Harrassment / Abuse over Invoice. Advice please.

[hayes126]

A few months back I went with the CEO of a charity I'm on the board with to a view office space.

The landlord of the property, who owns an advertising company that was based upstairs, showed us around. During our meeting we got into discussion about a new company I was a part of, and that when it's up and running etc. we'd probably need logo's designed.

He told me, "oh that's fine I'll do it for you! Just let me know what you want I'll do you up some designs!" I thought it was kind of him, and he got in contact soon after to discuss designs.

At no point did he ever mention cost/price or present a quote or anything of that nature - so I assumed he was doing a small favour in designing a simple logo, probably to build a rapport with his new tenants.

Anyway, he did design something (which is still copyrighted to his company as his logo is still plastered across it to prevent copying) and I thanked him repeatedly for his efforts. He then asked if I required any stationery and if so to send details so he can mock up business cards. I declined as the company is still some time away from trading.

A couple of months later I received an invoice for over £100 from him. Considering we never agreed terms I thought possibly it was something his staff processed anyway so I ignored it. I subsequently received two more invoices, each month after.

I was about to write a letter explaining my position on the matter when his PA telephoned regarding the invoice. I explained everything to her and how there was a) no agreement and b) I was given the impression he was doing this as a favour (especially considering his company is financial difficulty and a charity moving in to his building saves him some substantial business rates).

His PA told me he'd speak to him about it. A couple of days ago I received an email from him directly which was a very condescending, sarcastic email basically asking "what makes u think I'll do all that work then you have it free? Are we doing charity work?"

I replied in detail everything as to why I believed he was doing any work as a gesture of goodwill, and that there was no agreement. My final paragraph started "maybe I'm simple but I always thought a quote would need to be agreed first."

He replied by saying, "I think the beginning of your last paragraph sums it up!"

I started to feel a bit harrassed and offending over this, so I told him I found the comment personal and asked him if he really wanted to go down this road. He replied with another sarcastic comment and I could see what he was doing, looking to goad me into a nasty confrontation via email. The charity I'm with is an Anti-Bullying one so now that he knew he couldn't get money from me he wanted me to verbally abuse him so he could run downstairs and show the other Trustees.

I never replied, but he went down anyway and showed them the emails last night. I'm not sure what he implied to them over it because they want to speak to me about a conflict with the charity over this and any potential "retaliation." I feel like he's damaged my character and integrity here to an Anti-Bullying charity - although I don't feel it's any of their concern to begin with.


If you've read up to now, thank you, and what legal action can I take over this invoice and any slander? It's now got to the point where I feel harrassed over this all because of HIS mistake in not following proper procedure for obtaining business and has now dragged board members of a charity into this looking to discredit and make me out to be something I'm not.

Many thanks for your time and help.

 

[simon field]

Are you happy with the logos he's designed for you?

Slander is a very expensive business, can you and your friends not simply ignore him?

 

[hayes126]

Are you happy with the logos he's designed for you?

Slander is a very expensive business, can you and your friends not simply ignore him?

I was happy. But I don't have any final proofs of the logo, as I said his company logo is still branded over it for copyright - so I've never actually received any work.

I did ignore him, I purposely didn't reply after his third flippant comment because I knew what he was trying to do, so I didn't want to give him any excuse. Seems he had enough though because he's gone and effectively dragged my name through the mud of the Anti-Bullying charity I sit on the board of. It doesn't look good and now the Chair wants to speak to me about it and her concerns. And all this over a payment he's not entitled to and knows he's not, so he's gone down this route.

 

[simon field]

Well, these things happen unfortunately.

So when you have your meeting you can set the record straight, as for the invoice, if you want the logo then pay up, job done.

If not, I'd ignore him.

 

[hayes126]

Well, these things happen unfortunately.

So when you have your meeting you can set the record straight, as for the invoice, if you want the logo then pay up, job done.

If not, I'd ignore him.

I don't want the logo. That's besides the point. I did ask for legal advice because in case you have missed the point I feel a victim of slander against my reputation. He's insulted me via email and tried to damage my reputation to an Anti-Bullying charity. Ignoring him is easy, I did that, but now he's taken this issue a bit OTT.

