The Icon Bar: The Playpen: What are the legal implications...
| |
What are the legal implications... |
| |
VincceH (23:49 9/11/2006)
Phlamethrower (00:05 10/11/2006)
monkeyson2 (09:15 10/11/2006)
rich (12:30 10/11/2006)
VincceH (18:35 10/11/2006)
rich (20:52 10/11/2006)
SimonC (10:15 10/11/2006)
VincceH (09:27 24/11/2006)
VincceH (14:26 3/1/2008)
VincceH (11:33 4/1/2008)
filecore (12:28 4/1/2008)
VincceH (13:18 4/1/2008)
VincceH (19:33 8/1/2008)
Stoppers (11:10 10/1/2008)
monkeyson2 (12:33 10/1/2008)
filecore (12:47 10/1/2008)
VincceH (15:28 10/1/2008)
Loris (18:20 15/1/2008)
VincceH (23:28 15/1/2008)
filecore (09:01 16/1/2008)
VincceH (15:23 16/1/2008)
VincceH (11:49 4/7/2008)
Loris (12:32 5/7/2008)
VincceH (12:01 19/7/2008)
filecore (12:22 20/7/2008)
VincceH (17:03 20/7/2008)
VincceH (08:30 24/7/2008)
VincceH (13:58 7/8/2008)
|
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #82623, posted by VincceH at 23:49, 9/11/2006 |
 Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
...of me taking one of my clients to a secluded spot in the woods, where I will have prepared a noose, ready to hang the idiot?
It's a fairly normal story:
Client: "Vince, how do I do such and such?"
Me: "Like this... <advice> and here's why."
Client: "Okay, I'll organise things that way..."
Several months pass, and no such thing is done.
Mistakes happen (ref the "here's why" explanation), and the question becomes: "Vince, why has this happened?"
"BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T DO AS I SUGGESTED YOU BLITHERING IDIOT!"
Why am I annoyed? Because the "Why has this happened?" question is actually worded such that it implies the idiot thinks I'm to blame. And what makes it worse is that it's such a small, petty matter.
Needless to say, I've just sent him a long emailed reply explaining exactly why it happened, reminding him of exactly what I told him to do before, and what he should do now. (And pointing out that it's because of how good I am at what I do in the face of other people's stupidity that it doesn't happen more often - because it's always worth emphasising just how brilliant I am.)
All very politely, of course.
Twat.
(Oh, and yes, it IS the same client I was talking about before, for those who pay attention to these things.) |
| |
 [ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jeffrey Lee |
Message #82625, posted by Phlamethrower at 00:05, 10/11/2006, in reply to message #82623 |
 Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot stuff
Posts: 15100
|
 |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Phil Mellor |
Message #82627, posted by monkeyson2 at 09:15, 10/11/2006, in reply to message #82625 |
 Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler
Posts: 12380
|
You should find an appropriate book and read it infront of him. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Simon Challands |
Message #82630, posted by SimonC at 10:15, 10/11/2006, in reply to message #82623 |
 Right on, Commander!
Posts: 398
|
Keep sending them carefully-chosen Dilbert cartoons. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #82632, posted by rich at 12:30, 10/11/2006, in reply to message #82627 |
 Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
You should find an appropriate book and read it infront of him. I can't find "Get a fucking clue you moron" on Amazon...?
________
 Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #82660, posted by VincceH at 18:35, 10/11/2006, in reply to message #82632 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
You should find an appropriate book and read it infront of him. I can't find "Get a fucking clue you moron" on Amazon...?
It's not entirely uncommon that I have reason to say that, so I could always write it... 
One of those little collections of anecdotes, or something. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Richard Goodwin |
Message #82674, posted by rich at 20:52, 10/11/2006, in reply to message #82660 |
Dictator for life
Posts: 6828
|
It's not entirely uncommon that I have reason to say that, so I could always write it...
One of those little collections of anecdotes, or something. You should at least collect a few together to post online. Under a pseudonym of course. Perhaps as some kind of "what not to do in business" article/blog/thing.
In fact, can you draw? You might be able to go head-to-head with Dilbert 
________
Cheers,
Rich.
|
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #83543, posted by VincceH at 09:27, 24/11/2006, in reply to message #82623 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
It gets [ better / worse ] *
Received a cheque for one of the older invoices, and although he's paid the invoice in full, he's queried one of the items - it's the initial installation and set up of Sage so that it's suitable for the company and how accounts are to be produced: "Should this be a charge. It's not in your remit to do this."
Huh?
