A software replacement does not need a multimillion-dollar budget to put business goals at risk. Missing functionality, implementation delays, and unmet delivery commitments can consume substantial money and management time without delivering the improvements your business needs.
These cases involve reported spending and contractual commitments below $1 million, rather than verified total losses. The amounts are not directly comparable, and lawsuit allegations are not findings of fault. The practical lessons below are Wayferry’s interpretation of the reported events.
ERP and software failure cases under $1 million
Veronica’s Auto Insurance Services: Required Capabilities and Training Allegedly Missing
Reported amount: More than $111,000 in contracted fees
Source: Tactical Law Group’s account of the complaint, April 2025
Veronica’s Auto Insurance Services sued Oracle and NetSuite in April 2025 over an allegedly unsuccessful ERP implementation. According to an account of the complaint, the company signed in 2021 after receiving assurances about insurance-industry functionality, implementation without third-party add-ons, and Spanish-language support.
The company alleged that required capabilities were missing or depended on additional products, data migration was unsuccessful, and promised Spanish-language training was not delivered. It reportedly abandoned the system in 2024. These are allegations, not established findings of fault.
What buyers should verify
Turn assurances about industry suitability into specific requirements and demonstrations. Document any necessary add-ons, integrations, and associated costs before signing. Include training language, materials, and staff proficiency in the implementation scope and acceptance criteria.
Realogic Solutions: Software Dispute Extends to Financing Commitments
Reported amount: $184,000 in financed software and implementation commitments
Source: Realogic’s March 2024 complaint
Realscape Group, trading as Realogic Solutions, alleged that it committed to NetSuite software and implementation services in 2023 after receiving assurances that the system would be operational by July that year. The Ohio-based IT services and healthcare staffing business agreed to pay $184,000 over 24 months.
Its complaint alleged that the software required substantial additional work, contained data errors, and did not deliver the promised benefits. It also alleged that Oracle transferred the financing to another company. Oracle disputed the claims. Realogic voluntarily dismissed this action without prejudice in November 2025; that dismissal did not establish fault. regmedia.co.uk
What buyers should verify
Check how software delivery, acceptance, and payment obligations connect. Before financing a purchase, establish who receives payment, whether the financing can be transferred, and what obligations remain if implementation is delayed or disputed. Ensure important delivery dates and acceptance conditions appear in the signed agreements.
SkinMedix: Promised E-Commerce Capabilities Become a Dispute
Reported amount: More than $250,000 in spending, according to its lawsuit
Source: Chris Kanaracus, PCWorld
SkinMedix, a skincare retailer, selected NetSuite to replace its website and shopping platform and connect sales with back-office operations. Its requirements included faster page loading, international currency handling, and recurring billing and shipments.
In a 2014 lawsuit, SkinMedix alleged that the delivered website failed to provide promised capabilities and missed its deployment deadline. The company said it had spent more than $250,000 on an unusable website. NetSuite stated that it intended to defend itself against the claims.
What buyers should verify
Translate sales promises into specific requirements, demonstrations, and written delivery commitments. Test important capabilities using realistic customer transactions, including recurring orders and international purchases. Set measurable performance criteria and ensure essential functionality appears in the agreed scope before signing.
Kentwool: Manufacturing Requirements and Purchasing Controls Fall Short
Reported amount: $318,000 in payments, according to its lawsuit
Source: Chris Kanaracus, PCWorld
Textile manufacturer Kentwool selected NetSuite to connect manufacturing, inventory, purchasing, finance, sales, and shipping. In a 2014 lawsuit, the company alleged that the system did not deliver the capabilities represented during the sales process.
One alleged problem involved purchasing controls: users could enter an order below an approval threshold and then increase its value without triggering the required approval. Kentwool reported paying $318,000 against an original estimate of $246,000. It terminated the agreement and requested a refund after further work was proposed at additional cost. These were allegations, not established findings of fault.
What buyers should verify
Test business controls as well as routine transactions. Demonstrate what happens when users change approved orders, exceed limits, cancel transactions, or attempt unauthorized actions. Define the required approvals, permissions, and audit history, then carry those requirements into user acceptance testing.
Buckley Powder: A Six-Month Implementation Remains Incomplete After 18 Months
Reported amount: More than $185,000 in payments, according to its lawsuit
Source: Chris Kanaracus, PCWorld
Buckley Powder, a supplier to the mining and construction industries, contracted with Infor to replace its existing distribution software. According to its lawsuit, implementation was supposed to take no more than 180 days.
Buckley alleged that 18 months later it still had no working system, despite paying more than $185,000. It sought the return of those payments and other costs after rejecting a proposed revised implementation schedule. Infor declined to comment in the cited reporting.
What buyers should verify
Require an implementation plan with defined deliverables, responsibilities, dependencies, and acceptance criteria. Assess progress through demonstrated business capabilities. When milestones slip, require evidence that the recovery plan is achievable and establish when leadership will reconsider further spending.
Decide Before You Commit to Replacing Your ERP
A smaller software investment can still have serious consequences when it disrupts customer service, weakens financial controls, or consumes time and money without delivering the expected benefits.
Before committing to replacement, establish which strategic objectives and business goals your current ERP constrains, whether improvements could address those constraints, and whether the potential five-year value justifies the cost and disruption.
Wayferry’s standalone, fixed-fee ERP Replacement Decision Assessment gives your leadership team a documented recommendation: keep your current ERP, replace it later, prepare before replacing it, or proceed now.