Is it best to Threaten a Lawsuit First, or Just Serve them with a Lawsuit First?

[CalBayArea2]

California. Small Claims

Does warning a person first, often indicate a lack of seriousness in the legal world?

Do you think I have a higher chance at convincing a person to settle out of court by threatening them first, or just serving them first?

 

[Zigner]

California. Small Claims

I was afraid warning them first would indicate I am hesitant about whether I can win or not.

Do you think I have a higher chance at convincing a person to settle out of court by threatening them first, or just serving them first?

You have to make a demand on them (ie: ask them for the money.) If they don't respond, then you can file your case and serve it upon the other party.

There is no way we can predict whether or not the threat of a lawsuit would induce the other party to settle with you. Many people go on the defensive as soon as lawyers or court is mentioned.

 

[CalBayArea2]

You have to make a demand on them (ie: ask them for the money.) If they don't respond, then you can file your case and serve it upon the other party.

There is no way we can predict whether or not the threat of a lawsuit would induce the other party to settle with you. Many people go on the defensive as soon as lawyers or court is mentioned.

Okay, I have made the demand, I sent the person an actual attached bill and stated the amount in the email. Person refused to pay, very strongly too.

So it seems threatening would be a waste of time. Just filing and serving would show Im serious.

 

[quincy]

Okay, I have made the demand, I sent the person an actual attached bill and stated the amount in the email. Person refused to pay, very strongly too.

So it seems threatening would be a waste of time. Just filing and serving would show Im serious.

A demand letter is often the best first step to take. You want to see if the person will pay without you having to go to the trouble of taking them to court.

Once a suit is filed and your defendant receives the summons and complaint, the person owing you money may be more willing to settle.

If not, you can get a judgment against them and have more options available to you in collecting what is owed.

Good luck.

 

[HRZ]

JUdge , especially at small claims level, might be more impressed if you made TWO solid attempts to collect the sum owed you before you appeared before him or her .....just an observer

 

[adjusterjack]

The California small claims complaint form SC-100 asks:

You must ask the defendant (in person, in writing, or by phone) to pay you before you sue. If your claim is for possession of property, you must ask the defendant to give you the property. Have you done this? Yes___. No___. If no, explain why not.

The one written demand (and all the previous oral demands) suffices.

No need to waste time and effort on another demand. The judge will only care that one was made and refused.

 

[quincy]

The California small claims complaint form SC-100 asks:



The one written demand (and all the previous oral demands) suffices.

No need to waste time and effort on another demand. The judge will only care that one was made and refused.

I agree.

And it is generally the case anyway that there have been several attempts to collect on the debt before considering a lawsuit.

 

[CalBayArea2]

A demand letter is often the best first step to take. You want to see if the person will pay without you having to go to the trouble of taking them to court.

Once a suit is filed and your defendant receives the summons and complaint, the person owing you money may be more willing to settle.

If not, you can get a judgment against them and have more options available to you in collecting what is owed.

Good luck.

With small claims, for my county, it is only $75 to file, and a process server I looked up charges $50, $125 total.
Where as hiring an attorney to write a demand letter is going to be around $200-300 /hour.

So wouldn't it be cheaper to go ahead and file and serve him with it? vs a demand letter? (Unless there's some other costs I'm missing, as I've never been through the process.)

 

[quincy]

With small claims, for my county, it is only $75 to file, and a process server I looked up charges $50, $125 total.
Where as hiring an attorney to write a demand letter is going to be around $200-300 /hour.

So wouldn't it be cheaper to go ahead and file and serve him with it? Cheaper and more effective? (Unless there's some other costs I'm missing, as I've never been through the process.)

You don't require an attorney for most small claims actions and you can write the letter yourself.

When I said "demand letter," I was referring to a written letter (not email, not text). You ask in the letter for the money owed. A written letter is preferable to an email because emails are fairly easy to fake. You want to keep a copy of the letter for yourself and send the demand letter by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the person who owes you money.

