A fellow classmate and I were recently contracted to build a model for a low rise residential building. The guy who contracted us used to go to school here and when he came in today to look at the model, he decided that he didn't want it and refused to pay us.
What are the legal channels I can go through to receive payment for services? It was roughly $2000 for the model and we spent upwards of 50 hours building it. Should we go through small claims court to get paid or what are our options?
Thank you for the advice in advance.
Volunteer
Oct 10, 14 12:15 pm
Well, I don't know about Miles but Donna has a lock on Wonder Woman.
shellarchitect
Oct 10, 14 12:17 pm
i'm a little confused still, did anyone argue that an oral contract is better than a written, signed, and possibly even notarized contract?
Oct 10, 14 12:36 pm
Miles implied that by arguing and promoting an unrecorded verbal agreement against a suggestion for a written, signed & dated and possibly notorized contract.
That is how I read Miles point. Perhaps Miles and I misinterpreted each other and it got into an argument/debate. If so, I apologize on my part on that.
curtkram
Oct 10, 14 12:47 pm
wouldn't wonderk get wonder woman?
Miles Jaffe
Oct 10, 14 2:39 pm
Richard, I didn't imply anything, except maybe that you don't know what you're talking about. Which was more a statement of fact than an implication. And I didn't misinterpret you at all, I simply responded to your obsessively obstinate persistence, which I find absurd in the face of your obvious lack of experience in such matters.
proto
Oct 10, 14 3:53 pm
i'm a little confused still, did anyone argue that an oral contract is better than a written, signed, and possibly even notarized contract?
shuellmi - I don't think so
richard - the law recognizes common sense too. The first thing a judge will ask the defendant is "did you ask these students to make you a model?" I don't believe anyone is arguing that a written contract is not a great tool. But, a verbal contract has weight under the law as well.
Oct 10, 14 5:11 pm
proto,
If Jeff Svitas is the defendent, all he has to say is "I asked the craft workshop co-manager." I do agree that it has weight AS LONG AS IT CAN BE PROVEN IN THE PREPONDERANCE OF FACTS.
The craftshop co-manager asked the students and came to the students. Jeff may have been present to relay the specifications of the model but that alone does not necessarily constitute a contractual agreement.
This is what I am understanding from the original posts by Brandon and Olivia. This does not mean there was a contract relationship between Brandon/Olivia and Jeff Svitas.
Are you following so far? Is there any question?
Trier of facts needs to ascertain if a contract agreement exists between plaintiff and defendent. Key elements has to be established regardless of the type of contract.
Remember, courts have had liers claiming contract relationships even though there is none. There has been cases of wanton fraudulent use of the court system as an attempt to money out of someone. There are cases where they have successfully happened.
Since the burden of proof is with the plaintiff, they need to prove their argument with certain things needs to have clear and convincing evidence especially with existance of a contract agreement between plaintiff and defendent because it is a mandatory prerequsite for a contractual payment dispute because for the defendent to owe the plaintiff, he has to have a contractual obligation to pay.
Remember, the defendent has the benefit of assumption in that he does not need to have evidence to support his claim unless the burden of proof is shifted to the defendent. Go read up on shifting the burden of proof. You'll get the fundamental idea.
The defendent only needs to poke holes in the plaintiff's argument when the plaintiff has the burden of proof.
That is law.
Common sense is not common consensus.
This situation can be read in multiple ways.
Miles Jaffe
Oct 10, 14 5:24 pm
"AS LONG AS IT CAN BE PROVEN IN THE PREPONDERANCE OF FACTS"
Facts are simple and facts are straight Facts are lazy and facts are late Facts all come with points of view Facts don't do what I want them to Facts just twist the truth around Facts are living turned inside out Facts are getting the best of them Facts are nothing on the face of things Facts don't stain the furniture Facts go out and slam the door Facts are written all over your face Facts continue to change their shape
Volunteer
Oct 10, 14 5:31 pm
If the students had a verbal agreement that they would be paid in full before any supplies were purchased or labor begun on the project they would be home free. They would be in far better shape than if they had their current agreement codified in written form; they would have the money in the bank. When dealing with deadbeats the first rule is to get the money upfront.
Oct 10, 14 5:49 pm
Volunteer,
I concur with you.
midlander
Oct 10, 14 10:14 pm
Richard's basic concern now is that Svitak never agreed to have 2 students work on his project. He has kind of a blustery way of expressing this but actually I think it's a good point.
They haven't told us clearly whether Svitak agreed to have 2 students work on this instead of the shop manager he originally contacted so we don't have much to go on. If Svitak never agreed to this, there's nothing to argue here - they need to figure this out with the shop manager who asked them to do it.
the lessons:
1- don't start working for someone without a written agreement. Even just one paragraph stating the parties to the agreement, the work to be done, and the price is sufficient. It doesn't need to seem "official" to be legally enforceable.
