Originally Posted by logtroll
I wonder why Hatrack seldom responds to Logtroll's simple observations and questions?

I am finding the long and convoluted lectures in response to NWP to be impenetrable. Blenderized concoctions of opinion, history, dogma, alternative fact, and the occasional true fact, are unappetizing and hard to swallow.

My construction company (yes, I am a bona fide capitalist) has been engaged in a lawsuit with a crazy (former) client for a year and a half over a payment dispute. The problem arose when she decided that she wanted to shitcan us because we wouldn't allow her to micro-manage a fixed-price contract project. Several months into the job we submitted a progress payment application (stipulated by her lender), which she refused to authorize, saying she "felt" had already overpaid us (but with no documentation). At the same time, she refused to follow the contractual disbursement procedure that required a 3rd party professional to inspect the job, compare the AIA G702 pay app to the schedule of values for work completed, and certify the amount requested.

In short, she breached the contract by not performing her obligation to follow the progress payment approval process. The cure was simple - have the 3rd party professional inspect the job and certify that payment is due.

However, she started making up tons of other reasons to accuse us of breaching the contract by stopping work until we got paid (we were $45,000 into the job and out of funds to continue). She locked up the jobsite (with some $60,000 of our tools and materials inside), and got an unethical lawyer to write a "Notice of Termination" of the contract, that was filled with specious claims and libel, coupled with extortive demands (one was that we'd get our tools back when all of her demands were met).

We finally got into court 8 months later, where she and her second sleazeball attorney poured a blenderized concoction of crap onto the judge (who was not the brightest bulb in the room and was on his final day at the bench having recently lost an election), including a new story claiming that she didn't know who the tools belonged to and and needed to determine the rightful owners were before releasing them.

The judge was so confused that he declined to rule on the case, except to order the client to give us back our tools (some of which had been stolen during the period of her protective custody).

She is now on her 3rd lawyer (from her insurance company, who is only defending covered claims) and is attempting to represent her company pro se on a raft of new claims against us. She has been so bold as to contradict the new judge after he told her that unless she is an attorney she can't represent a LLC or a corporation. He was unconvinced by her arguments, so now she is busy trying to justify pressing the claims on the basis she has been injured as a result of her company being injured. But of course, if there is no ruling that we injured her company, there is no basis for her alleged injury. She can't argue personal injury without first succeeding at arguing company damage.

Quite the stinking muddle - we are now 1-1/2 years in, she has spent an estimated $50,000 and has forced us to spend $20,000 - and the core issue is still simple and without a hearing... she didn't follow the contract in certifying the pay app. When that little step in the process is finally performed, we will get a judgement awarding the payment, interest, and damages. She will still blame us bitterly, and what should have been a normal and friendly project that would have been completed on time (June 2018) and on budget (it was a fixed-price contract) will be a smoking wreck, possibly putting her out of business.

In case you are wondering what the point is here, it's that arguing with Hatrack reminds me of our dispute with the crazy lady client. You just can't get anywhere with a Blenderizer on the other side of the table.
Did you ever consider the possibility that for the people here I am automatically wrong? That a long diatribe comparing me to a crazy former client of yours is not a good way to have a conversation. That every thing I say is meet with derision. The Rant is no longer a place for a friendly discussion between conservatives and liberals. It is now a place where the idea that someone might disagree with the liberals here, even if they are business owners, and what they have to say is valid. As William F. Buckley once said
Quote
Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.


The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary