Was told at last minute I was not a party to contract

[Ohiogal]

OP could not sue for money back when OP did not actually pay the money.

 

[Zigner]

OP could not sue for money back when OP did not actually pay the money.

I hear what you're saying, but the OP actually DID pay the money. To me, it's like getting a money order. YOU'RE not paying the money, the money order issuing company is...but you are paying the money.

 

[Ohiogal]

I hear what you're saying, but the OP actually DID pay the money. To me, it's like getting a money order. YOU'RE not paying the money, the money order issuing company is...but you are paying the money.

OP paid mom. MOM paid the company. OP could sue mom.

 

[Zigner]

OP paid mom. MOM paid the company. OP could sue mom.

OP gave money to mom so that mom could write a check on his behalf. OP was simply the middle-man...much like Moneygram when you buy a money order.

 

[Ohiogal]

OP gave money to mom so that mom could write a check on his behalf. OP was simply the middle-man...much like Moneygram when you buy a money order.

MoneyGram and such have contracts that you enter into that are in writing. Where was the written contract with mom?

 

[Zigner]

MoneyGram and such have contracts that you enter into that are in writing. Where was the written contract with mom?

Does the contract have to be written?

Edit: If the OP testifies that he entered in to an agreement with mom for her to take his cash and write a check on his behalf, and if the mom testifies to the same agreement, then wouldn't that prove the agreement?

 

[Ohiogal]

Does the contract have to be written?

Edit: If the OP testifies that he entered in to an agreement with mom for her to take his cash and write a check on his behalf, and if the mom testifies to the same agreement, then wouldn't that prove the agreement?

Apparently that did not happen

 

[quincy]

What Wenkle failed to prove to the court's satisfaction was that the mom paid the contractor with Wenkle's money. The court apparently saw the money paid as mom's money. Wenkle cannot recover mom's money.

 

[Litigator22]

What is the name of your state? S. Carolina
I signed and contracted bath remodel on my home. Gave my mother cash to write check for payment bc I dont use checks and wanted record of payment. At completion of work was very low quality. I filed small claims for damages of costs to repair/replace work. Contractor lawyered up and at hearing I was told I was not a party to the case bc I did not provide payment. I signed contract and it is solely my property. Mother was not a party to contract, no ownership in house, payments were not a gift, and did not bring claim. Due to multiple continuances granted on behalf of defendants attorney ( court, illness, vaca) judge had ordered no more would be granted. Could not request continuance to prepare mother to present case. Have been told I was swindled bc I did not know how to argue that she was not a party.

Wow! Truly disturbing as I fully agree that you were indeed swindled by this hack of an excuse for a judge! Someone needs to explain to the moron what means the universal principle of law requiring that every lawsuit must be prosecuted and or defended in the name of "the real party interest".

For a judge to find that your mother is the real or proper party in interest simply because she wrote the check in payment to the contractor for remodeling your home is incomprehensible! It so absurd as to defy common sense. Which is all "the real party interest" principle means; it is simply unadorned, logical, common sense! What has happened here is as senseless as if to say that your bank would need to file and prosecute the claim against the contractor for the shoddy workmanship because it loaned you the money to pay him.
______________________________
Not to unduly belabor the point, but let's just suppose this:

The money you gave mom, etc., was only in partial payment of the contract price with the balance to be deferred upon completion of the job. Unsatisfied with the work you then refuse to pay any more and the contractor sues for the balance. Do you think for a minute that the contractor's lawyer would be suing mom for the balance and not you. Of course not! He would be suing on the contract; not on the friggin' check!

What I suspect is that the low-life lawyer for the contractor (whom ought to know better) threw it up as a bluff and the numbskull sitting on the case (most likely never having stepped foot in a law school) and eager to make it to lunch bought it.

 

[justalayman]

What Wenkle failed to prove to the court's satisfaction was that the mom paid the contractor with Wenkle's money. The court apparently saw the money paid as mom's money. Wenkle cannot recover mom's money.

The signed contract was with the op. That makes them a party to the contract.

The money was paid as consideration of the op’s contract so op had standing to sue for issues within the contract regardless of who paid the money. Any contract between mom and op is irrelevent. That is an issue between them only.

To support that: tell me; if the contract was not fulfilled, would mom have standing to sue the contractor? No because she did not enter into a contract with the contractor to perform. She paid on behalf of op.

What has happened is the court has substituted the mother for the op in the contract. Unless there was specific agreement to do that on the part of all parties involved, it can’t happen.

