Bad support for forum software

[total21]

Jurisdiction

California

I started a topic about it a couple of weeks ago, but it is already closed. Basically I purchased a forum software for $250 and I invested like $650 in the graphic designs. When something broke, I asked them to fix it and after dealing with a support rep and a supervisor they both told me that it can be fixed. I was also given bad info, I was told that I have to install A or B before that can work on it, and when I installed A, I was told that this is wrong and it was suppose to be B, something like this. Basically this could have been fixed, but they did not care. They had a lot of other problems and they left it like that as a "low hanging fruit". I got a permission from a Judge to appear by a written declaration only in a LA Small Claims Court. I am trying to recover around $930 - this is what I have spent for it and nothing else (I have all the receipts, and I sent it to the court).

I am getting ready to send the documentation and I am wondering about one thing. I will be treating this as a BREACH OF AGREEMENT, and based on California law, can I look at it like, they breached it so this nullifies the contract and I don't have to follow the rules that were set out by them. The promise of FREE SUPPORT was first and I agreed to the TERMS AND CONITIONS after that, on a second or third page. In there, they limit their financial responsibility to the amount that I paid for the script ($250). Does it make sense to state - Ok, they breached the contract, it nullifies it, so they owe me the full amount?

These could be the two "fundamental blocks" of my argument, my point of view. The promise of free support was first, I said ok, I will agree to the terms and conditions then, and when they did not fix it (not my fault, nothing on my side caused it), they breached the agreement that we had (and like I said, they could have fixed it, it was fixable). By doing this, they nullified the contract, and for this reason all of this particual term / condition does not apply and they owe me the full amount. I would add that I have invested a lot of time for dealing with this, and I could be asking for another $1000 or so for my lost time, but I will settle at that $930 that I've been asking for.

Does it make sense?

Thanks!

 

[adjusterjack]

A breach of a contract doesn't nullify the contract. The breach gives you a remedy. That remedy could range from nothing to a full refund depending on the terms and the circumstances.

According to you, you agreed to a contract that limits the company's liability to $250 so that is the most you can expect to recover in court if you recover anything at all.

And that $1000 for your time is baloney. Nobody ever gets money for their time.

Good luck with your lawsuit. Let us know how it turns out.

 

[zddoodah]

I will be treating this as a BREACH OF AGREEMENT, and based on California law, can I look at it like, they breached it so this nullifies the contract and I don't have to follow the rules that were set out by them.

This sentence is more than a little convoluted. It's not clear who "they"/"them" refers to, and we obviously know nothing about the terms of the contract at issue. That being said, a breach of a contract by one party does not typically give the other party impunity to breach the contract.

Does it make sense to state - Ok, they breached the contract, it nullifies it, so they owe me the full amount?

I'm guessing that "they" refers either to the manufacturer of the software or the store where you bought it. If you're asking whether the failure to provide support entitles you to a refund of your purchase price, the answer is maybe.

By doing this, they nullified the contract, and for this reason all of this particual term / condition does not apply and they owe me the full amount. I would add that I have invested a lot of time for dealing with this, and I could be asking for another $1000 or so for my lost time, but I will settle at that $930 that I've been asking for.

Does it make sense?

Not really, and I don't get where you're coming up with $930 if you only paid $250 for the software.

 

[total21]

$250 for the software, the rest for the graphic design. "Them" is the company who created the software, sells it and promises the free support. I was thinking ok, they will fix it, so I can invest. Not fixing the site has caused trouble for me. But I don't want to be theorizing in general or anything like that. Like I said, by knowing the situation I want to find the best fitting California law. It seems like the Breach of Contract is the best thing. And I was asking whether their action (breaching) would be nullifying it or not. It does not matter if it is this. Something the best, that is based on the CA law is what I need. I am not asking if I will win or not, I just need to create the paperwork and I want to prepare it in the best possible way.

 

[zddoodah]

$250 for the software, the rest for the graphic design.

You might be able to recover the cost of the software. Money spent on graphic design won't be recoverable.

I'm not really sure what you're seeking with respect to the rest of your post, the California small claims statement of claim form is about the easiest thing in the world to fill out (especially when you read the accompanying instruction form), and you don't need to state any particular legal theory and certainly don't need to cite statutory or case law (and it will be of no benefit to do so. Fill it out, file it, have it served, show up for the hearing, and see what happens.