How the hell do you want me to maintain your accounting records in Sage without first setting it up, you twat!? Simply hold the disk in front of my face and blow on it? (For I am godlike, obviously, and that would somehow put life into it).
* delete according to your point of view - funnier, more annoying. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #105848, posted by VincceH at 14:26, 3/1/2008, in reply to message #83543 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
Let's play a game of old thread resurrection... I *knew* I'd mentioned some of this hereabouts before, and now I know about the search box, so I can add an over 12 month update!
The other day, I did some analysis of my sales ledger accounts for my two worst paying/biggest PITA clients - and the results have formed the basis of a very long debt collection letter to each of them. Hopefully, they'll get them either tomorrow or Monday, and I really can't wait to see what happens next (which will hopefully involve cheques being written out - but I have my doubts!)
I think I'll modify them tonight to remove names/protect the guilty, then upload them as PDFs for your viewing pleasure. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #105862, posted by VincceH at 11:33, 4/1/2008, in reply to message #105848 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
I think I'll modify them tonight to remove names/protect the guilty, then upload them as PDFs for your viewing pleasure. With the names of the guilty removed, they are here and here.
My prediction for the company the first letter went to:
The guy there will get in a bit of a strop and/or panic about it. He'll either email me or telephone me initially (probably the latter), and might even respond in writing afterwards (especially he he 'phones rather than emails) but amongst other things, his response will include complaints about certain tasks not being done. The background there, though, is that in order to "save money" (ie reduce the amount on my invoices) he asked me not to bother doing certain things... then a couple of months later forgot and asked why they hadn't been done.
He'll probably also object to the amount he needs to pay each month to bring things up to date, based on the amount of work being done each month, conveniently forgetting that the amount he needs to pay is for work done months ago.
As to whether he will actually take steps to bring the account up to date - either as suggested in the letter, or by proposing an alternative payment plan, that remains to be seen. In three months time, however, the situation will be reviewed again.
My prediction for the other company: The guy there will read the first couple of paragraphs, chuckle to himself, then bin it. Next week, he'll get one of the girls to ring me and ask why I haven't turned up. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #105863, posted by filecore at 12:28, 4/1/2008, in reply to message #105862 |
Posts: 3868
|
My prediction for the other company: The guy there will read the first couple of paragraphs, chuckle to himself, then bin it. Next week, he'll get one of the girls to ring me and ask why I haven't turned up. At which point you give him a link to this thread, and say "I told you so. Now please pay me." |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #105865, posted by VincceH at 13:18, 4/1/2008, in reply to message #105863 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
My prediction for the other company: The guy there will read the first couple of paragraphs, chuckle to himself, then bin it. Next week, he'll get one of the girls to ring me and ask why I haven't turned up. At which point you give him a link to this thread, and say "I told you so. Now please pay me."
Something like that.
As to my prediction for the first company - that upon receipt he'd either email or telephone...
...email just in: "Please contact me regarding your formal letter"
My first thought was "Bloody cheek - you ring me, Debtor" but looking at my phone, it seems there's a missed call from him earlier this morning, so he obviously did try!
Either way: That part of what I predicted was bang on the nose. I'll leave it a few hours before finding out how much of a flap he's in. Sweat, Debtor! |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #105918, posted by VincceH at 19:33, 8/1/2008, in reply to message #105865 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
An update... the one that tried contacting me, I did ring him back, we discussed it, he started out a bit upset - mainly that I wrote instead of talking to him, which fails to recognise the point that I've written because talking to him has already not worked! - and sounded almost panicky (you'd think he was used to getting letters like that from other suppliers, but apparently isn't) but he's happy to pay the way I suggested. So that's good.
We agreed that the first cheque would be given to me tomorrow. So that's good.
Then, of course, the car decided it didn't like being used as a car, and there's no way I can get to that client in a sensible time frame on the bus (particularly because I work elsewhere in the morning), so that's bad.
But I'm willing to wait on that one, because he showed willing himself and the reason I'm not going to be paid tomorrow is because of MY car1. (Provided I do get paid the next time I'm able to go there, of course - if I don't get the payment then that I would have had tomorrow, all bets are off...)
As to the other, my prediction was wrong.
I got home today to find a letter from them with two cheques attached. The topmost cheque paid one of my o/s invoices, and lifting the top right corner, I could see the second paid the other. Both dated yesterday.
"Hmm," thinks I, "How stupid - by sending two cheques instead of just one for the total, they're incurring twice the bank charges - and not for the first time; I've pointed out to them before that they shouldn't do that. Oh well, up to them."