2- never ever do work to help someone out who doesn't himself have a written agreement with the ultimate recipient of that work. Make sure you review that agreement yourself - and then get your agreement written too!
Contract law is basically fair. The problems people have come entirely from confused thinking and unclear agreements.
Oct 10, 14 10:38 pm
midlander,
Yep.
A simple written contract and it doesn't need to be fancy. Just that it exists and contains the most basic elements of a contractual agreement like you said.
I recommend a print name, signature line and an "Agreement entered on __________________ (month, day, year)" with the Agreement enter on date component usually at the beginning.
This is just helpful to have a date so it places the chronology of the contract. It isn't much work but it goes a long ways in keeping the agreement in order timeline wise.
Just that the agreement is legible is all really matters as one that isn't legible to any degree can effectively be only as good a butt wipe.
Word of advice for those that it matters and others that can learn to be better at contract matters.
Learn from other's misfortunes is as good if not better than learning it the hard way.
vado retro
Oct 10, 14 11:07 pm
I am tempted to pay the bill to make this thread stop.
chigurh
Oct 10, 14 11:26 pm
balkins you are a total nerd
Oct 11, 14 9:12 am
nerd denotes intelligence. It is better to be intelligent (or nerd as you may call it) then it is to be total mook.
Miles Jaffe
Oct 11, 14 9:17 am
Nerd (adjective: nerdy) is a descriptive term, often used pejoratively, indicating that a person is overly intellectual, obsessive, or socially impaired.
I thought I'd point out something, it seems rather obvious, only if you are like me, standing on the other side of the room, watching this clusterfuck of a conversation. The original poster, um, he left the conversation about a third of the first page into it, and he's standing next to me, laughing hysterically. Unless any of you have a legal background, beyond watching LA Law, or the Good Wife, you're not likely to represent my interests in small claims, my contractual negotiations with the NY Mets, or in my class action against Hobby Lobby. But, please, go on, this is quickly becoming the most watched program since, Seinfeld.
Volunteer
Oct 11, 14 9:31 am
Had you rather have a verbal agreement with Roger Staubach or a written agreement with Donald Trump?
archanonymous
Oct 11, 14 9:32 am
Preponderance of bullshit.
( o Y o )
Oct 11, 14 9:34 am
Hutz is the name. Lionel Hutz, attorney-at-law. Here's my card. It turns into a sponge when you put it in water.
The state bar forbids me from promising you a big cash settlement. But just between you and me, I promise you a big cash settlement.
Miles Jaffe
Oct 13, 14 9:16 am
Great choice of threads to spam looking for work.
CD.Arch
Oct 13, 14 9:46 am
HA! I Do not Liked Spamming people's. They is Irritating. I don't wanna Your Help With my Modelering. Who Does He Must complaint to? He Tried complaint Before.
A fellow classmate and I were recently contracted to build a model for a low rise residential building. The guy who contracted us used to go to school here and when he came in today to look at the model, he decided that he didn't want it and refused to pay us.
What are the legal channels I can go through to receive payment for services? It was roughly $2000 for the model and we spent upwards of 50 hours building it. Should we go through small claims court to get paid or what are our options?
Thank you for the advice in advance.
Well, I don't know about Miles but Donna has a lock on Wonder Woman.
i'm a little confused still, did anyone argue that an oral contract is better than a written, signed, and possibly even notarized contract?
Miles implied that by arguing and promoting an unrecorded verbal agreement against a suggestion for a written, signed & dated and possibly notorized contract.
That is how I read Miles point. Perhaps Miles and I misinterpreted each other and it got into an argument/debate. If so, I apologize on my part on that.
wouldn't wonderk get wonder woman?
Richard, I didn't imply anything, except maybe that you don't know what you're talking about. Which was more a statement of fact than an implication. And I didn't misinterpret you at all, I simply responded to your obsessively obstinate persistence, which I find absurd in the face of your obvious lack of experience in such matters.
i'm a little confused still, did anyone argue that an oral contract is better than a written, signed, and possibly even notarized contract?
shuellmi - I don't think so
richard - the law recognizes common sense too. The first thing a judge will ask the defendant is "did you ask these students to make you a model?" I don't believe anyone is arguing that a written contract is not a great tool. But, a verbal contract has weight under the law as well.
proto,
If Jeff Svitas is the defendent, all he has to say is "I asked the craft workshop co-manager." I do agree that it has weight AS LONG AS IT CAN BE PROVEN IN THE PREPONDERANCE OF FACTS.
