Shoreline Studio
A studio handed Telvon a processor-fee discrepancy so the team could stay on client work.
Someone needed to speak for the studio when the processor statement did not match the signed agreement.
I cannot sit on hold during service. Telvon took the file, assembled the documentation, and spoke with the processor on our behalf.
The challenge
Shoreline Studio is a small creative shop. Monthly processor fees drifted from the signed merchant agreement. The owner had statements and the contract, and no hours left to reconstruct the fee schedule.
The statement, the merchant agreement, and the rate sheet did not agree. The owner was on client work, not auditing interchange line by line.
How the file was handed over
Telvon took the statements, compared them to the agreement, and wrote the processor on the studio's behalf.
The file included:
- Signed merchant agreement and the rate sheet in effect for the period.
- Monthly processor statements for the same period, with questioned lines marked.
- Any ticket already opened with the processor's support desk.
- Written authorization for Telvon to speak for the studio.
“We spot recurring workflow pain earlier and make product decisions with much stronger confidence.”
What changed
The studio stayed on client work while the file moved. No recovery amount is claimed here.
The owner kept a dated record of every statement without assembling a separate summary deck.
What this note is not
- Processor statement received that did not match the signed agreement.
- Studio stayed on client work while Telvon assembled the file.
- Processor received a documented fee letter, not a scattered inbox thread.
- Operator kept a complete copy of every statement and reply.
- File status lived on the desk instead of a personal inbox.
This is an operator note, not a verified case study. Telvon does not publish recovery amounts or timelines unless the owner supplies them.