 

[DavidAshdown]

I was happy. But I don't have any final proofs of the logo, as I said his company logo is still branded over it for copyright - so I've never actually received any work.

I did ignore him, I purposely didn't reply after his third flippant comment because I knew what he was trying to do, so I didn't want to give him any excuse. Seems he had enough though because he's gone and effectively dragged my name through the mud of the Anti-Bullying charity I sit on the board of. It doesn't look good and now the Chair wants to speak to me about it and her concerns. And all this over a payment he's not entitled to and knows he's not, so he's gone down this route.

Why do you say 'a payment he's not entitled to'.

Yes, it would have been ethical to quote first but at the same time you should have asked him. He is a business, why would you think he was doing it as a favour and for free especially as you are not old time mates. If you go into a sweet shop and see a mars bar with no price on it, do you assume its free ?

You instructed him to do the work, and therefore a contract has been created, the fact that you did not ask for a price is not his fault.

I think you should approach him and say you misunderstood his original offer and although he should have made it clearer, he has done the work and therefore maybe you should split the bill but realistically in my view, I think he is entitled to be paid so long as he then gives you full ownership of the artwork.

 

[simon field]

Ok so you'll ignore the invoice, that's fine. There's nothing in writing, no trading history, and you have no product. He can't make you pay.

As for the slander, people who go around bad mouthing others just end up looking rather pathetic and get ignored anyway. However if you intend to take him to court for it you'll be in for a long and expensive ride. Imho

 

[DavidAshdown]

Ok so you'll ignore the invoice, that's fine. There's nothing in writing, no trading history, and you have no product. He can't make you pay.

As for the slander, people who go around bad mouthing others just end up looking rather pathetic and get ignored anyway. However if you intend to take him to court for it you'll be in for a long and expensive ride. Imho

He has done the work though on instructions from the client !

At the very least there is a moral obligation to come to an arrangement, in my view, don't you think ?

 

[hayes126]

Why do you say 'a payment he's not entitled to'.

Yes, it would have been ethical to quote first but at the same time you should have asked him. He is a business, why would you think he was doing it as a favour and for free especially as you are not old time mates. If you go into a sweet shop and see a mars bar with no price on it, do you assume its free ?

You instructed him to do the work, and therefore a contract has been created, the fact that you did not ask for a price is not his fault.

I think you should approach him and say you misunderstood his original offer and although he should have made it clearer, he has done the work and therefore maybe you should split the bill but realistically in my view, I think he is entitled to be paid so long as he then gives you full ownership of the artwork.

I see your view on it, good to see it from the other perspective. I fully appreciate that we weren't old time mates but the clear impression I was given, along with someone else who was present in the conversation, is that he was offering to do a mock design as a gesture of good will. I wasn't actively seeking any design so if he had presented a quote or a price I'd have told him at the time "I apologise I misunderstood." The fact he also offered to do all stationery again without presenting a quote also made me think nothing more than, "Wow. Nice guy."

It did feel like he was showing some kindness as the result of us being new tenants working right below him. Of course this is the same man who's building was up for sale for two years prior to us agreeing a lease and he never once mentioned anything until the property was sold recently, forcing us to move out after only a few months.

I must ask, as he has not demanded payment when he contacted me, rather decided to be a bit rude/abusive and is showing little interest in actually recovering the money as he is in causing me trouble, would I not be better placed to just not mention anything about payment? He doesn't seem interested in it at the moment.

 

I don't want the logo. That's besides the point. I did ask for legal advice because in case you have missed the point I feel a victim of slander against my reputation. He's insulted me via email and tried to damage my reputation to an Anti-Bullying charity. Ignoring him is easy, I did that, but now he's taken this issue a bit OTT.

Just think of him jumping up and down in frustration and all the effort he is putting in over a hundred quid.

 

[DavidAshdown]

I see your view on it, good to see it from the other perspective. I fully appreciate that we weren't old time mates but the clear impression I was given, along with someone else who was present in the conversation, is that he was offering to do a mock design as a gesture of good will. I wasn't actively seeking any design so if he had presented a quote or a price I'd have told him at the time "I apologise I misunderstood." The fact he also offered to do all stationery again without presenting a quote also made me think nothing more than, "Wow. Nice guy."

