Law Suit

[Roofing]

If I am being sued by a business that claims they have not received payment for services rendered, but the business has no documentation to proof this one way or the other.

I have provided them with copies of documents from the company stating that they received the payments and the balance being paid off. The payments were paid by personal check.

I was told by their lawyers that the burden of proof in on me to proof that I made the payments.

The Law suit has from the courts to mediation.

Is this true that the burden of proof is on my side?

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

If I am being sued by a business that claims they have not received payment for services rendered, but the business has no documentation to proof this one way or the other.

I have provided them with copies of documents from the company stating that they received the payments and the balance being paid off. The payments were paid by personal check.

I was told by their lawyers that the burden of proof in on me to proof that I made the payments.

The Law suit has from the courts to mediation.

Is this true that the burden of proof is on my side?

My response:

First, I want to make sure I'm understanding you.

You're telling me that you have receipts marked "Paid in Full" and/or you have all of your cancelled checks, and that you've shown all of this proof to their attorney. Is that a fair assessment of what you're saying ?

IAAL

 

[Roofing]

You are correct on all accounts, except for the fact the company never cashed the checks we gave them. I did not find this out until last week.

The company has done a very bad job in keep records from the beginning. They did not have any of the records or copies that we provided them that they originally gave of after receiving the checks and written copy stating it was paid in full.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

Okay, you have receipts. However, the attorney should have said, "then you have a defense."

As plaintiff, the roofing contractor has the burden of proof to show they weren't paid, e.g., by their books. Then, the burden shifts to you.

This is where it gets sticky. So, you have "Paid" receipts. But, for the judge, that won't be enough. I think you'll agree, that sometimes, people pay with "rubber" checks and the merchant gives a "Paid" receipt to the customer. So, the judge will ask you, "Do you have the cancelled checks?"

And you'll say, "Well, I, uh, you see, well, . . . "

Guess what? Even though you say you paid them, and they "failed" to cash your check, the judge will say, "Gee, then you still have the money in your account, don't you? Then, place a stop payment on your other check, and write the roofer a new check."

And, you thought you were going to "get out of this", didn't you?

IAAL

 

[Roofing]

Actually I already knew that I was going to have to write another check to them. I was just not sure how they can sue someone when they did not keep good records and did not cash a check that was given to them.