Contractor didn't quote first - can he legally send invoice? Go to court?

[sdlegal]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

Company hires an independent technical support contractor to perform services for company's clients. One day, company's network goes down and independent contractor happens to be there dropping off paperwork. An employee asks contractor for help and he does help, but does not offer any written or verbal quote for his time. Independent contractor completes work and a few days later sends a bill (at the same rate he charges for serving company's clients). Since he merely performed the work based on an employee's request, without any written signed work order or quote, is this bill valid? We have never asked contractor for help before so we have no pre-existing relationship in this regard. Contractor just assumed he could bill us his normal rate.

The contractor is threatening to sue if invoice isn't paid. Company has in writing (email) contractor admitting that he did not quote the employee anything, only that employee asked contractor to work on the problem, and that he assumed the owner knew he was there (again, nobody was quoted verbally or in writing).

 

[swalsh411]

If the contractor can show that his belief that the employee who asked him to provide the work was authorized to engage his services, I suspect he will prevail. Or maybe you should put on your big boy pants and pay the person who appears to have worked in good faith for one of your clients.

 

[sdlegal]

How could the contractor show that employee was "authorized to engage his services"? Employee DID reach out to the contractor whenever a job was ready to be dispatched and does carry the title of Office Manager. However, contractor admitted in email that he did not provide any estimate, therefore how can he possibly be in the right. Isn't it illegal in California to perform services and then render a bill without a written or verbal estimate?

FYI, the contractor worked for the employing company's clients and was always paid on time and in full - it was not on "faith". Would this past history of contracted jobs give contractor cause to then simply jump into work for the company when asked by an employee and then just charge a bill - is this truly a valid supposition?

 

[Mass_Shyster]

Isn't it illegal in California to perform services and then render a bill without a written or verbal estimate?

I'm not aware of any law prohibiting that.

Your position is that the office manager, who normally directs this contractor to do work, directed this contractor to do work, which he did. Now you want to withhold payment because he didn't provide a quote first?

I hope he sues and wins. I also hope all of your clients hear about how honorable your company is.

 

[sandyclaus]

How could the contractor show that employee was "authorized to engage his services"? Employee DID reach out to the contractor whenever a was ready to be dispatched and does carry the title of Office Manager. However, contractor admitted in email that he did not provide any estimate, therefore how can he possibly be in the right. Isn't it illegal in California to perform services and then render a bill without a written or verbal estimate?

FYI, the contractor worked for the employing company's clients and was always paid on time and in full - it was not on "faith". Would this past history of contracted jobs give contractor cause to then simply jump into work for the company when asked by an employee and then just charge a bill - is this truly a valid supposition?

If the contractor HAD performed services for this client before, and especially as someone in a capacity to authorize the work requested services to be done, it seems that the invoice may well be legitimate. They did work for the client and it was reasonable to assume that the work was authorized again this time as it had been in the past.

If then office manager needed to clear pricing with someone else before actually engaging the services of this contractor, then that sounds like an issue within your hierarchy of decision-makers and about what steps they should be following (i.e. obtaining written estimates for review prior to authorizing services to be performed.)

 

[swalsh411]

It's not like this guy showed up at a random business and the secretay said he could perform some expensive task and then just made up an inflated bill rate:

The contractor performed work:

-at the direction of the person who normally assigns him work
-at the standard billing rate
-doing work he usually does
-after being asked to arrive at the client site

And you think he shouldn't get paid? Talk about the moral low road.

 

[sdlegal]

I think there is some confusion here. The contractor never did direct work for the company's actual business location itself. He did work for the company's clients at client locations. He was not called in to work at the company, he happened to be there dropping off some paperwork and then was asked for assistance.

 

[LdiJ]

I think there is some confusion here. The contractor never did direct work for the company's actual business location itself. He did work for the company's clients at client locations. He was not called in to work at the company, he happened to be there dropping off some paperwork and then was asked for assistance.

We understand that. However, since he was asked for assistance by the exact same person who scheduled him to work for clients, its not at all surprising that he would expect to be paid for work in your offices.

 

[Zigner]

In case you missed it above...your beef is with your office manager, not the contractor.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

So he is a contractor, who was engaged in a good faith contract, for the company he normally contracts for. Sounds legal to bill you to me. Next time, tell her to ask the UPS guy to help out.

 

[tranquility]

I agree with the others and like how carefully swalsh411 phrased it. It is not the reality that matters here, but the person's perception or belief. The office manager, if not your actual agent, certainly is your apparent agent. The business is responsible of the invoice. If this were not true, no business would ever get done. How can anyone ever do work for a business if you can't rely on the person talking to you to approve something. Certainly, if the amount is so large that no reasonable person would begin work without a work order or signed contract, that's one thing. Here? This is how business works.

 

[sdlegal]

Thanks for all your input and professionalism. One more quick question:

Contractor has company property and is refusing to return it unless his invoice gets paid in full. Is this legal on his part - isn't holding company property after a contractor relationship been ended tantamount to theft? He can always sue if the invoice isn't paid (not saying that he won't be paid, but just trying to understand the legal validity of threatening to hold onto property without being paid first).

 

[Dave1952]

It is not legal for the contractor to hold your equipment hostage. In your case this is moot since you plan to cut him a check in a timely fashion paying the company's debt in full.

 

[sdlegal]

Thank you. Closing thread.