Out of state court threat

[Zigner]

I am posting this as a correction to my earlier incorrect posts about attorneys in small claims court in California. The OP is correct in that an attorney cannot represent a corporation (outside of specific instances that do not apply here) in small claims court. My apologies for the earlier incorrect information...it's been a long day and my back hurts.

ETA: The corporation must be represented by an employee or officer who has not been hired solely to represent the party in the action. If the shop happens to have an attorney who moonlights as a repair tech, then the attorney could go to court, but he can't be hired solely for that purpose.

 

[sdlegal]

1. He was told device was non-repairable so therefore he is making his claim based on the information that was provided, as well as his claim that his property was lost.

2. He may have received his equipment, he may not have. There was no delivery confirmation in the shipping. It was left at the home of the customer, at the original address provided.

3. The established value of the device would be based on the time that it was sent in or the present time? The value has gone up because the device is ancient, obsolete and hard to find. So it's whatever someone posts on eBay and someone is willing to pay. The item price on eBay is very high ($900 is fair) but nobody is buying at that price. How is a fair value calculated in this case?

 

[Zigner]

1. He was told device was non-repairable so therefore he is making his claim based on the information that was provided, as well as his claim that his property was lost.

2. He may have received his equipment, he may not have. There was no delivery confirmation in the shipping. It was left at the home of the customer, at the original address provided.

3. The established value of the device would be based on the time that it was sent in or the present time? The value has gone up because the device is ancient, obsolete and hard to find. So it's whatever someone posts on eBay and someone is willing to pay. The item price on eBay is very high ($900 is fair) but nobody is buying at that price. How is a fair value calculated in this case?

Who are you in this situation? Are you posting here as the owner or employee of the repair shop?

 

[sdlegal]

I am trying to help out this small business pro bono.

 

[Zigner]

I am trying to help out this small business pro bono.

Please have someone who is actually involved in the situation log on to ask their legal questions. What you are doing could cross the line of becoming the unlawful practice of law (if it hasn't already). Thank you for understanding.

 

[infocus]

That would be me. Same questions apply.

Thank you.

Edit: Customer claims our company "owes me the sum of $900 because you have failed to repair my device in over 9 months and after disassembling it have lost the parts."

He also claims that if a judgement is obtained against us, it will negatively affect our ability to obtain credit and we will be ordered to pay court costs and incur interest at a rate of 10% per annum.

 

[Zigner]

That would be me. Same questions apply.

Thank you.

Actually, they've already been answered. The questions that are being asked now would need to be answered by the court. Our opinion on the value of an item, etc., is really irrelevant.

 

[infocus]

Actually, they've already been answered. The questions that are being asked now would need to be answered by the court. Our opinion on the value of an item, etc., is really irrelevant.

Forgive me, I'm talking about this:

1. He was told device was non-repairable so therefore he is making his claim based on the information that was provided, as well as his claim that his property was lost.

2. He may have received his equipment, he may not have. There was no delivery confirmation in the shipping. It was left at the home of the customer, at the original address provided.

3. The established value of the device would be based on the time that it was sent in or the present time? The value has gone up because the device is ancient, obsolete and hard to find. So it's whatever someone posts on eBay and someone is willing to pay. The item price on eBay is very high ($900 is fair) but nobody is buying at that price. How is a fair value calculated in this case?

 

[Zigner]

Edit: Customer claims our company "owes me the sum of $900 because you have failed to repair my device in over 9 months and after disassembling it have lost the parts."

Ok

He also claims that if a judgement is obtained against us, it will negatively affect our ability to obtain credit and we will be ordered to pay court costs and incur interest at a rate of 10% per annum.

He's right (but that sounds pretty boilerplate to me.)

 

[infocus]

Also:

Customer claims he didn't get his property back and that the provider lost it. On top of this is the fact that the property is damaged and no longer working.

Customer WAS told that the screen replacement didn't work and authorized other work. Customer even took it upon himself to purchase an additional part and have it shipped to the repair company in an attempt to get the device working!

 

[infocus]

The item is curently on sale for $475 on eBay (or best offer!), should we contact customer and tell him to revise down his estimate to the actual market price as of today's date? Or better to just ignore and wait to prove in court (if it ever comes to that, which it likely won't).

 

[Zigner]

He will need to prove the value of the item in court. Maybe you can offer him a smaller amount to make him go away? How much you offer is a business decision that you will need to decide upon yourself.

 

[infocus]

He is basing the value of the item at what he last saw it on eBay for. The price has since gone down significantly. Will contact the customer and advise him of this. Either way, he is going to spend far more on flights, time, multiple court trips, etc. than the device is worth.

 

[Zigner]

He is basing the value of the item at what he last saw it on eBay for. The price has since gone down significantly. Will contact the customer and advise him of this. Either way, he is going to spend far more on flights, time, multiple court trips, etc. than the device is worth.

...which, again, goes back to my "blowing smoke" statement.

 

[justalayman]

Here is what I see;


You screwed up when you did anythkg to the equipment after you replaced the screen without first consulting the customer. That alone could cause you to lose. If it was me I would argue it worked fine except for the screen so if they did a bunch of work to it it must be because they damaged it when replacing the screen and felt obligated since they broke it.

Unless you can make a winning argument the equipment was delivered to the customer you lose