Do This Not That

Originally Posted by sweetcuties

... are some of the biggest pieces of shit around

Originally Posted by cardinalvices

Those that chargeback are even worse..

I may have the prefect remedy for pricks like that. I sue them, what?s more is I prevailed in every case and its really not all that difficult if you clearly display verbiage such as this.

The Terms of Service for the sale will be interpreted and governed by the laws of the State of Florida. Fraudulently disputing moneys paid may result in violations of Florida's civil theft statue. Violators of this statue are subject to treble damages and attorneys fees being awarded. You agree that any legal dispute involving any purchase and/or site related services must take place in State courts in Brevard County, Florida. You further agree to waive any objection to personal jurisdiction, and agree that venue shall be in Brevard County, Florida.

That will bypass most jurisdictional defenses, (but I would check the laws of your state)

It?s true most people won?t appear, or even answer the suit
(Although 2 of them did, I will get to that soon) but my reasons are not just monetary.

You can legally post the details without any worries of a libel suit against you because law suits, unless expressly agreed upon and stipulated in writing by both parties then signed by a judge ?are public?.

Here is one,

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
FOR BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

CASE NO. 2007 CA 26888

DIA INDUSTRIES INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.


WANDA REED and
STEVEN REED,

Defendants.
_____________________________________ /

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

The Plaintiff, DIA INDUSTRIES, INC., a Florida corporation (?Plaintiff?), by and through the undersigned attorney, hereby sues the Defendants, WANDA REED and STEVEN REED (?Defendants?), jointly and severally and alleges as follows:

PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE
1. This is an action for damages in excess of $15,000.00 in Brevard County, Florida.
2. Damages in this cause will not exceed $75,000.00.
3. Plaintiff is a Florida corporation with offices in Brevard County, Florida.
4. Defendants are residents of Grants Pass, Oregon.
5. This action arises out of purchases made on the internet to www.websfinest.com (the ?Website?).
6. The terms of service, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A (the ?Terms?), which are accessed when purchasing services on the Website, state that any legal dispute arising from the purchase of services from the Website will subject the purchaser to the courts of the State of Florida.
7. The Terms also state that purchasers of services from the Website waive any objection to personal jurisdiction and agree to venue in Brevard County, Florida.
8. Jurisdiction and venue are proper in that all of the events occurred in Brevard County, State of Florida, and Defendants acknowledged the Terms, subjecting them to jurisdiction in Brevard County, Florida.

COMMON ALLEGATIONS
9. Plaintiff is the owner of the Website.
10. The Website is accessible by any person with access to the Internet.
11. From December 24, 2006 to February 15, 2007, Defendants made twenty (20) or more individual purchases of services in multiple sized increments from Plaintiff through the Website in an amount of at least ONE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SIXTY AND 00/00 UNITED STATES DOLLARS (US $1,160.00) (the ?Purchases?).
12. The Purchases were made on Defendants? credit cards through ccbill.com.
13. On February 15, 2007, Defendants filed a claim with ccbill.com that that they never received the services from the Website.
14. Although Defendants made the Purchases over a period of almost two months, they now claim they did not receive any of the twenty of more purchased services.

COUNT I: BREACH OF CONTRACT
15. This is an action for damages exceeding $1,000.00 but less than $15,000.00.
16. Plaintiff realleges and reincorporates Paragraphs 9-14 into this count.
17. Defendants entered into a contract through a Term of Service Agreement with Plaintiff, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B (the ?Agreement?).
18. Defendants breached the Agreement by obtaining services from the Website and then canceling the charges, thus receiving the services free of charge.
19. Plaintiff has suffered damages for this breach of contract in an amount, not including interest, of at least ONE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SIXTY AND 00/00 UNITED STATES DOLLARS (US $1,160.00).
20. Plaintiff has retained the services of undersigned counsel. Pursuant to the Agreement as well as applicable state law, in the event Plaintiff prevails, it requests that Defendants jointly and severally pay his attorney?s fees in full.
21. A jury trial is hereby demanded on all counts in this Complaint.
22. All conditions precedent to maintaining this cause of action have been met, waived or otherwise occurred

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against Defendants, jointly and severally, under this Count of Breach of Contract, for damages in excess of $1,000.00 but less than $15,000.00, together with costs, attorney fees and such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.

