Being threatened with court action

[Ben Anderson]

To put a long story short I was working with this guy which we did a deal that I created their website for free and then they would introduce me to creating sites for their clients in which they would pay a monthly fee. They paid a deposit to me of £50. They then took ages to get back to me and I didn't hear back. Communication broke down between everyone and the middle-man guy decided to leave, so I presumed that the landing page for the client they intruded to me was not needed anymore. I didn't make a fuss.

I made 1 mistake, I anciently took down their landing page when I moved server, as I presumed that they went elsewhere and I took 2 weeks to get back as I was on holiday at the time when they requested me to reinstate their landing page. I didn't really expect to hear from them again after all this time.

They have not said anything to me for a year, suddenly this has come to haunt me. They are now demanding I refund them. It seems unfair to me as I lost out when they didn't get back to me when I was going to start developing their website?

Should I just pay them back the £50 or let them carry on? Don't really want the hassle of all this really but it seems unfair after a year I now have to refund them?

 

[Ben Anderson]

They are also claiming that they used the landing page of their material and because their details were not showing, they are also going to claim the costs of their marketing material.

 

[Darren C]

If you can afford it, pay them the £50. It shows good will on your part and gets rid of the problem. Later down the line they may accept they acted improperly and realise you're a good guy, or they may not and that's their problem not yours.

 

[Ben Anderson]

I am pretty skint this month. It's a real pain all this, I could do without!

 

[STDFR33]

If you pay the £50 you are accepting liability.

The may then find that the liability goes beyond £50 because of loss of business etc. They may then seek to recover further damages.

It may seem the easiest option to pay the £50, but you'll need assurances (in writing) that this would be in full and final settlement.

 

[Darren C]

I am pretty skint this month. It's a real pain all this, I could do without!

Well, in that case just ignore them and let them do all the running. £50 isn't exactly a great basis of a massive legal claim is it?

 

[Ben Anderson]

Could they claim anything else against me such as 'loss of earnings' on their marketing material because it had the website on (and the landing page was down, as I presumed my services were no longer being used?) they are now claiming they want to do? Surely this is unfair after not even hearing from them for a year! I need to take a quick decision as they are moving on this fast.

 

[Ben Anderson]

I have also just found a contract the middleman signed with me, stating that deposits are none-refundable and the payment was made to me by the middleman's bank account. Even though the website is for a different client?

 

[Darren C]

They can claim anything they want to but it's up to them to enforce this claim. It is uneconomical to even commence and they would have to be a) very petty minded and b) very determined to see it through.

My personal opinion, from what you say, is that they are just trying to bully you and there isn't even a justifiable claim in it.

 

[Ben Anderson]

Thanks for your reply. I am just worried if they will come with a large sum of the marketing material on their claim because it has their website address on it and stating there is no landing page up for a couple of months or weeks because I wrongly pressured that the middle-man was no longer using my services. Obviously, I have to look at this if worse comes to worse.

 

[The Byre]

If what you say is true, this claim is ridiculous and only a complete fool would try to initiate litigation for such a footling sum on such a flimsy basis.

I doubt I would even reply to rubbish like this, though if I did, I would find a good reason to make similar counter-demands and point out that should they seek to pursue their claim "we would have no option, other than to seek damages for XXX (server fees, development costs, whatever). We were forced to withdraw your services, because these fees were not paid."

As for their website, if the damn thing is still up, start charging them a monthly fee.

 

[Darren C]

Yeah, the bloke might be a complete nut case and turn up at your house in the middle of the night, who knows? My bet is he just trying it on and will run out of steam in a day or so.

 

[Gordon - Commercial Finance]

only a complete fool would try to initiate litigation for such a footling sum

Did we not have a discussion recently about pursuit of all monies owed, regardless of the amount? Or is the addition of the "flimsy basis" the key here?

 

[The Byre]

Or is the addition of the "flimsy basis" the key here?

Ha! Ha! I thought you might come back on that one!

Yes, it's one thing to go after someone who clearly and obviously owes £5 or £50 for a good or service he/she refuses to pay for. It is quite another, to get cute (IMO!!!) over something that is a matter of interpretation and debate. Not least, because you may win, yet have to pay some or all of the costs, so one or the other party may lose the case, but end up winning!

 

[Gecko001]

If you pay the £50 you are accepting liability.

The may then find that the liability goes beyond £50 because of loss of business etc. They may then seek to recover further damages.

It may seem the easiest option to pay the £50, but you'll need assurances (in writing) that this would be in full and final settlement.

You can pay without admitting liability, if when you make the payment you clearly state that you do not admit liability and that the payment is a goodwill gesture. It is fairly standard legal procedure in cases like this.

 

[Gordon - Commercial Finance]

Ha! Ha! I thought you might come back on that one!

I could hardly let it slide!

I am being facetious of course, because I completely agree that it would overly litigious and uneconomical to pursue any claim in these circumstances.

 

[STDFR33]

You can pay without admitting liability, if when you make the payment you clearly state that you do not admit liability and that the payment is a goodwill gesture. It is fairly standard legal procedure in cases like this.

That's what I was trying to get at in my last sentence. It just didn't come across very well.

 

[Awinner2]

Were you working for them or the middleman? I would just ignore their claim.