interesting "how to get paid" topic

[visual800]

I was called last week to do a new sign for a building that used to be a flooring company, which brought back memeories of the funniest damn story.

We had a large sign company here in montgomery called Landmark signs formerly Triple J signs. At the time it was owned by a wealthy, crazy ***, genious of a guy. He bought this company and turned it around. Hats off to him. sign company had bout 30 on the payroll and was whipping jobs out left and right. The company was listed under both in the phone book

This company (Landmark) did a large sign for this flooring company who never paid the sign co their balance. After many attempts to get paid the sign co said "screw it" a couple years later that same company called Triple J signs to get a large awning placed out front (obviously not knowing it was really Landmark). landmark did the layout and priced it out and said it would be this much down. The flooring company paid the money down and Landmark knocked that total OFF the total that was owned them and then sent a letter stating they had so much credit and they would have to pay X number of dollars for the awning but their balance was paid off.

The owner raised hell and told Landmark he would sue them for misrepresenting the monies, or some junk. Landmark said "see you in court". It never turned into anything but somehow that flooring company did get a bigass awning i dont know who did it but the economy took both companies out

you have to admit that is priceless!

 

[Xcesiv]

Karma

I hate people that screw others and not pay

I ave 1 customer right now who just ignores my calls. I want to just ark in his driveway till e pays

 

[TXFB.INS]

yeah those type situations are always the best!
they either forget who did the work or working under multiple DBAs

 

[WildWestDesigns]

The flooring company paid the money down and Landmark knocked that total OFF the total that was owned them and then sent a letter stating they had so much credit and they would have to pay X number of dollars for the awning but their balance was paid off.

The owner raised hell and told Landmark he would sue them for misrepresenting the monies, or some junk. Landmark said "see you in court".

The irony is that the the company that wasn't paying their bills had a case to go to court with.

Unless both parties stipulate that funds received are to go to an outstanding balance, that sign company (or any company) can't unilaterally chose to use funds for a previous bill when they received those funds for a different job. That has been on the books as law since I think the '50s or 60s. It was in that link the last time this type of discussion came about.

Rather or not they ended up going to court in the end, doesn't mean that they didn't have a case even though they didn't pay their bills first.

I can't stand people that don't pay, but I also can't stand people that resort to this type of self help. Sometimes it sucks doing things according to the rules and sometimes that means for expensive lessons.

 

[Pat Whatley]

I can't stand people that don't pay, but I also can't stand people that resort to this type of self help. Sometimes it sucks doing things according to the rules and sometimes that means for expensive lessons.

Rules are not necessarily sacred, principles are. - Franklin D. Roosevelt

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Rules are not necessarily sacred, principles are. - Franklin D. Roosevelt

Neither party though showed principles. One didn't pay their bills, the other used trickery to get the bill paid for, even if it wasn't a law that they violated.

 

[cdiesel]

The sign co showed the principle of "pay me the money you owe me". No problem there.

I've leant money to friends, family, and extended customers credit when I probably shouldn't have. Don't have the money to pay? No problem.. pay me when you can. There is a problem, however, if you have the money and are choosing not to pay me, but are buying new awnings instead.

 

[Fatboy]

The sign co showed the principle of "pay me the money you owe me". No problem there.

I've leant money to friends, family, and extended customers credit when I probably shouldn't have. Don't have the money to pay? No problem.. pay me when you can. There is a problem, however, if you have the money and are choosing not to pay me, but are buying new awnings instead.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

The sign co showed the principle of "pay me the money you owe me". No problem there.

Not according to the law. What they should have done is "Look you owe us this money, pay that money now and then we will talk about this upcoming project". That would have been the principle thing to do. They already, according to the story, considered it a lost as it is. So even if they said it that way and he still didn't pay and went somewhere else, they weren't any worse off, because they already wrote it off.

I've leant money to friends, family, and extended customers credit when I probably shouldn't have.

Always better to just give them the money. I've seen horrible things happen between family and friends when money is borrowed.

Don't have the money to pay? No problem.. pay me when you can. There is a problem, however, if you have the money and are choosing not to pay me, but are buying new awnings instead.

I wouldn't ever say it like that. Who knows when you would ever see that money with something like "pay me when you can".


I am not saying that it doesn't suck. But I have a hard time reconciling someone that uses devious means of collecting and talking about principle (especially if they violated the law in the collection process) in the same breath. It just doesn't jive. Devious doesn't usually go with principle.

Now you also have to realize that my dad was a lawyer for 35+ years, so my upbringing probably really skewed me on this subject to a certain side.



Of course, this all just boils down to why I'm a "cash on the barrel head" type of person. I have a few that are monthly billed, but it took a long time for them to be able to get that type of pay schedule though.

 

[qmr55]

Anyone would have done the same! Good for them for getting the money that was owed to them.

 

[cdiesel]

Not according to the law. What they should have done is "Look you owe us this money, pay that money now and then we will talk about this upcoming project". That would have been the principle thing to do. They already, according to the story, considered it a lost as it is. So even if they said it that way and he still didn't pay and went somewhere else, they weren't any worse off, because they already wrote it off.