Then I read the letter. "Please find attached two cheques paying your invoices. Can you come in on the 11th to discuss the situation."
Well, I did say I'd come in on the 11th if I'd been paid, and on the face of it, there was the payment... so fair enough. I put it to one side and set about something else (specifically, working out WTF was wrong with my network!)
Having sorted that, I began writing out my paying in slip to bank these cheques along with the other cheques I have (for December work, paid by other clients ON TIME!), and I therefore looked again at those cheques...
And lo! Once I'd seperated them and looked at them properly, I could see what the crafty bastards had done.
The top cheque was written out properly, and signed, and pays the older invoice.
The cheque underneath has the wording not quite right (subtle) for the amount - and unsigned.
Tut tut.
Now, I could go in Friday, but I expect if I did I'd be having an argument, and because of the car, I'd be spending an hour on the bus plus waiting time and walking time to/from the bus stops each way - so I'd guesstimate one and a half hours each way - to do so.
I think I'll just 'phone them instead, and give Friday a miss. It's easier and less costly to have an argument that way.
1. I have been planning to buy another car for a while. I started looking 'seriously' a couple of months ago. I have a particular car I want most of all, with another as a backup option - and I specifically want a manual diesel. When I started looking properly, I didn't have the money; the manual diesels are less common, and more expensive - but there were a few on sale. I now have the money, having scrimped and saved out of the payments for other work - but can't find any manual diesels for sale.
It doesn't take a genius to realise that if I'd been paid on time by these two clients, I'd have had the money back when there were cars of my spec available, so my broken starter wouldn't be a problem now. Ho hum. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Simon Willcocks |
Message #105934, posted by Stoppers at 11:10, 10/1/2008, in reply to message #105918 |
Member
Posts: 302
|
...I'd be spending an hour on the bus plus waiting time and walking time to/from the bus stops each way - so I'd guesstimate one and a half hours each way - to do so.
I don't know how much you charge for your time, but everywhere I've lived there have been people who take other people from where they are to where they want to go in exchange for money. I think they are called taxi drivers.
Seriously, how much more than the bus fare does a minicab cost? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Phil Mellor |
Message #105935, posted by monkeyson2 at 12:33, 10/1/2008, in reply to message #105934 |
Please don't let them make me be a monkey butler
Posts: 12380
|
Seriously, how much more than the bus fare does a minicab cost? It costs THE EARTH  |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #105936, posted by filecore at 12:47, 10/1/2008, in reply to message #105935 |
Posts: 3868
|
Depends where you are and what company you use. Here, there are a dozen airport taxi firms, but one charges a 20 euro flat rate to anywhere in the city, from the airport, so we always recommend it to incoming friends. In addition, they reduce the rate slightly for each additional traveller - so if you pack the vehicle full, you get to where you're going even more cheaply (and you don't all need to be going to the same destination). Some city-centre companies do similar things. You just need to shop around a bit. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #105946, posted by VincceH at 15:28, 10/1/2008, in reply to message #105934 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
I don't know how much you charge for your time, but everywhere I've lived there have been people who take other people from where they are to where they want to go in exchange for money. I think they are called taxi drivers.
Seriously, how much more than the bus fare does a minicab cost? A lot more than the bus.
Anyway, update.
Having contacted them and pointed out the unsigned cheque, and told them that because I've effectively still not been paid, I won't be in tomorrow (and that the next timeslot they can have - subject to me being paid - is 1st Feb) - I've just received a phone call to say the MD turned up on my doorstep to sign the cheque.
Of course... I'm not actually there1, and there's a lock between him and the cheque.
1. What did he think - that when I'm not working for him I'm just sat at home twiddling my thumbs? |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Tony Haines |
Message #106020, posted by Loris at 18:20, 15/1/2008, in reply to message #105946 |
 Ha ha, me mine, mwahahahaha
Posts: 1025
|
He could... always post a new cheque, since you can't pay in the old one without a signature.
Well, actually, perhaps you can, but they could contest it at some random point in the future, so don't do that. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #106025, posted by VincceH at 23:28, 15/1/2008, in reply to message #106020 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
Several days and £350 later... I'm mobile again, without that mobility costing an excessive bus fare and a couple of hours or more added to the length of my day. Yay!
[Edited by VincceH at 23:29, 15/1/2008] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #106030, posted by filecore at 09:01, 16/1/2008, in reply to message #106025 |
Posts: 3868
|
Rising costs of petrol, environmental damage, etc etc. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #106039, posted by VincceH at 15:23, 16/1/2008, in reply to message #106030 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
Rising costs of petrol, environmental damage, etc etc. Sod the rising cost of petrol (well, diesel in my case) - and therefore, sod the environment1 - it works out better value by a huge margin for me to drive, so drive I will, wherever and whenever I can.
