Defending Against Exploitative Billing Practices
Predatory Services Offered in an Emergency
The proprietor of a convenience store, was thrust into a harrowing ordeal when he was brutally attacked at his store. The incident inflicted severe, life-threatening injuries, setting the stage for a series of events that would soon transpire into a legal battle.
The Remediation Company's Intrusion: Shortly after the incident, as medical professionals attended to his critical condition, representatives from a remediation company arrived, uninvited, at the scene. Notably, the only other individual present at the time was a local friend of the owner who occasionally assisted him with various tasks at the store for supplementary income, but had no permanent position or authority to act on his behalf. The local friend, originally determined to clean up the aftermath of the incident herself, was soon dissuaded by the remediation company, who insisted that they, not her, had to take immediate action, but refused to provide a cost estimate. She tried to reach the owner's wife, but her efforts were in vain, as she was understandably consumed with her husband's condition. In the face of relentless pressure, the friend reluctantly signed a contract authorizing their cleaning and removal services, still without an estimate. Later, the company submitted a bill for over $7,000, far more than anyone anticipated the cleanup would cost. It then brought a lawsuit against the owner and the company seeking payment of this unauthorized invoice. Legal StrategyOur client initially attempted to represent himself, responding to the complaint without legal representation. However, as the company itself was also a defendant in the case, the court advised him that he could not represent the company and needed to secure an attorney.
Upon consulting our services, we carefully examined the pleadings and quickly discerned that the company, which had been sued, had no connections to Massachusetts. Therefore, we pursued the dismissal of the case against the company based on a lack of jurisdiction. Shifting our focus to the claims against our client individually, we recognized the inappropriate conduct of the remediation company and filed a counterclaim on behalf of the owner. Our counterclaim alleged that the company violated Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 93A by engaging in deceptive and unfair business practices. We argued that the company deliberately targeted the owner's friend, withheld crucial cost information, and failed to verify her authority to sign on behalf of the store. We further contended that the company had committed fraudulent misrepresentation and concealment. They falsely asserted their inability to provide a cost estimate when, in reality, they possessed all the necessary information. The undisclosed potential costs played a pivotal role in the decision to sign the contract, resulting in significant financial harm. By skillfully presenting these legal arguments early in the case, we achieved the dismissal of claims against all defendants. |
Need Help With an Unfair Business Practice?OR
|
How Our Lawyers Can Help
Our team can guide you through complex legal battles, ensuring fairness and transparency in business transactions, just as we did for this business owner in his victorious case. You can use the button below to schedule a call back from a member of our team, or give us a call at 781-784-2322.
|
|
|
