Customer: Epicor failed the ERP project

One of the American clients of Epicor company said that after implementation of its ERP system instead of the expected business process optimization the state of affairs in the company even worsened.

As it appears from the claim submitted by the seller of furniture of ParknPool to District court of the USA on the Western District of Virginia, ERP from Epicor was set in this company instead of the obsolete QuickBooks system which ParknPool used several years. Also the partner in Epicor implementation, EstesGroup company which performed integration works within this project is mentioned in the claim.

According to the representative of affected party Jim Fonner, QuickBooks was quite working system, only "had no potential for growth". "We reached a maximum of opportunities, working with this system", - he said.

When ParknPool, and is the small company, decided to replace ERP, it considered several different platforms. The Epicor system was selected because specialists said that it is most densely integrated, Fonner noted. Epicor assured the customer that there will be enough available hardware and therefore system implementation will be made quickly enough. Any of these promises was not executed, claim in ParknPool.

According to Jim Fonner, Epicor was going to execute implementation in 7 weeks. "But even after seven months the result was zero. We could not watch profits and loss statements, could not do orders. In comparison with new ERP QuickBooks was much better and cost all $3.5 thousand a year", - the representative of the company explained.

In the claim it is in detail described what specifically problems arose at ParknPool during the work with a new system, it is confusion in drawing of accounts invoices, incorrect charge of commission charges. Also the customer claims that only after the beginning of implementation it became clear that acquisition of additional functionality will be required though it was not stipulated in advance. "For salary accrual from us demanded to purchase the production module, but we are not engaged in production, only distribution", - Fonner says.

Problems were aggravated with the fact that replacement of a system was made during the "hottest" period of sales for the company, and the working ERP was required in March that did not happen. In February, 2011 customer representatives dropped a hint of doubt to EstesGroup integrator concerning effectiveness of implementation on what they received the answer: a problem in installation "not tested" versions of ERP. It was not succeeded to finish implementation.

It was succeeded to hold on during peak sales to furniture makers at the expense of the old, partially working system, but they remember this time as "terrible". Through court the company asks to indemnify to $250 thousand loss and other costs, approximately it also spent such amount for implementation of ERP from Epicor.

In Epicor "resolutely disprove all charges from ParknPool", said in the official statement of vendor. "Our products, personnel and partners – everything in this project was excellent, we will lag behind the position in court", - added in the press service of the company.