The craftshop co-manager asked the students and came to the students. Jeff may have been present to relay the specifications of the model but that alone does not necessarily constitute a contractual agreement.
This is what I am understanding from the original posts by Brandon and Olivia. This does not mean there was a contract relationship between Brandon/Olivia and Jeff Svitas.
Are you following so far? Is there any question?
Trier of facts needs to ascertain if a contract agreement exists between plaintiff and defendent. Key elements has to be established regardless of the type of contract.
Remember, courts have had liers claiming contract relationships even though there is none. There has been cases of wanton fraudulent use of the court system as an attempt to money out of someone. There are cases where they have successfully happened.
Since the burden of proof is with the plaintiff, they need to prove their argument with certain things needs to have clear and convincing evidence especially with existance of a contract agreement between plaintiff and defendent because it is a mandatory prerequsite for a contractual payment dispute because for the defendent to owe the plaintiff, he has to have a contractual obligation to pay.
Remember, the defendent has the benefit of assumption in that he does not need to have evidence to support his claim unless the burden of proof is shifted to the defendent. Go read up on shifting the burden of proof. You'll get the fundamental idea.
The defendent only needs to poke holes in the plaintiff's argument when the plaintiff has the burden of proof.
That is law.
Common sense is not common consensus.
This situation can be read in multiple ways.
"AS LONG AS IT CAN BE PROVEN IN THE PREPONDERANCE OF FACTS"
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts don't do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts don't stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
If the students had a verbal agreement that they would be paid in full before any supplies were purchased or labor begun on the project they would be home free. They would be in far better shape than if they had their current agreement codified in written form; they would have the money in the bank. When dealing with deadbeats the first rule is to get the money upfront.
Volunteer,
I concur with you.
Richard's basic concern now is that Svitak never agreed to have 2 students work on his project. He has kind of a blustery way of expressing this but actually I think it's a good point.
They haven't told us clearly whether Svitak agreed to have 2 students work on this instead of the shop manager he originally contacted so we don't have much to go on. If Svitak never agreed to this, there's nothing to argue here - they need to figure this out with the shop manager who asked them to do it.
the lessons:
1- don't start working for someone without a written agreement. Even just one paragraph stating the parties to the agreement, the work to be done, and the price is sufficient. It doesn't need to seem "official" to be legally enforceable.
2- never ever do work to help someone out who doesn't himself have a written agreement with the ultimate recipient of that work. Make sure you review that agreement yourself - and then get your agreement written too!
Contract law is basically fair. The problems people have come entirely from confused thinking and unclear agreements.
midlander,
Yep.
A simple written contract and it doesn't need to be fancy. Just that it exists and contains the most basic elements of a contractual agreement like you said.
I recommend a print name, signature line and an "Agreement entered on __________________ (month, day, year)" with the Agreement enter on date component usually at the beginning.
This is just helpful to have a date so it places the chronology of the contract. It isn't much work but it goes a long ways in keeping the agreement in order timeline wise.
Just that the agreement is legible is all really matters as one that isn't legible to any degree can effectively be only as good a butt wipe.
Word of advice for those that it matters and others that can learn to be better at contract matters.
Learn from other's misfortunes is as good if not better than learning it the hard way.
I am tempted to pay the bill to make this thread stop.
balkins you are a total nerd
nerd denotes intelligence. It is better to be intelligent (or nerd as you may call it) then it is to be total mook.
Nerd (adjective: nerdy) is a descriptive term, often used pejoratively, indicating that a person is overly intellectual, obsessive, or socially impaired.
Wikipedia
I thought I'd point out something, it seems rather obvious, only if you are like me, standing on the other side of the room, watching this clusterfuck of a conversation. The original poster, um, he left the conversation about a third of the first page into it, and he's standing next to me, laughing hysterically. Unless any of you have a legal background, beyond watching LA Law, or the Good Wife, you're not likely to represent my interests in small claims, my contractual negotiations with the NY Mets, or in my class action against Hobby Lobby. But, please, go on, this is quickly becoming the most watched program since, Seinfeld.
Had you rather have a verbal agreement with Roger Staubach or a written agreement with Donald Trump?
Preponderance of bullshit.
Hutz is the name. Lionel Hutz, attorney-at-law. Here's my card. It turns into a sponge when you put it in water.
The state bar forbids me from promising you a big cash settlement. But just between you and me, I promise you a big cash settlement.
Great choice of threads to spam looking for work.
HA! I Do not Liked Spamming people's. They is Irritating. I don't wanna Your Help With my Modelering. Who Does He Must complaint to? He Tried complaint Before.
Thanks you,
CD.Arch
What ended up happening with this?