Web Development & Design for Construction Company
-
Web Design Web Development
- Less than $10,000
- Apr. - May 2026
- Quality
- 0.5
- Schedule
- 0.5
- Cost
- 0.5
- Willing to Refer
- 0.5
"They were not trustworthy."
- Construction
- Woburn, Massachusetts
- 11-50 Employees
- Online Review
- Verified
Flow Cubo Studio was hired to redesign a website for a construction company. The team was also tasked with creating a custom booking system and providing SEO services.
Flow Cubo Studio failed to deliver the website, and the client discovered a payment discrepancy of over $600. The booking system did not function as specified, and the team did not implement the promised SEO services. Moreover, the developer accessed the client's account without authorization.
The client submitted this review online.
BACKGROUND
Please describe your company and position.
I am the Owner of a construction company
Describe what your company does in a single sentence.
Fabricates and installs stone countertops for residential and commercial projects
OPPORTUNITY / CHALLENGE
What specific goals or objectives did you hire Flow Cubo Studio to accomplish?
- Website Redesign
SOLUTION
How did you find Flow Cubo Studio?
Webflow
Why did you select Flow Cubo Studio over others?
Other
How many teammates from Flow Cubo Studio were assigned to this project?
2-5 Employees
Describe the scope of work in detail. Please include a summary of key deliverables.
Website redesign and custom booking calendar
RESULTS & FEEDBACK
What were the measurable outcomes from the project that demonstrate progress or success?
I engaged Malik, trading as Flow Cubo Studio, for website repair, redesign, SEO, and booking-system work beginning April 2026. I'm documenting this in detail because the engagement ended in undelivered work, a false completion claim, a payment record that does not match what the developer reported, and unauthorized access to my accounts — and as of today, the website still isn't delivered. Timeline. The 30% deposit ($516) was paid April 16, 2026, per the proposal's own terms, to "begin design work immediately." The proposal itself set a 12–14 working day total timeline (4 days design, 8 days development, 2 days testing/launch), putting delivery due in early May 2026 by the developer's own estimate. The developer did not claim the site was complete until June 7, 2026 — already more than five weeks past his own deadline — and that claim was contradicted the same week by an independent page-by-page inspection. Three PayPal claims were filed June 12, 2026. As of today, three months after the original delivery date and two months after the developer's own disputed completion claim, no finished, launched website has ever been delivered. Payment discrepancy. Bank records (Citizens Business Checking, 11 payments via Zelle, PayPal, and card, April–May 2026) confirm $3,961 paid to the developer. His own “Consolidated Summary of Works” reports $3,350 paid — $611 less than what the bank shows. Of the confirmed total, $550 (a $400 website repair/AWS backup and $150 of WordPress repairs, each with contemporaneous payment memos) does not appear in his summary at all. The redesign proposal and its terms. The Complete Website Redesign Proposal, issued by Flow Cubo Studio, priced the full WordPress rebuild at $1,720 with a 30/70 payment split. The proposal's own language states the final 70% is due “upon completion and final delivery before site handover.” That handover has never occurred. The false completion claim. On June 7, 2026, the developer emailed stating the development site was “completed and ready for your review” and asked me to “proceed with the payment so we can move forward with the final handoff.” I conducted a full page-by-page review of the staging site that same week and documented the opposite: a 5-page defect report and a 34-item correction punch list. What the review actually found, in detail: - Material pages were mixed up: the Quartz page's body copy was entirely about granite (“What is Granite?” heading, granite CTA copy). The Marble gallery contained no marble — every image was a quartz project photo. The Quartz gallery mixed in four quartzite slabs. All four material pages shared an identical, wrong spec box (Material Type: “Granite,” Brand: “Cambria” regardless of which page). - At least five confirmed dead links (404s), plus numerous mis-pointed links: four footer links pointed to a nonexistent “http://Visualzer” domain, breadcrumb “Home” links were broken sitewide with a doubled URL, and material-page navigation chips were cross-wired to the wrong pages. - The video page mislabeled every file “Quartz-N.mp4” regardless of actual content, so entire category tabs (Granite, Quartzite, Fabrication, Installation) contained no videos, and several files were malformed and failed to load. - The Contact page was unfinished: duplicated content blocks, a phone number missing a digit, and a circular “Book an appointment” button that linked back to itself instead of the actual booking system. - The homepage displayed all stat counters at zero, claimed “4.9/5 across 120+ reviews” against an actual standing of 4.8/108, used placeholder testimonials, and had review badges linking nowhere. - Sitewide SEO was not launch-ready: every page title carried a “–dev.pablomarbleandgranite.com” suffix, the homepage had no title tag at all, and canonical URLs pointed to the dev domain rather than production. The booking system. A second proposal, Custom Booking System and Technical SEO and Visibility Setup, priced this work at $970 with a 5–7 working day estimate, and included instant email notifications on each new booking as a contracted feature. The booking interface was demonstrated but does not function as specified — the contracted email notifications were never implemented, and zero bookings have ever been recorded. Technical SEO. The same proposal's SEO scope included fixing broken links and orphan pages, resolving Google Search Console indexing issues, and fixing title tags. Beyond minor changes to approximately three listings, this was not performed. One of the three disputed PayPal payments is memoed “SEO” by the developer himself. The developer's own summary contradicts itself. His Consolidated Summary of Works lists “Technical Site Health” ($210 of $350 paid) as “Completed.” In fact, that work — clearing broken JavaScript, resolving orphan pages, and improving page speed — was performed by me, in-house, and is verifiable against dated Ahrefs crawl history and Google PageSpeed Insights: broken JavaScript dropped from 29 flagged pages to 1 after I deleted the Slider Revolution plugin and replaced Wordfence with MalCare; orphan pages dropped from 17 to 4 after I built and internally linked 11 new city/service-area pages; and