Plast

I always rely on you for creating landing pages. As I run a small, privately owned salon, it's difficult to find large blocks of time, but your ability to work smoothly remotely is a huge help as it doesn't disrupt my regular business. Even when I don't have a specific plan for adding pages, you offer wonderful suggestions, which is very reassuring. I look forward to continuing to work with you in the future.

When I opened my salon seven years ago, I implemented the app, and a few years later, although I had a website created by another company, I also implemented a landing page (LP) with them. I decided to entrust all my web-related needs to Plast because they always show concern and call me. I'm not very tech-savvy, and I'm so busy now that I can't update the website at all, but the staff haven't given up on me and continue to support me, which is a great help! Thank you. It's also great that the staff I work with haven't changed in the last seven years! I look forward to continuing our relationship for many years to come!

I requested the creation of a website. The process involved an online meeting followed by several phone calls for revisions. The person in charge of creating the website was easy to talk to, and the process went very smoothly. I am very satisfied with the resulting website.

The website wasn't launched on the scheduled date, there was no apology, and I was presented with a 70% cancellation fee. This company's response seemed to be solely focused on how to collect money and how to pretend the matter never happened. They couldn't even properly create the website they advertised. They couldn't even properly resolve the problems they themselves caused. I strongly condemn the actions of Plast Co., Ltd. I will record my reasons based on the facts and how I felt. The reason isn't simply that the website wasn't launched on the scheduled date. It's because their response after the launch was extremely dishonest. First, on the scheduled launch day, I was informed that the website would be launched. However, even when the launch became impossible, they failed to contact me within the promised time frame of "10:00 AM to 4:00 PM." Even after the promised time had passed, there was no explanation for the failure to launch, no apology, and all I received later was a request for further work. The company, which undertakes website creation and management as a business, failed to complete the basic settings necessary for publication. Furthermore, the company later admitted that it was responsible for the matter and that I was not at fault. Despite this, the initial offer was for a 70% cancellation fee. The company was the one that failed to publish the website. Even though the company later admitted I was not at fault, they brought up the cancellation fee to me, the victim. I perceived this as extremely strong pressure. Later, I received an invoice for 50%, or 420,000 yen. After I objected and contacted their head office, the direct invoice was withdrawn. However, that wasn't the end of it. After withdrawing the direct invoice, they offered a reduced price based on the premise of continuing the contract, and a proposal to refund 120,000 yen after publication. In other words, they simply changed from direct invoice to a different processing method. While the company admitted responsibility, it seemed they were ultimately trying to get me to continue the contract. Subsequently, I received a message from the CEO stating that they would not charge any termination fees, that the termination was unconditional, and that everything was my responsibility. However, the agreement presented by the company as part of this unconditional termination included clauses regarding confidentiality, non-defamation, restrictions on claims including criminal charges and administrative reporting, and a clause stating that I would not raise any objections regardless of future circumstances. Not charging any fees is a natural conclusion, given that the company has already acknowledged responsibility and explained that I was not at fault. Nevertheless, in exchange for this natural conclusion, I was asked to agree to an agreement that broadly restricted disclosure, reporting, objections, and claims. I do not consider the contents of this agreement to be a typical termination agreement. When I requested that they revise the agreement to reflect the circumstances and exchange it in written form for record-keeping, the company refused, citing that it would leave unilateral risks solely on their end. However, they did not provide a satisfactory and specific explanation of which clauses were unilateral and what the risks were. Furthermore, claiming that email communication was going nowhere and would further waste my time, they tried to revert to phone and online discussions. It was I who had requested a record-keeping process. Their attempts to avoid this and instead revert to phone and online communication fueled my distrust. I wasn't making an emotional complaint against Plast Co., Ltd. I carefully documented the circumstances that prevented disclosure, the billing process, the contents of the agreement, and future resolution methods, ensuring that the facts were properly recorded. However, the company refused to accept my explanations and resolutions head-on, instead continuously trying to revert to terms and negotiation methods favorable to them. Moreover, their tone made me feel as if I were being blamed, as if I were the one who caused the problem. The term "amicable resolution" was superficial; to me, it seemed from the beginning that they were only concerned with defending themselves. In reality, I felt they were shifting all the burden onto the customer. The company might respond to this review by saying things like, "We responded with sincerity," "We aimed for an amicable resolution," or "We informed them of unconditional termination." However, the facts I see are different. The content was not released on the scheduled release date. They failed to contact me. They issued a claim while acknowledging responsibility. Even after withdrawing the direct claim, they tried to revert to a company-mandated process in a different form. They tried to get me to agree to an agreement with broad restrictions. They tried to revert to phone and online communication instead of a document-based resolution. Because of all of the above, I was subjected to an excessive burden. This is not simply a communication error or a production problem. I feel that the series of actions taken by Plast Co., Ltd. were extremely malicious. Furthermore, although this is unrelated to this matter, there was also a serious problem regarding the handling of personal information. An email containing the name, phonetic spelling, address, and phone number of a third party unrelated to me was somehow forwarded to me via Plast Co., Ltd.'s inquiry form. I have absolutely no connection to that person. I feel that such a leak of personal information occurring at a company that handles customer and inquiry information is extremely serious. As far as I can tell, the company has not issued any requests for correction, deletion, explanation of the cause, or explanation of measures to prevent recurrence. As a company that handles website creation, customer management, and operational support, this is a problem that cannot be overlooked. Unfortunately, I cannot write everything here. Plast Co., Ltd.'s response is not limited to what I have written here. Even though I repeatedly explained the circumstances and tried to organize everything in a way that would leave a record, the company completely ignored what I had to say and continued to impose terms, agreements, and negotiation methods that were convenient for them. I have a strong distrust of their response. In the future, once the situation has settled down, I will disclose emails, invoices, agreements, and other correspondence as evidence as necessary. However, I do not intend to disclose the personal information of third parties as is. The issue I am concerned with is the fact that unrelated third-party information was sent to me, and the company's information management system that allowed this to happen. Furthermore, I will not accept this review being treated as defamation. I am writing about my experiences and my reactions to them, based on the emails, invoices, agreements, and correspondence I actually received. That's what negative reviews are supposed to be. If even factually negative reviews can be silenced with money, agreements, removal requests, and legal pressure, then the review system ceases to be for the benefit of users and becomes merely an advertising space convenient for companies. I do not accept that. For the reasons above, I absolutely cannot recommend any involvement with Plast Co., Ltd.

I was glad they responded quickly to any issues that arose even after the contract was signed. They also created images for posting on Instagram as we increased our app membership, which helped us grow our membership numbers!