COUNT II: FRAUD
23. This is an action for damages exceeding $15,000.00.
24. Plaintiff realleges and reincorporates Paragraphs 9-14 into this count.
25. Defendants purchased services from Plaintiff.
26. Defendants in fact received the services.
27. There were no problems or issues with the services as evidenced by the twenty or more different purchases by the Defendants over a period of almost two (2) months.
28. Defendants obviously had no intention of paying for the services when purchased as evidenced by the charge backs in full in February 2007.
29. Defendants intended to obtain the services free of charge and possessed fraudulent intent when charging back the costs for the services obtained.
30. Defendants engaged in this fraudulent behavior willfully and maliciously.
31. Plaintiff has suffered damages for these fraudulent acts in an amount exceeding $15,000.00.
32. Plaintiff has retained the services of undersigned counsel. Pursuant to the Fraud Statute as well as applicable state law, in the event Plaintiff prevails, it requests that Defendants jointly and severally pay his attorney?s fees in full.
33. A jury trial is hereby demanded on all counts in this Complaint.
34. All conditions precedent to maintaining this cause of action have been met, waived or otherwise occurred.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against Defendants, jointly and severally, for damages in this Count of Fraud in excess of $15,000.00, together with costs, attorney fees and such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.

COUNT III: CIVIL THEFT
35. This is an action for damages in excess of $1,000.00 but less than $15,000.00 in Brevard County, Florida.
36. Plaintiff incorporates Paragraphs 9-14 into this count of the complaint.
37. Defendants knowingly obtained and used the services of Plaintiff with the felonious intent to, either temporarily or permanently, deprive Plaintiff of the right to the money owed for the services and to appropriate the money to Defendants? own use in violation of Florida Statutes Section 812.014(1) and Section 772.11 (the ?Civil Theft Statute?).
38. As a result, Plaintiff has lost over $1,160.00, plus interest, from the date the money was taken by Defendants.
39. Plaintiff has engaged the services of the undersigned law firm and is obliged to pay them a reasonable fee for said services. The Civil Theft Statute authorizes Plaintiff, in the event it prevails in this action, to recover reasonable attorney fees.
40. The Civil Theft Statute requires written demand be made by Plaintiff. When purchasing services from Plaintiff prior to the initiation of the service, a pop up box appears, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C, stating that disputing the monies paid after the services are rendered will subject the violator to Florida Civil Theft Statute and treble damages. This notice puts the purchaser of services on notice of the statute obviating a second notice being mailed.
41. A jury trial is hereby demanded on all counts in this Complaint.
42. All conditions precedent to maintaining this cause of action have been met, waived or otherwise occurred.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in its favor and against Defendants, jointly
and severally, for all counts in this Complaint, for damages in excess of $15,000.00, together with costs, attorney fees and such other relief as this Court deems appropriate.
____________________________________
BROOKE DERATANY GOLDFARB, ESQ.
107 South Riverside Place
Indialantic, Florida 32903
Tel: (321) 674-1976
Fax: (321) 723-6685
Fla. Bar No. 0097047
Attorney for Plaintiff

Have to admit it was very gratifying to receive a sobbing phone call from
Steven Reed, the person who obviously made the charges. ?I hope you know that you?re suing a 76 year old woman, I?m suing a chargebacking creep that obviously used mommy?s credit card, that?s who I?m suing?.

The other fairly large suit I can?t post because it was stipulated in the settlement by both parties and signed by the judge. Lets just say they made me an offer I couldn?t refuse and not with the use of a horses head. I was thrilled to send the performer involved 50% of her loss. At least it was something.

I also sued for some smaller amounts, one was just $50.00 but all it involved was a demand letter. I?m not sure if that would be considered public so best I don?t post it. For what its worth, although I may be a few bucks in the rears considering my legal fees I do have a feeling of satisfaction.

[ottopottomouse]

Originally Posted by Bold Venture

although I may be a few bucks in the rears considering my legal fees I do have a feeling of satisfaction.

Lawyers absolutely love people who sue on principle.

Originally Posted by ottopottomouse

Lawyers absolutely love people who sue on principle.

How the fuck is that principle? I run a webcam site and the performers go out if their way to deliver a good show.

I’m far from a fan of lawyers, and agree once they get involved it’s generally a lose lose situation, but if it came to using a lawyer or tolerating an obvious charge backing creep, I’ll take the lawyer. Furthermore the lawyer involved with the few cases I mentioned actually got me $4,000.00 above the original chargeback and now I use his legal language to institute the suits pro se.

[CaptainHowdy]

That sure is bold ...

[ottopottomouse]

Originally Posted by Bold Venture

How the fuck is that principle?

The way you mentioned being satisfied even though you were financially down. The overall winner was the lawyer.

It's like buying $10 of lottery tickets and winning $8 but still thinking you won.

Originally Posted by ottopottomouse

The way you mentioned being satisfied even though you were financially down. The overall winner was the lawyer.

It's like buying $10 of lottery tickets and winning $8 but still thinking you won.

I doubt this would fall into a lottery category that I occasionally dabble into and consider a voluntary tax in return for the dream, till I see the results.

Driving force was mere frustration, knowing that the charges were clearly not fraudulent and services in question were delivered.

