@ThomasJNewton wrote:
@coldfusion wrote:A caveat with that is that a successful chargeback doesn't prevent their ability to sue you for the debt, it reframes the argument along the lines of whether or not they feel it's worth suing you if their best case senario is to get a judgement in their favor for the $750.
I think that might also work against him in that by paying he would at some level be acknowledging the debt was valid.
Not if he pays under protest.
@ThomasJNewton wrote:
@SouthJamaica wrote:Not if he pays under protest.
First, if they even accept credit cards, I have seen very few payment forms that allow one to add notes, so I am not sure how one would "pay under protest" using a credit card. Second, I am not sure how paying and hoping that one is successful on a chargeback is different than just not paying at all (especially if one makes it clear in response to the invoice that the charge is disputed).
If they do not get the money they have to decide either to sue or send it to collections. If he Hayes. (even stating it's under duress) or or loses the chargeback, he hast to sue them, which, given, that he would not be able to recover court costs, and we have to do it from out of the country, seems like a much worse position.
if I am missing something, please let me know.
I didn't say he should pay with a credit card. He should pay by check, with the check and cover letter indicating that payment is under protest.
@ThomasJNewton wrote:
@SouthJamaica wrote:I didn't say he should pay with a credit card. He should pay by check, with the check and cover letter indicating that payment is under protest.
You may not have intended to say pay by credit card and then dispute the payment, but this is the post to which you responded:
@SouthJamaica wrote:
@ThomasJNewton wrote:
@coldfusion wrote:A caveat with that is that a successful chargeback doesn't prevent their ability to sue you for the debt, it reframes the argument along the lines of whether or not they feel it's worth suing you if their best case senario is to get a judgement in their favor for the $750.
I think that might also work against him in that by paying he would at some level be acknowledging the debt was valid.
Not if he pays under protest.
However, my more important question is after he has payed under protest, how does he get his money back? If he has to go to court, why would he not be better suing them first or waiting until they try to file a claim against him and then suing them? In either case, he has his money and there is a substantial chance that they do not bother to do anything.
One could file a complaint against the moving company with various government agencies, or sue in small claims court.
@ThomasJNewton wrote:
@SouthJamaica wrote:One could file a complaint against the moving company with various government agencies, or sue in small claims court.
In other words, exactly the same options he has now, but instead of trying to get his money back, he just has to prevent them from making a claim against him. He national company with whom he contracted, has been paid in full (and has said they will not help their subcontractor). The local company may or may not be set up to file a report with a CRA, and if it goes to collections, he will have 30 days to decide what to do then.
You opened this thread to ask for our input. I've given you my input:
1. Nonpayment of this could lead to a very damaging item in your friend's credit file.
2. My recommendation would be to pay the $750 under protest, and then challenge it later if he so chooses.