It did feel like he was showing some kindness as the result of us being new tenants working right below him. Of course this is the same man who's building was up for sale for two years prior to us agreeing a lease and he never once mentioned anything until the property was sold recently, forcing us to move out after only a few months.

I must ask, as he has not demanded payment when he contacted me, rather decided to be a bit rude/abusive and is showing little interest in actually recovering the money as he is in causing me trouble, would I not be better placed to just not mention anything about payment? He doesn't seem interested in it at the moment.

I don't think the other issues have anything to do with it. Conversely, I also don't think he needs to become insulting or abusive especially as he hasn't handled the situation very well but I am surprised that anyone, particular someone who is at board level of any organisation, could really be nieve enough to believe a business was offering to create a logo and stationery for free.

I think you are both at fault really, thus why i suggested you explain this and offer to split the bill. He should handle this request in a professional and polite manner and if he doesn't then I would tend to give you the benefit of the doubt but I believe a court would expect you to genuinely make a goodwill gesture on the grounds of misunderstanding and for him to accept it.

With regard the slander, it doesn't really wash with me and as the earlier poster said, it would be a very costly and to be honest, pretty pointless venture.

 

[DavidAshdown]

Just think of him jumping up and down in frustration and all the effort he is putting in over a hundred quid.

Yes agreed, sounds a bit much, but I suspect he believes it was agreed and therefore feels cheated, although he does actually sound a bit daft.

 

[kelvin1950]

Is this worth you getting wound up over?

Either pay him and find some other offices or don't pay him and find some other offices. It's the loss of a tenant that will really hurt him. No point in you having a heart attack over it.

 

[DavidAshdown]

Is this worth you getting wound up over?

Either pay him and find some other offices or don't pay him and find some other offices. It's the loss of a tenant that will really hurt him. No point in you having a heart attack over it.

I agree, it all sounds a bit like a storm in a tea-cup on both parts for what is essentially a pretty small issue.

 

Well I can't imagine anyone authorising a logo design without having a price.

Bearing in mind the Olympic logo cost 400K.

 

[Cylon]

His PA told me he'd speak to him about it. A couple of days ago I received an email from him directly which was a very condescending, sarcastic email basically asking "what makes u think I'll do all that work then you have it free? Are we doing charity work?"

I replied in detail everything as to why I believed he was doing any work as a gesture of goodwill, and that there was no agreement. My final paragraph started "maybe I'm simple but I always thought a quote would need to be agreed first."

He replied by saying, "I think the beginning of your last paragraph sums it up!"

I started to feel a bit harrassed and offending over this, so I told him I found the comment personal and asked him if he really wanted to go down this road. He replied with another sarcastic comment and I could see what he was doing, looking to goad me into a nasty confrontation via email. The charity I'm with is an Anti-Bullying one so now that he knew he couldn't get money from me he wanted me to verbally abuse him so he could run downstairs and show the other Trustees.

Is it possible you may be a little over sensitive as part of an Anti Bullying charity when all i can see here is a little squabble over payment and yes he should have made it clear he was going to be charging for the work, as he didn't you have the right to tell him to get stuffed.

But If your more concerned about him bringing your name into disrepute with the charity i can't see anything in what youve written that is anything more than a minor squabble about payment after all he's not pulling your pig tails and giving you a wedgy just having a tantrum about what on the face of it is his severe lack of business sense and speculative invoicing.

If you do have any juicy e-mails that offer more evidence of libellous comments could you post them (removing any identifying information) otherwise i would suggest just presenting your case to the board calling the CEO who was present to back you up and then ignore any further communications from him.

 

[Cylon]

A few months back I went with the CEO of a charity I'm on the board with to a view office space.

Of course this is the same man who's building was up for sale for two years prior to us agreeing a lease and he never once mentioned anything until the property was sold recently, forcing us to move out after only a few months.

Sorry I meant to ask was there some sort of underlying feud with this landlord as it appears you where only in the offices for a short period of time before having to move out.
I'm presuming there was a clause in the lease that allowed for early termination by the landlord as the property was also up for sale.

 

[DavidAshdown]

Somehow I can't help feeling, this is more about trying to sue for bullying than about the underlying problem, which is that someone has done a job and now cant get paid for it.