They never would have seen a dime if they had approached the situation that way. I understand that what they did technically broke the law, but that is a stupid law.

The client company could have sued and won. The sign co could have sued and won. The end result would have netted the same.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

They never would have seen a dime if they had approached the situation that way. I understand that what they did technically broke the law, but that is a stupid law.

I didn't say that they would and the wouldn't. No debate there. They wouldn't.

But here is my thing. When you are talking principles, you are talking about a very black and white issue. It is or it isn't. No middle ground.

It's the deception that I really don't like. Regardless of the intention. Hell is paved with good intentions (John Ray I believe, not Samuel Johnson).

The client company could have sued and won. The sign co could have sued and won. The end result would have netted the same.

I know some arbiters/judges that if someone tries to do self help and then it goes through the court system, they will throw out the case, because of the self help angle. You can't break the law (which self help is in quite a few instances, depends on the circumstances) and then expect the law to pick up the pieces that your attempt failed to get.

 

[Pat Whatley]

I know some arbiters/judges that if someone tries to do self help and then it goes through the court system, they will throw out the case, because of the self help angle. You can't break the law (which self help is in quite a few instances, depends on the circumstances) and then expect the law to pick up the pieces that your attempt failed to get.

Yeah, but I'd be a heck of a lot more comfortable with them having to sue me to recover the money than I would be with me suing them to try and get it in the first place.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Yeah, but I'd be a heck of a lot more comfortable with them having to sue me to recover the money than I would be with me suing them to try and get it in the first place.

Statistically speaking you would be right to think that. Not many know what their legal rights are.

I have seen emails were people have in their signature about "emergency repairs", but they are talking about repo. TN law (and AL) says that if you want to be able to repo, it must clearly be stated in your contract as a repo. Otherwise, you can't repo. Not many people would know that, some may not challenge the repo for other reasons, but most wouldn't know about that.

 

[cdiesel]

But here is my thing. When you are talking principles, you are talking about a very black and white issue. It is or it isn't. No middle ground.

It's the deception that I really don't like. Regardless of the intention. Hell is paved with good intentions (John Ray I believe, not Samuel Johnson).

I understand what you're saying about breaking principles by being deceiving, but once you've screwed me over, I don't owe you any consideration. Respect is earned.

 

[Si Allen]

Years ago, I had a customer who never had a problem collecting his money.

He would send 2 guys, one mean looking guy from production and a HUGE guy from the warehouse.

They would just barge int the office and demand a check for the money owed. That usually resulted in the sleasebag saying "Get out of here before I call the Cops!"

That is when the BIG guy would say "Can I hit him now?"

That would result in a scream to the Secretary to bring him the checkbook.

AS they were leaving he would say "If this check bounces or if you put a stop on it, we will be back and Joey gets to do a number on you before he tosses you out the window !"

Always worked like a charm!

 

[Kentucky Wraps]

Statistically speaking you would be right to think that. Not many know what their legal rights are.

I have seen emails were people have in their signature about "emergency repairs", but they are talking about repo. TN law (and AL) says that if you want to be able to repo, it must clearly be stated in your contract as a repo. Otherwise, you can't repo. Not many people would know that, some may not challenge the repo for other reasons, but most wouldn't know about that.

Gotta be careful with that one. If the sign is attached to the building, it becomes part of the building and belongs to the owner...not the renter.
The building owner could take you to court for repoing his property that he gave his renter permission to have installed. If the building owner didn't sign the contract with the repo stipulations...you're playing fire.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Gotta be careful with that one. If the sign is attached to the building, it becomes part of the building and belongs to the owner...not the renter.
The building owner could take you to court for repoing his property that he gave his renter permission to have installed. If the building owner didn't sign the contract with the repo stipulations...you're playing fire.

There are typically stipulations in the contract between the lessor and the lessee to that affect. Now if there are none, then you are correct, however, I do believe in all current contracts that is typically addressed.

 

[John L]

Payment before or at time of service is the norm nowadays. But my personal second favorite "how to get paid" is to use my licenses to pull permits for the project and then withold the final inspection request until we are paid.

ONE TIME a couple years ago I didnt get paid. Exhausted requests, warnings, and threats over a couple months worth of grace period for them. Then called the city and state and, as allowed of the permit holder, I cancelled the required permits... just changed my mind about that 60' highrise sign with the double digital displays up there. About a week passed and then inspectors started showing up to issue citations.

I got paid the original plus some additional administrative work. YMMV

 

[TXFB.INS]

Payment before or at time of service is the norm nowadays. But my personal second favorite "how to get paid" is to use my licenses to pull permits for the project and then withold the final inspection request until we are paid.

ONE TIME a couple years ago I didnt get paid. Exhausted requests, warnings, and threats over a couple months worth of grace period for them. Then called the city and state and, as allowed of the permit holder, I cancelled the required permits... just changed my mind about that 60' highrise sign with the double digital displays up there. About a week passed and then inspectors started showing up to issue citations.

I got paid the original plus some additional administrative work. YMMV