Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YC S12 company refuses to pay for my design. "Send your claim to our legal team"

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 175 posts

Re: YC S12 company refuses to pay for my design. "Send your claim to our legal team"

#101

Post by Silhouette »

tptacek wrote: post #99
Silhouette wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That may be true, but it's a risky thing to do just to see if someone's serious. The moment you refer me to real laywers, you have probably removed any opportunity for me to be nice to you and settle the disagreement amicably, even if you subsequently realise you've been an ass all along and want to make it all go away quietly. If nothing else, if I think you're asking me to speak to your lawyers, it's probably not m…

Are we debating? I don't think we are. I think "send it to legal@" was poor messaging; "send it to finance@" would have accomplished the same thing without escalating the situation. Having said that: "send it to legal@" is not "breach of contract". Sorry, it just isn't.

I think we probably agree here. I was just pointing out that your alternative suggestion (how_serious_are_you@) might not be much of an improvement from a business point of view over the original (fuckoff@). Ultimately, asking someone to contact legal@ is still significantly escalating a situation where there appears to be very little potential upside from doing so, whatever the underlying intent might be.

Re: YC S12 company refuses to pay for my design. "Send your claim to our legal team"

#102

Post by tptacek »

Silhouette wrote: post #101
tptacek wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we debating? I don't think we are. I think "send it to legal@" was poor messaging; "send it to finance@" would have accomplished the same thing without escalating the situation. Having said that: "send it to legal@" is not "breach of contract". Sorry, it just isn't.

I think we probably agree here. I was just pointing out that your alternative suggestion (how_serious_are_you@) might not be much of an improvement from a business point of view over the original (fuckoff@). Ultimately, asking someone to contact legal@ is still significantly escalating a situation where there appears to be very little potential upside from doing so, whatever the underlying intent might be.

Escalating the situation or overtly signaling displeasure is a bad strategy.

Expressing passive skepticism and slow-rolling an invoice you don't believe you should pay is not a bad strategy, at least not always. There is an upside to it.

Re: YC S12 company refuses to pay for my design. "Send your claim to our legal team"

#104

Post by dr_ »

guelo wrote: post #72

This is off-topic and I couldn't really figure out what it is that eligibleapp does, but why would they not come out with a web app first? Restricting whatever it is they're doing to the iPhone seems shortsighted.

Agreed. But if it's not restricted to the iPhone, there are already competitors out there such as cake health and simplee. It could be useful for physicians who are in the hospital or skilled nursing setting and want to check insurance eligibility. But much of today's health care work is desktop related, and there's so much opportunity for disruption there that it's important not to overlook it all and head straight for mobile apps.

Re: YC S12 company refuses to pay for my design. "Send your claim to our legal team"

#105

Post by greatreorx »

tptacek wrote: post #102
Silhouette wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we probably agree here. I was just pointing out that your alternative suggestion (how_serious_are_you@) might not be much of an improvement from a business point of view over the original (fuckoff@). Ultimately, asking someone to contact legal@ is still significantly escalating a situation where there appears to be very little potential upside from doing so, whatever the underlying intent might be.

Escalating the situation or overtly signaling displeasure is a bad strategy. Expressing passive skepticism and slow-rolling an invoice you don't believe you should pay is not a bad strategy, at least not always. There is an upside to it.

> Expressing passive skepticism and slow-rolling an invoice you don't believe you should pay is not a bad strategy.

Do you not believe the vendor's story? or are you saying it's okay to be a dick as long as you delude yourself into thinking you don't owe people money?

Re: YC S12 company refuses to pay for my design. "Send your claim to our legal team"

#106

Post by jbigelow76 »

nwmcsween wrote: post #50

This is what you don't do if things don't work out. Go to small claims court, do not post it on the internet and open yourself to getting sued for libel.

If the same legal team that reviews the invoices would be in charge of pursuing the lawsuit the chances of the OP getting sued are pretty slim ;)

Re: YC S12 company refuses to pay for my design. "Send your claim to our legal team"

#107

Post by jarrett »

Cushman wrote: post #82
jarrett wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's one reason why putting it in writing is best, even if forgery is possible. People are way more likely to argue about what was agreed to, than about whether an agreement was made. With verbal agreements, most people won't lie and say that no conversation took place. (The "whether" part.) But many people will misremember or distort the exact words that were exchanged. (The "what" part.) And those exact words are…

I'm realizing now I misread the OP, and we are talking about a verbal contract-- for which I'll agree different rules apply. (Not legally, but practically.) My question is more about whether there's any practical distinction between an informal email which contains a clear agreement to work and the "signed contract" spoken of in legend.

Practically, one difference would be in the level of detail. Contracts tend to go on at length about the finer points of the business relationship. Whereas, in an email, people would typically be much more brief.

The extra details can be very important.

For one, they help prevent misunderstandings. ("It's been three months, and you haven't paid me." "Oh, well it's our standard practice to pay all invoices within 12 months.")

Secondly, if the relationship becomes acrimonious, the details help limit the scope of a possible dispute. The more the parties make explicit up front, the less there is to argue about later.

Another difference concerns the Statute of Frauds. (http://www.lexisnexis.com/lawschool/study/outlines/html/cont...) Certain kinds of contracts--notably those above $500--require a signature of some kind. But, if you read § 6.03 in the statute, you'll see that this can be construed broadly. Often, merely including your name in an email is enough to satisfy the Statute of Frauds (http://www.internetlibrary.com/topics/statute_frauds.cfm). But if you're looking to hold someone to their word, it's safer not to rely on that.

It's better to be safe than sorry. If you want something to be binding, it's best to go with a solid contract, rather than just an exchange of emails. If you don't want to commit yourself just yet, don't assume that your emails are nonbonding. In other words, be pessimistic either way.

Re: YC S12 company refuses to pay for my design. "Send your claim to our legal team"

#108

Post by inuhj »

I'm delighted to see that disputes are being solved this way instead of tying up the assets of our judicial system. Remember the days when we actually tried to resolve our problems and court was a last resort? Now the sentiment seems to be that you should file in small claims court instead of writing a post on reddit.

I'm glad to see 'court of public opinion'(AKA reputation) make a comeback. The concept of reputation is, in my humblest of opinions, more important than our legal system when it comes to keeping people from behaving badly. Being publicly shamed is a deterrent for unethical behavior in a way that our courts can not be because of the ridiculously high cost of litigation.

Re: YC S12 company refuses to pay for my design. "Send your claim to our legal team"

#109

Post by javajosh »

tptacek wrote: post #91
javajosh wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually I agree. That's why small claims court should precede the public shaming.

Small claims court? How many days outstanding is the invoice? You want to take a guess about the longest it's ever taken us to get paid for an invoice? Net-30 (meaning, let's just pretend we're going to pay you within 30 days of getting invoiced so we can stop talking about this part of the contract) is a standard term. Is it your expectation that when you don't have a contract, you can expect "Net-1" payment?

Of course not! "Small claims court" doesn't mean now. To even file a claim you must have sent a demand letter. So he's still got some hoops to jump through. That said, I don't think he has to wait 30 days if the client has already indicated that they've decided to breach the contract. What he needs to do now is send a real-life letter demanding an agreement to pay within the week, and if that agreement is not forthcoming, then he should file in small claims court. Really, it's not all that dramatic either.
Post reply on HN