This is no different than when an insurance company pays on behalf of a car owner for accident damage. If the repair is not performed properly, is ohiogal suggesting the car owner has no standing to sue and the insurance company must? The insurance company is not entering into a contract with the repair shop. The car owner is and if the repairs are not performed properly, it is the car owner who is damaged.



An alternate theory:

Accepting the court’s argument op had no standing because somehow mom was substituted for op in the contract:

Op, as a third party beneficiary, was damaged due to the poor workmanship and as such, had standing to sue for the damages the poor work caused him. Since op did not have a contract with mom to have work done (in essence making mom a general contractor), op could sue contractor directly for damages he was subjected to.

 

[quincy]

I don't know what went on in the courtroom or what argument was presented by the defendant-contractor that convinced the court that the money damages claimed by Wenkle belonged to mom (who was not a party to the contract) and not to Wenkle (who was a party to the contract).

There is either a lot that has been left unsaid about this contract or Wenkle was sadly taken advantage of by the contractor's lawyer and/or the judge.

I can't explain it but I would bet that the outcome would have been different had Wenkle had an attorney of his/her own.

 

[Wenkle13]

UPDATE :::
That is it exactly, the magistrate judge does not have law training so to say, so when the attorney said something was not in accordance, the judge followed. I have never known a judge to allow an attorney to run his courtroom as I witnessed. The attorney was very intimidating to my mother, snatching documents from her hands, at the witness stand shuffling papers while she was testifying, etc. The attorney knew exactly what he was doing, my mother was very intimidated and nervous already, she's 70. If it were me I would have looked at the attorney and asked if he were finished and waited for him to finish (I still have teens at home.)

I actually went to the court yesterday and reviewed submitted evidence because I am one of those really organized people. I could tell looking over the remaining (determined inadmissible by the contractor's attorney, not the judge) evidence what was missing and had composed a list. At the beginning of the hearing the judge had my mother provide all her evidence to the attorney (???), in that time frame it appears that he managed to pull items that my mother was not aware of (receipts, photos, etc.) from the evidence and hide them, my mother did not know what was there for evidence, had been thrown in 5 minutes before hearing, and I could not assist her. The court must maintain a file of the case with all submitted evidence...those documents were not there...

Other than that I asked the judge to please explain the basis of his determination that I was not a party to the case. He stated that because the checks were in my mother's name and signed by her. I mentioned about if I had paid him with a money order or God forbid!, cash (never received any receipts, just invoices) how would it be proven who paid. I also pointed out that my mother had written checks for dollar amount but not made to a payee. Defendant had written his name on the checks because I was not sure to have it made to his (fictional business discovered after) or him. The judge admitted that was a mistake by the court.

Since the jury is not required to provide explanation for judgement amount, I can only assume they awarded the amount paid in labor for the construction of the shower only. (The dynamics of the case changed when my mother was the plaintiff, she could only sue for refund of amounts paid, not incurred damages). Ultimately my options are to leave it go and accept the low judgement in my mother's name (which she will give me any money if paid) or to appeal based on the reasons I have discovered. I have 30 days from the day after judgement to appeal and I am working on consulting an attorney for advise along with waiting to what the defendant does. If he attempts to appeal the judgement, then I will definitely file counterclaim. I find humor that he is probably paying the attorney more than he would have ever had to pay to settle with me, and of course if he appeals, the appeal will cost more than the existing judgement itself.

In the meantime I am working on contacting all the state and local agencies I can to have him either shut down or get in conformance with the law. i.e licenses for both business and contractor, which require bonds and education, qualifications etc.

 

[quincy]

Please clarify:
Who filed the suit? You or your mother?

 

[Wenkle13]

Wenkle certainly was in need of legal advice early on, especially once learning the contractor had an attorney.

I had legal advice early on, was told it was a matter for small claims court and that the attorney fees would eat any judgement I received. Small claims is supposed to be pro se. The defendant did not hire attorney until after pre-trial conference when he was told by the judge that being an unlicensed contractor in the state meant he could not bring any counterclaim and could only defend himself. That is also when he realized that I was not being frivolous and had already had the shower torn out and rebuilt. The work WAS that bad (a shower that would leak through my slab foundation) and I had been without the use of that bathroom for 4 months.

 

[Wenkle13]

Please clarify:
Who filed the suit? You or your mother?

I filed, I drafted the claim, I paid the fee in cash. The judgement actually came to my house in my mother's name...