Hey eggbutt, apologies for dashing down the rabbit hole, there. I know this is supposed to be a thread about the posted legal orders in the Kraken/Baritone case.
8 Likes
This thread has taken some really strange turns. Coronavirus, unicorns, drug abuse, and legalese are not things one would generally loop together but here we are.
10 Likes
NP…some of us think a certain horse has now been beaten to death, buried and resurrected for no reason other than obnoxious attention and being sure to have the last word.
8 Likes
I thought the merits of knitting needles and crochet hooks as weapons was interesting. Next up, the repurposing of tonfas - real or legend?
The alternative uses of craft supplies was an interesting segue. Puts me in mind of the tonfa discussions and how their use has changed - or did it?
Scrollers: Scroll on by.
Note that in both Florida and NJ, the treble damages applies to “ascertainable loss of moneys or property” from the work of the unlicensed contractor.
So MB can sue RG for three times the value of any damages that MB suffered from shoddy work.
So with regard to the question of why RG is not suing MB, it looks like he doesn’t have much standing if he was unlicensed. If the work was shoddy, and MB suffered a loss, then the question is why MB is not suing RG.
3 Likes
You are mistaken. Ascertainable loss can be a myriad of things.
One example: an unlicensed contractor does work. He charges $10,000. Normally this work is paid 1/3 to initiate, 1/3 in the middle, 1/3 at completion. If the customer paid the first and second payments, and there was a problem then there is a ascertainable loss totalling at least the first 2 payments
That’s just one example.
5 Likes
KM - Generally speaking, wouldn’t Barisone have to prove that he paid Goodwin? If he took him at his word and provided housing in exchange for work done, but no written contract was drawn up, then could it be not worth the effort? Or if MB decided there was no way to ever collect any damages awarded (blood from a turnip)?
Barisone has no legal obligation to sue Goodwin, correct? Nor does Goodwin have ANY standing to sue Barisone for non-payment as Goodwin is not a licensed contractor - is that also correct?
2 Likes
I think at this point we’re talking hypotheticals. Proving payment could be easy - showing a cancelled check. Or it could be more complex - you fix my steps and you get to live here one month rent free. Either thing is an exchange of work for something of value.
But again, different jurisdictions may do things differently.
Like I said in my jurisdiction an unlicensed contractor sued the homeowner but even though the contractor was the plaintiff the defendants prevailed and were awarded treble damages. Clearly the homeowner had not paid the bill because if they did the unlicensed contractor would not have had the need to sue them.
5 Likes
? This doesn’t quite make sense? It’s incomplete somehow?
1 Like
Different examples from around the internet
https://www.dailybreeze.com/general-…sed-contractor
[ATTACH=JSON]{“data-align”:“none”,“data-size”:“medium”,“data-tempid”:“temp_64520_1585545185197_65”}[/ATTACH]
3 Likes
3 Likes
Listen lady, if you’re here … discussing ME, lets face it, it’s probably the “dark, dank point,” in YOUR life. Not mine. Is your threat to be “rude,” to me supposed to be taken seriously? I’m shaking in my boots & peeing in my breeches. You can feel free to leave this thread at any time. If you have an issue with my replies, scroll on by!
As an aside- you have zero understanding. Also, what exactly does a “drug face,” look like? I invite you to my fb page - or anywhere else- to point out my face in what you call “drug face.” Aside from that, do yourself a favor & never “strongly advise,” me to do… anything. Who TF are you, again? Oh. Nobody! Walk on by, lady. Walk on by.
1 Like
You can actually sue an unlicensed (or licensed) contractor that doesn’t complete work or doesn’t complete work that is up to code for the cost to have another licensed contractor complete or correct the work. So while he has no legal obligation to sue Goodwin, he (or the LLC, whoever owns the place) could. RG, if he is unlicensed, which I don’t know, would have no standing to sue Barisone or the LLC for payment for his work.
10 Likes
I don’t know, I think Knights Mom doesn’t have “zero understanding” as she is educated and actually works as a legal professional/attorney and has brought forth some useful general info in an attempt to assist others in better understanding the law.
Although, I don’t agree with the drug comments directed at LK because I feel as though those are hefty accusations and I just don’t take accusing someone of being a heroin user lightly. There’s just no actual proof of that, to my knowledge.
