with the dispute.

Implications Beyond a Single Contract

For ERP Focus, the consequences extend far beyond this single engagement. “As a small business, we depend on timely payments to operate and continue delivering high-quality marketing programs,” the company said in a written statement. “When a client like Fourth Generation Software refuses to pay for work delivered in good faith, it threatens the sustainability of what we do.”

The ripple effects also reach the broader community of B2B service providers, many of whom operate under similar conditions—low margins, high trust, and a reliance on the integrity of contractual partnerships. If larger clients are allowed to unilaterally rewrite history, what protection remains for the vendors who support their growth?

The Ethics of Evasion

Creosen presents itself as a competent software development partner with a history of serving major clients. Its refusal to meet basic contractual obligations—while refusing dialogue and sidestepping accountability—stands in sharp contrast to the values of transparency and professionalism it purports to uphold.

The conduct of its executives, particularly Sundar Kumarasamy, has only deepened the frustration. ERP Focus maintains that no one in a position of authority at Creosen Inc. has made any attempt to resolve the situation. “This is about more than just money—it’s about principle,” said one ERP Focus manager. “We’re a small business playing by the rules. They aren’t.”

Conclusion: A Call for Accountability

As small and mid-sized firms continue to serve clients around the world, the story of ERP Focus versus Creosen Inc./Fourth Generation Software serves as a cautionary tale. Contracts are only as good as the parties that respect them—and when one side refuses to engage, the damage is felt not just in unpaid invoices, but in the erosion of trust that underpins the entire ecosystem of modern business.

ERP Focus is now exploring legal avenues to recoup the debt and protect its rights. But more than that, it is calling on Creosen—and the wider business community—to reflect on the cost of such tactics.