- 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!
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!