However, it looks like I'm back on the bus for the next few days - unless (as is the current theory) the reason I couldn't start my car to drive home from where I was working this morning is because the battery is frelled. An attempted jump start from a second battery got some juice through (none at all without it, so a frelled battery looks about right) but it still wouldn't turn over. Probably too weak.
1. I don't really think that, but ATEOTD if I had to bus it everywhere, with my diversity of clients and locations and the cost of bus travel in this city2, then I might as well give up and get <spit>a proper job</spit>
2. Not to mention having to carry the laptop with me and any paperwork etc. There are two issues there - not just the weight of it all, but also that to get from some of the various bus stops to some of the various offices etc (and, therefore, back again) I have to walk through some questionable areas. If I used the bus more often, I reckon it would only be a matter of time before I get mugged. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #107759, posted by VincceH at 11:49, 4/7/2008, in reply to message #106020 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
He could... always post a new cheque, since you can't pay in the old one without a signature.
Well, actually, perhaps you can, but they could contest it at some random point in the future, so don't do that. That man's a piece of shit. At the time, he claimed that non-signed cheque was an accident (plausibly - they'd sent two cheques, and he'd signed the top one, so it's possible he hadn't noticed the one below it).
However, a few weeks ago, I was at his company again. At that point they owed me two "normal" invoices, and an exceptional one (the software I wrote for them in March, using time I had set aside to work on WebChange - thus making it much harder for me to get a useable version up by Wakefield). I pointed out what I'm owed, and said I was prepared to wait a couple of months for the exceptional one (because it's larger than the normal ones), but that I wanted the regular ones paid there and then.
He got the girl to write a cheque out.
He then signed the cheque and gave it to me.
Today was the first chance I've had since then to go to the bank - and what did I discover just before paying it in?
It's unsigned.
Which means he blatantly pretended to sign that cheque in front of me.
Meanwhile, the other company that I was moaning about before (and which is owned by the same person, though actually run on a day to day basis by someone else), gave me a cheque a few days after he'd "signed" that one, on which the words and figures didn't match. I noticed that one sooner, and figured it was an accident - easy mistake to make.
But now, with them having been written so close together, I'm not so sure. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Tony Haines |
Message #107761, posted by Loris at 12:32, 5/7/2008, in reply to message #107759 |
Ha ha, me mine, mwahahahaha
Posts: 1025
|
Vincey, you need to start being a bit more bloody minded. Take the time to check over what people give you, and don't worry about holding them up. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #107875, posted by VincceH at 12:01, 19/7/2008, in reply to message #107761 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
Vincey, you need to start being a bit more bloody minded. Take the time to check over what people give you, and don't worry about holding them up. Yes.
I also need to tell this particular scumbag to stick his accounts - and most especially his VAT problems - up his arse.
As we know, he owes me money - but in detail, half of it is overdue (on three invoices), and the other half is not quite due (on one invoice). The unsigned cheque was for the first two of the three overdue invoices.
I received a cheque last week for half the balance - logically, that would be the three overdue invoices, replacing the unsigned cheque and adding the third invoice. However, this company is more likely to sign the cheque and issue another for the balance - so I queried it.
They claimed I had been paid in full, which clearly isn't the case. I was having an argument with the scumbag there by phone on Thursday, during which it was said that other cheques had been sent - before the one I'd received (why did they not say that sooner?). So, the question is where had they gone?
One was the unsigned one, now signed and returned, and the other was for the third invoice. The cheque I'd received was for the fourth invoice - the one amounting to half the balance.
It's slightly concerning that two cheques might have gone astray, so I asked (twice) if they were definitely sent separately, and was told they were. He said he'd cancel them, and hand delivery a replacement Friday. In amongst this, he also suggested that perhaps someone in my house was tearing up my post (!)
He never showed up Friday with a replacement.
This morning, the two missing cheques turned up - in a single envelope. I know they're the missing ones, and not replacements, because one of them is the unsigned cheque. Also, the envelope is postmarked 10th July (a week before the argument on the phone).
I can see why they took so long to arrive, given that the envelope is addressed to "Soft Cock Software" - I should imagine the post office had to consider whether to let it through the system.
But in addition to that, the 'new' cheque is made payable to Soft Rock Softmars.
Obviously, I can't bank these - they're supposed to be cancelled now, and the misnamed one will probably have bounced anyway.