Technically you do not need to send a letter but having proof of communications can be smart in case your defendant tries to claim he knew nothing about the debt.

Wait to see if you get a response before filing suit.

Good luck.

 

[CalBayArea2]

You don't require an attorney for most small claims actions and you can write the letter yourself.

When I said "demand letter," I was referring to a written letter (not email, not text). You ask in the letter for the money owed. A written letter is preferable to an email because emails are fairly easy to fake. You want to keep a copy of the letter for yourself and send the demand letter by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the person who owes you money.

Technically you do not need to send a letter but having proof of communications can be smart in case your defendant tries to claim he knew nothing about the debt.

Wait to see if you get a response before filing suit.

Good luck.

Okay, I see. That makes sense. I think this particular individual would laugh at a written demand letter.

I emailed him a PDF attachment bill and stated it in the email itself, and he did acknowledge it by responding with a rude response and saying he's not paying it. ....I'm assuming printing that out, our email communications and the PDF bill I sent him, would suffice as proof to a judge?

 

[quincy]

Okay, I see. That makes sense. I think this particular individual would laugh at a written demand letter, and it could give away the element of seriousness that comes with just serving him first.

I emailed him a PDF attachment bill and stated it in the email itself, and he did acknowledge it by responding with a rude response and saying he's not paying it. ....I'm assuming printing that out, our email communications and the PDF bill I sent him, would suffice as proof to a judge?

A lawsuit should not be considered a bad surprise. It is a legal action pursued after efforts to resolve the legal issues outside of court have failed.

I recommend a letter sent through the US mail.

 

[latigo]

California. Small Claims

I was afraid warning them first would indicate I am hesitant about whether I can win or not.

Do you think I have a higher chance at convincing a person to settle out of court by threatening them first, or just serving them first?

Don't give up you day job to become a philosophizer! And that goes for any part time work as well. "Warning them first" shows weakness of resolve- geez!

________________________

But allow me to offer some proven philosophy. People don't react to be being threatened as you so naively seem to believe. Mostly it pisses them off and strengthens their resolve!

(How old are you, by the way?)

 

[CalBayArea2]

Don't give up you day job to become a philosophizer! And that goes for any part time work as well. "Warning them first" shows weakness of resolve- geez!

________________________

But allow me to offer some proven philosophy. People don't react to be being threatened as you so naively seem to believe. Mostly it pisses them off and strengthens their resolve!

(How old are you, by the way?)

Ha. I'm in my 30's. I'm just nervous and thus over analyzing everything, I've never gone through a court process, or dealt with any legal matter like this. It's a bit intimidating.

But your final quote there does reinforce my point, a threat letter just "pisses them off".

 

[quincy]

Ha. I'm in my 30's. I'm just nervous and thus over analyzing everything, I've never gone through a court process, or dealt with any legal matter like this. It's a bit intimidating.

But your final quote there does reinforce my point, a threat letter just "pisses them off".

A demand letter is not a threat. It is a request for payment. You can use a demand letter to inform the person that legal action is being considered and will be taken if the matter cannot be resolved outside of court, though - so in that sense it is a threat.

But you need to inform the person that they owe you X amount of dollars and that you expect to be paid in X amount of days. That notification is necessary.

You can't hope to collect on what is owed if you don't make it clear you expect to be paid.

 

[CalBayArea2]

A demand letter is not a threat. It is a request for payment. You can use a demand letter to inform the person that legal action is being considered and will be taken if the matter cannot be resolved outside of court, though - so in that sense it is a threat.

But you need to inform the person that they owe you X amount of dollars and that you expect to be paid in X amount of days. That notification is necessary.

You can't hope to collect on what is owed if you don't make it clear you expect to be paid.

Okay, so my emails and bills I sent him, which he responded to, is not enough proof? I will still need to do a physical letter with signature required?