Are you seriously claiming that -- if they were so inclined -- Apple couldn't safely resolve this issue within an hour or two?
Corporation Makes Application
Programmer has control of communication with Apple Store
Programmer leaves Corporation aggrieved
Programmer asks Apple to personally wire him the Corporation's Money
Corporation is f-ed.
That is the fundamental problem he has getting this issue solved, and I'm guessing that from his story that his communication skills aren't helping people at Apple get in a place to help him.
From Apples point of view it would be very hard to see the difference between the two.
Which, if true, Apple never actually verified existed in the first place. Seems a bit odd to be pushing for it now.
I can't really blame him, either. The sign-up is confusing, the legal requirements are often poorly specified, and it's to do something that seems to makes sense (I want a fictitious name, I'll create the company later) that's actually a really bad idea given Apple's requirements.
It's one thing to, in good faith, work through an outstanding issue with someone over the course of months, another to simply ignore any/all requests until they go through extraordinary measures to capture your attention.
I get the impression that you're arguing (and users are downvoting) from the vantage point that Apple is a reasonable organization. They are most certainly not.
The only organization I know of that beats Apple and the AppStore when it comes to Kafkaesque bureaucracy is US Immigration Services.
It's a bad situation for both parties. It sounds like he's doing the right thing trying to make it public and get advice. If the media does some of the vetting of his story Apple will take him much more seriously and perhaps not view him as a fraudster.
Here Apple is dealing with someone who basically invented a fictitious company in a different country (! ! !) and is now trying to collect on payables. What do you expect to have happen? I actually believe vessenes --- he may just never get paid. I wish him the best.
I'm curious -- what reporting to the government/legal paperwork do you see Apple as doing that makes the payout legally more difficult due to the use of a fictitious name?
In the U.S., using a fictitious name is incredibly simple -- is it really that much more complicated in the U.K.? Why is this suddenly an "oh my god" situation?
What is possibly preventing Apple from changing their records to use his personal name?
The reason it didn't work is because the bank did not want to accept the payment because they would be in violation of the law on money laundering if they did.
With the wrong name (ie, not the name he entered on the bank account form). Which was the original problem.
Is Apple reporting the payment to the tax service? What's to prevent Apple from switching the account to a personal one, or transferring it to an additional legal entity? Why are they taking many months to find any resolution?
As long as you stick to the form and procedure in place things will run smoothly and you'll be fine.
If you start making exceptions people higher up will have to get involved to authorize the exception, that will take a lot of time because they really won't want to do that without making sure they're not setting themselves up for a problem.
OP was doing something not 100% on the up-and-up imho and that is the prime cause of all this trouble.
All that's necessary is verifying that the individual in question is an suitable officer of the corporation.
As long as you stick to the form and procedure in place things will run smoothly and you'll be fine.
Unless Apple decides otherwise. We've had payments come in months late for no apparent reason, and didn't see resolution until Apple received a spate of bad press.
The 'for no apparent reason' sort of proves that already. So if you had would you blame apple ?
If Apple put up their usual bureaucratic wall, ignored our requests, or required multi-week/month turnaround times to resolve the issue -- then yes, I would blame Apple.