Quite frankly in my opinion, these so called 'charitable organisations aka do gooders', do not understand realism or commercialism. You have here a member of an organisational at board level who believes that all businesses are a charity and offer their services for free and then uses the bullying organisation as a means to stop people claiming money where money is due. Why on earth would anyone think that if a taxi driver turned up and didn't state their fare on collection, then they would get a free ride ?

I don't believe the conversation was that simple or the fact that this business implied that they would do it for free. I believe that this 'charitable' organisation, immune to the understanding of the real world, took advantage of the situation, probably through naivety and thus the guy who offered his services is now cheesed off that he has been cheated.

 

[internetspaceships]

Nice one Chuckles.

I agree, sort out between you what to do regarding the invoice and forget the slander and bullying thing.

People getting frustrated with other people and saying harsh words isn't always bullying you know.

p.s cracking post Earl - you're right, you old goat

 

[BustersDogs]

Putting aside the logo issue as others have discussed that, I'd be interested where you think he's slandered you?

To be slanderous he has to damage your reputation, if the other trustees immediately sacked you, you might have a point. If they took no notice and carried on working with you as usual, your repuation is intact. There also has to be a fair sized number - when I did my defamation training (admittedly about 5-10 years ago now) there had to be a group of around 10 people. And of course, the defence against slander is if it's true.

 

[DavidAshdown]

It seems to be a modern day trend.....'cry wolf' springs to mind.

Slander, prejudice etc......lets sue.....

Defamation of character.....hmmmmm !!!

Its a mad world we live in.

 

[Billmccallum]

Is the charitable organisation a registered charity???? If so, the following applies.

Most trustees are unpaid, and must not benefit in any way from their connection with the charity. There are limited exceptions to this rule, and the Charities Act allows trustees to be paid in certain circumstances for providing services to the charity over and above their normal trustee duties. http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Publications/cc3.aspx#f2

Seeking to gain a commercial advantage due to your connection to the charity is frowned upon.

Based on your original post, there was clearly a misunderstanding. The offer of producing something was made and you accepted, as both parties failed to make it clear that payment was involved or not is the key issue, as the board member of the charity the onus would be on you to ensure that there was no conflict of interest.

The important point is "Considering we never agreed terms I thought possibly it was something his staff processed anyway so I ignored it." THIS was your mistake, you should have spoken to him immediately and come to some arrangement which was suitable to you both.

IF I was in your position, I would suck it up and pay the invoice. As a former Chairman of a charitable organisation and a Manager for several small and large charities, I would never get myself into this type of situation....if I did have a business interest separate to the charitable work, I would arrange a visit in my buisness time to make any such arrangements, I feel it was quite unprofessional to mix the charity work with business.

But that's just my opinion.

 

[DavidAshdown]

Is the charitable organisation a registered charity???? If so, the following applies.

Most trustees are unpaid, and must not benefit in any way from their connection with the charity. There are limited exceptions to this rule, and the Charities Act allows trustees to be paid in certain circumstances for providing services to the charity over and above their normal trustee duties. http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Publications/cc3.aspx#f2

Seeking to gain a commercial advantage due to your connection to the charity is frowned upon.

Based on your original post, there was clearly a misunderstanding. The offer of producing something was made and you accepted, as both parties failed to make it clear that payment was involved or not is the key issue, as the board member of the charity the onus would be on you to ensure that there was no conflict of interest.

The important point is "Considering we never agreed terms I thought possibly it was something his staff processed anyway so I ignored it." THIS was your mistake, you should have spoken to him immediately and come to some arrangement which was suitable to you both.

IF I was in your position, I would suck it up and pay the invoice. As a former Chairman of a charitable organisation and a Manager for several small and large charities, I would never get myself into this type of situation....if I did have a business interest separate to the charitable work, I would arrange a visit in my buisness time to make any such arrangements, I feel it was quite unprofessional to mix the charity work with business.

But that's just my opinion.

And its a very good opinion.

 

[OldWelshGuy]

I work with various groups, and you have to be completely on your guard about not how things are, but how they APPEAR. In this case, and by your own admission, you thought he was doing the work as an offer of goodwill due to the position you held. If you have indicated that via email, then you have broekn the terms of your office as a trustee, as it COULD be seen as a sweatener for the deal in renting the office.

Daft I know, but as I said, it is how it appears that matters.