Point I was trying to make is there is no guarantee even after you win that
You will prevail monetarily. You can very well end up with nothing more than worthless judgment. On the other hand I came to learn that most people with credit cards also have bank account and other sources of income that can be attached, as well as a credit rating they don?t want jeopardized, so settlements may very well occur.

[TripleXPrint]

I think this is a great idea and thread! Bold Venture, can I get your permission to add that verbiage to my TOS agreement?

I sold a guy one of my "components" (that's for an entirely different thread) for $15,000. He got one of his office lackeys to sign for the package. I received a phone call from him upon receipt on how delighted he was and how he wanted more information on reselling my patented component. I sent him information and another solid deal until....

The fucker charged back the full amount on his Amex!!!

He stated that it was an unauthorized purchase and he did not sign for the package, therefore there was nothing I could do. I spent days, weeks on the phone with my credit card processor (Merchant Account) and Amex, but still ultimately lost.

I was out the $8,000 in materials, about a $1,000 in labor, $500 in freight and only God knows how much in wasted time trying to fight this fucker. What it boils down to is credit card companies make it too easy for people to reverse charges on their cards and ultimately give the power to the people; not the companies they're ripping off. I like how Bold Venture is fighting back and flipping the script. It's theft any way you slice it and those assholes need to pay!

Nothing more I hate in this world than thieves...especially ones that do it with the banks and laws covering their asses.

[Ron Bennett]

This thread raises a good point ... most people don't realize that a merchant on their own can attempt to collect monies refunded due to a chargeback.

With that said, many merchants won't attempt collections after losing a chargeback*, because the cost involved, and the potential for bad publicity.

* if the merchant lost the chargeback, they likely will lose in lawsuit too, if the defendant chooses to fight back hard.

And for adult, the added risk of a defendant fighting back hard bringing undue attention to the adult site's operations. All it takes are some allegations of underage content, obscene content (local community standards), or heck just announcing the presence of an adult business to bring on problems by the authorities.

Ron

Originally Posted by TripleXPrint

I think this is a great idea and thread! Bold Venture, can I get your permission to add that verbiage to my TOS agreement?

I sold a guy one of my "components" (that's for an entirely different thread) for $15,000. He got one of his office lackeys to sign for the package. I received a phone call from him upon receipt on how delighted he was and how he wanted more information on reselling my patented component. I sent him information and another solid deal until....

The fucker charged back the full amount on his Amex!!!

He stated that it was an unauthorized purchase and he did not sign for the package, therefore there was nothing I could do. I spent days, weeks on the phone with my credit card processor (Merchant Account) and Amex, but still ultimately lost.

I was out the $8,000 in materials, about a $1,000 in labor, $500 in freight and only God knows how much in wasted time trying to fight this fucker. What it boils down to is credit card companies make it too easy for people to reverse charges on their cards and ultimately give the power to the people; not the companies they're ripping off. I like how Bold Venture is fighting back and flipping the script. It's theft any way you slice it and those assholes need to pay!

Nothing more I hate in this world than thieves...especially ones that do it with the banks and laws covering their asses.

I?m really sorry to hear that, you?re more than welcome to use that verbiage and any portion of the suit I posted. Just keep in mind it was meant for compliance with the state of Florida, so I suggest you check the laws and statues of the state you?re located in. Also keep in mind I?m not lawyer and don?t want to give you legal advice.
But lawyer or not I wish you the best.

Originally Posted by Ron Bennett

This thread raises a good point ... most people don't realize that a merchant on their own can attempt to collect monies refunded due to a chargeback.

With that said, many merchants won't attempt collections after losing a chargeback*, because the cost involved, and the potential for bad publicity.

* if the merchant lost the chargeback, they likely will lose in lawsuit too, if the defendant chooses to fight back hard.

And for adult, the added risk of a defendant fighting back hard bringing undue attention to the adult site's operations. All it takes are some allegations of underage content, obscene content (local community standards), or heck just announcing the presence of an adult business to bring on problems by the authorities.

Ron

That depends on if the merchant actually tried to fight the chargeback, which in our industry few if any do. They just accept the chargeback then charge it to us. Some even add a fee to it, but regardless just because the credit card company and the merchant reached a decision doesn?t mean its gospel. We still have every right to pursue legal remedies and you?d be surprised how stories began to change when perjury is at stake. Let alone the expense the creeps are about to incur.

I?m not saying I would want to get involved in suite in some Bible belt town, although I was once and won.
As for underage, most of my suits involve multiple purchases, so how would a customer use underage as defense, the courts would see right through that. Furthermore it sounds like an admission of criminal behavior on their behalf. Oh the girl looked young so I went back and bought more, not gonna fly. Besides we al have our 2257?s compliance as well as ID?s if it ever came to that. My guess is if they ever attempted to use that as a defense and couldn?t prove it, case is over I win.

As for the presence of an adult business to bring on problems by the authorities;
We?re not doing anything criminal and they still have to follow the law.