I have found the self proclaimed legal experts thing interesting in this thread. I suppose it can be a learning experience to bicker with actual attorneys over what the law is or isn’t. I do find the argument of, “Well, in my state it is like this, so if it is like this in NJ…” but either is or isn’t “like this” in NJ. Look it up. No need to create a hypothetical. I mean, if we are just generally discussing common law practices and practices of the various states and their similarities and/or differences, fine.
Just my 2 cents… Worth exactly what you paid for it.
There’s a lot of repetition and going in circles, as usual. :lol: That is one of the things you can always count on in these threads. Oh and going ad hominem. At least something stays consistent during these uncertain times!
7 Likes
Hahahaha! Wait, seriously? There’s actually a rumor going around that I “won the lottery!” Given I’ve never once purchased a lottery ticket - of any kind/ ever- that would be special! Can you direct me to the source? Perhaps, I have a powerball ticket which someone put in my name & I don’t even know about it!!! FYI- (while I could be wrong) Do they not announce these things? Lottery wins & such?
Anyway, thanks for the laugh! Whew! That was an LOL funny one! Maybe… your source was having a premonition! Maybe… I will buy a lottery ticket, for the first time ever! I’m going to be really disappointed if I learn your “source,” has one of those little tarot/palm reading shops. Out went your source’s clairvoyant credibility if that is the case! Bummer. I was almost excited for a millisecond there.
Man, I was gonna say, I’m super jealous of anyone that wins the lottery! However, in order to win, I guess I’d have to actually buy a ticket, so there is that! :winkgrin:
3 Likes
These examples, which seem to be California, do say that the unlicensed contractor cannot successfully sue for payment, and the property owner can attempt to claw back payments already made.
But for either the payments made or to remedy shoddy work, I didn’t see any treble damages.
It still seems odd to me that a property owner could recover 300% of the amounts paid for the work (as opposed to 100%), even if the work is flawless. On the other hand, treble damages for the damage actually created (compared to the licensed contractor being sued for just the straight damages) seems logical.
Does this all apply if there was no written contract?
If it was a $50,000 remodeling job, doesn’t your interpretation of the treble damages suggest that MB or the LLC could sue RG for $150,000?
You know exactly which company he worked for. You also know, they ONLY do bathrooms. Not kitchens. The owners wife is your “friend.” Even though RG refused to so as much as touch a bathroom in the farmhouse, due to MH’s clear lack of comprehension on how measurements work, every bathroom he did touch at the company you’re referring to earned him a 5 star rating as an “installer,” on every single survey completed by clients. This is fact. Perhaps, you should confirm with your friend that they DO, in FACT, send employers each survey by email. The sales person is rated, the installers are rated as are all parties who had direct exchanges with a client. On most occasions, it was the 5 rating given to the “installer,” (RG) which raised the general review score’s sum total- for others’ who scored quite low. On zero occasions was a complaint made or poor score given to RG - when he, himself was the installer.
Im not exactly sure how his “gone missing,” event is relevant here. He continued to work there, for quite some time after that. But um… why continue to work for someone else’s company, when he A.) dislikes the bathroom remodeling business & B.) keeps all the profit for himself when working under his own LLC ?? Yeah. I didn’t understand it either- Luckily, he took my advice.
FYI- in regards to your sign off using “Semper Fi,” I should inform you, unless YOU - YOU YOURSELF are or have been a USMC Marine, it is considered horribly disrespectful to sign off using the term. Since we both know you are not & have never been a Marine, best not to use it. It’s part of a serious brotherhood/sisterhood greeting or post script. You are not part of either. Refrain.
To avoid finding & quoting another post, I’ll just say this- @tryingtogetthere He made it through basic. And, luckily, a few other places, too. Either thank him for his service or kindly [edit]. Disgusting.
1 Like
@eggbutt - has RG ever done any work for you? Your many comments have been screenshot. Hopefully, RG won’t lose any work bc of your defamatory comments. I can assure you, the lawsuits will come rolling in if you persist. We know who you are. RG has more friends than you do, none of which will hesitate for a second to provide other slanderous or libel remarks you’ve made regarding his “shoddy,” work.
Another thing which should probably be cleared up STAT- The house was never condemned. Now that you have been made unequivocally aware of this, I will expect to find no more blatant lies on this subject. We were also never evicted. Know who was??? Well, you can ask your “good friend,” MH & fam about that. So, now, in crayon talk for you- WE evicted? NO. They evicted? Yes. HOUSE Condemned- NO. You make defamation? Yes. We bring lawsuit? Find attorney. Did you understand it that time? Me hope so.