PageSpeed gains traced to my own WP Rocket configuration, ShortPixel compression, and removal of Slider Revolution (previously the site's single largest performance problem, at a 12.9-second mobile load time). “Local Search Dominance” ($450, paid in full) is marked “In Process” in the same summary, but ranking reports show no movement, and the deliverable — a four-phase authority build — was reduced to updating roughly three business listings. Unauthorized account access. Separate from the redesign dispute, Malik accessed my Cloudflare account and disabled/deleted the DNS records for my domain during this engagement, taking my live website offline without notice or authorization. I had to rebuild all 24 DNS records from scratch to bring the site back online and enable two-factor authentication to prevent further unauthorized access. During this same period, a DMCA complaint was also filed against my domain through Cloudflare, which I resolved by removing the specific DNS record in question. After things broke down, Malik maliciously and without authorization accessed my Cloudfare account and used my existing payment method on file to bill roughly $2,000 in Cloudflare subscription charges and then maliciously and illegal charged roughly $3,000 across four identical transactions on Elementor that I did not authorize. I further allege that Malik engaged in a pattern of deceptive and fraudulent conduct designed to make it difficult to hold him accountable. Upon information and belief, Malik’s website falsely represents that his business maintains a headquarters in Nevada; however, the listed Nevada address appears to be merely the address of his brother, who has no ownership interest, operational role, or legitimate connection to the business. This representation appears intended to create a false impression of a legitimate U.S. business presence and to obscure the true location and control of the business. I allege that Malik knowingly engaged in unauthorized access, computer fraud, and the unlawful use of my payment information because he believed he could avoid accountability due to his residence and operations outside the United States, including his location in Pakistan. After our business relationship deteriorated, Malik allegedly exploited his prior access to my accounts, exceeded any authorization previously granted to him, and intentionally used my Cloudflare and Elementor accounts to obtain approximately $5,000 in unauthorized charges and financial benefit. Malik’s conduct reflects an intentional scheme involving unauthorized access to computer accounts, misuse of stored payment information, fraudulent transactions, and deception regarding his business identity and location. The unauthorized Cloudflare charges of approximately $2,000 and the four identical Elementor charges totaling approximately $3,000 were not authorized by me and caused direct financial harm. I request that law enforcement investigate Malik’s conduct, including his account access history, IP addresses, payment records, communications, business representations, and any other evidence necessary to determine whether violations of applicable computer crime, fraud, theft, and identity-related statutes occurred. I allege that, after our business relationship deteriorated and after Malik no longer had authorization to access or control my accounts, Malik knowingly and intentionally accessed my Cloudflare account without permission and used my existing payment method on file to incur approximately $2,000 in unauthorized subscription charges. I further allege that Malik knowingly made four identical unauthorized Elementor transactions totaling approximately $3,000, causing a total financial loss of approximately $5,000. Malik’s conduct appears to constitute multiple potential criminal violations, including unauthorized access to a computer system or online account, computer fraud, unlawful use of payment information, and theft by deception or larceny. Specifically, Malik allegedly exceeded any prior authorization he may have had by accessing my accounts after the business relationship ended, using my account credentials or access privileges for an unauthorized purpose, and obtaining services or financial benefit through charges that I did not approve. His alleged actions involved the intentional misuse of computer accounts, electronic systems, and stored payment information to cause financial harm to me and obtain services without lawful authorization. The unauthorized access and charges were not accidental, mistaken, or the result of a billing error. The multiple transactions, including four identical Elementor charges, demonstrate an apparent intentional course of conduct designed to obtain value without my consent. I request that law enforcement investigate these matters, obtain relevant account records, login histories, IP information, payment records, and communications, and determine whether criminal charges should be brought, including charges related to computer crimes, fraud, unauthorized use of payment information, and theft. Bottom line. Of the $3,961 bank-confirmed paid to this developer, at minimum $2,170 (the $1,720 redesign and the $450 local search package) was for services never delivered, and a further $210 was billed for site-health work I performed myself. On top of that, my live website was taken offline through unauthorized changes to my DNS, and unexplained charges appeared on connected accounts. Three months after the original delivery date, and with a false completion claim already on record, there is still no finished website. I filed three PayPal claims totaling $1,480 for the most clearly documented instances of services not rendered, and I'm pursuing the remainder through my bank. I would strongly recommend any prospective client require a detailed, itemized, dated deliverable log before paying any milestone, verify claimed “completed” work independently before releasing final payment, and avoid granting broader account access (hosting, DNS, third-party subscriptions) than strictly necessary for the contracted scope. In my case, that access resulted in real downtime and unexplained charges on top of an undelivered website.
Describe their project management. Did they deliver items on time? How did they respond to your needs?
Deadlines were missed by months.
What was your primary form of communication with Flow Cubo Studio?
Email or Messaging App
What did you find most impressive or unique about this company?
None
Are there any areas for improvement or something Flow Cubo Studio could have done differently?
They were not trustworthy. Criminals
RATINGS
-
Quality
0.5Service & Deliverables
-
Schedule
0.5On time / deadlines
-
Cost
0.5Value / within estimates
-
Willing to Refer
0.5NPS
