Monthly payments in the amount of $630.00 were made to Metropolitan on the 20th of each month, to be dispersed to my creditors, as stated in the original contract. I began the program in January of 1999, and recently canceled (10/17) due to non-payment by the program.

During 2-1/2 years of activity in the program, I have had numerous account advisors, the company has changed addresses three times and most recently two creditors did not receive payment. I have been prompt each month with my payment. The agency advises clients not to go by the "estimated balance" but to consult the monthly statement. This is certainly accurate information.

Then, Mr. Groman claimed payment was not made to one creditor because the balance had "zeroed" out -- the estimated balance. I was contacted by that creditor and informed that I was no longer eligible for the program. Their decision was based on the fact that Metropolitan took too long to respond. I immediately made the required payment to keep my account current. Keep in mind I made duplicate payments, one to the Metropolitan and one to the creditor.

Now, I'm dealing with another creditor who did not receive payment for October. My last payment to this agency was made by the due date of September 20, to ensure payment for the month of October. I have canceled my contract with the agency and will resume the repayment of my debts.

The company responds (10/17/03):

A complaint was posted about two years ago that continues to appear in connection with our website. I would like to request that you remove it. I am not opposed to the posting of complaints, but would like to add that since our organization was founded in 1985 we have assisted over 35,000 individuals and families. Since that time we have had only two complaints registered with the Better Business Bureau, and both were addressed and satisfied.

We are a licensed, bonded and accredited agency in good standing with state and federal regulatory agencies. The complaint you posted was from a lady that started our program in 1999 and was successful until 2001. We did change processors (the electronic movement of money) at that time and suffered through many glitches. The fact that this single complaint could deter a client in need of assistance to avoid our service seems a little unfair. Our agency is a founding member of the AICCCA which has a very strict code of practice, and I would hate to see someone contact and enroll with one of the "Big Bad Agencies" because they think we will not work in their best interest.

Bob Larson