[Edited by VincceH at 13:03, 19/7/2008]
[Edited by VincceH at 13:05, 19/7/2008] |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
Jason Togneri |
Message #107877, posted by filecore at 12:22, 20/7/2008, in reply to message #107875 |
Posts: 3868
|
Soft Cock Software Soft Rock Softmars Uh... sounds like this guy is doing this deliberately. Nobody can make these sorts of mistakes unless they meant to, or were extremely incompetent. "Soft Cock" sounds very provocative to me. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #107878, posted by VincceH at 17:03, 20/7/2008, in reply to message #107877 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
Uh... sounds like this guy is doing this deliberately. Nobody can make these sorts of mistakes unless they meant to, or were extremely incompetent. "Soft Cock" sounds very provocative to me. Indeed. That's why I'm "a bit" annoyed.
I'd see the funny side of Soft Cock Software, if it didn't involve me not getting paid for work I've done over the last few months. (Though if I wanted to take the piddle out of the name like that, I'd probably have used Soft Cock Softwank). He probably didn't realise that would cause a delay - but clearly it did.
However, the writing of "Softmars" instead of "Software" on the cheque is clearly a deliberate attempt at not paying me. The name was written in his handwriting, but the date and amount (including in words) was written out by the girl who normally writes the cheques out: she writes them, and he signs them.
I think he must have told her to write it out without a payee, with the intention writing something else there himself.
The irony is that when I "discussed" my non payment with him on Thursday, he was a bit pissed off that I called him dishonest. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #107896, posted by VincceH at 08:30, 24/7/2008, in reply to message #107878 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
Oh look, a proper cheque in the post for the balance.
I wonder if this has anything to do with his VAT being due in a couple of weeks time?
Normally, I'd go in tomorrow and next Friday, and possibly pop in after I've finished elsewhere nearer to the 7th to submit his VAT. But I'm going to bank the cheque tomorrow, and then toddle off to see the new Batman movie (so my phone will be switched off and left at home for, what, three and a half hours in total - journey time, adverts and trailers, film).
By the time he gets hold of me - and I'm pretty damned sure he'll try - it'll be too late for tomorrow. That will leave next Friday, and I'll point out that I want to allow at least a week for clearance of the cheque.
I will then suggest I'll go in on Wednesday 6th, in the afternoon (which I know happens to be free at the moment) and that'll I'll submit the VAT based on what is in the accounting system as is - which I know is higher than he'd like to pay, but I'm not willing to do any more than the few minutes of work it'll take to submit the VAT - and then piss off again. The only other contact he'll have from me is my invoice for that task, which will be a fixed fee of, I dunno, £50+VAT - and probably statements and reminders that it has to be paid. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
VinceH |
Message #107982, posted by VincceH at 13:58, 7/8/2008, in reply to message #107896 |
Lowering the tone since the dawn of time
Posts: 1600
|
As a complete afterthought....
Surprisingly, he didn't ring me when I didn't show up on Friday July 25th, nor on August 1st. He finally rang me, reminding me that his VAT was due and asking when I'd turn up, Monday 4th August.
I then told him that those missing cheques had turned up, so I'd seen what he'd done on the envelope and cheque (which he tried to stretch credibility beyond breaking point by saying it must have been accidental) and, therefore, that I wasn't going to be doing business with him any more.
I did, though, say that I would be in Wednesday (yesterday) to do the VAT, but only based on what had been input so far, because I don't want to do any more work than necessary. He initially agreed, then started talking about how to bring the VAT bill down - so what I said I'd do went in one ear and out the other... though in the end he seemed to accept it. I imagine that had I gone in yesterday, he'd have tried that again.
However, on Tuesday I had a call from his accountant - which sounded like he was sheepishly feeling me out to see if I could be persuaded to change my mind about continuing with this work, before concluding that I couldn't so going on to alternative solutions. The upshot was that I wouldn't go in yesterday - I will put in one more appearance when they've found someone to do what I did and I'll go in to show him/her the ropes, particularly on some of the more complicated tasks. Fair enough.
In the meantime, the accountant would go in (yesterday) for the VAT. I assume this happened, and the VAT is done - but amusingly, I know that this guy's knowledge of the software and how things should be done is limited, so I'm about as sure as it's possible to be that it will have been done wrong. The most likely mistake will mean that when the next VAT return is done, the figures submitted will include some of what will have been submitted this time. I smell an overpayment in three months time. |
| |
[ Log in to reply ] |
| |
|
The Icon Bar: The Playpen: What are the legal implications... |
