Unpaid invoice - do I have a possessory lien over equipment loaned to me by client ?

[northernladuk]

I can't really fathom why someone would turn to an internet forum for very specific legal advice, based on limited information, about an issue for which no one responding (including a lawyer) could offer an informed opinion. The range of responses are exactly what you might expect. On the contrary, it's you that seems to be the "internet warrior" here

Absolutely this. We gave our opinion as contractors and not as legal experts. Completely the wrong forum so got completely the wrong advice. You can't say we over charged him for it though.

[Bozwell]

Oh here we go, Mr 20/20 Hindsight.

There's a builder that I know in a similar situation but on the other end. His subbie has done one and retained equipment in lieu of being paid (for an allegedly incomplete job). He's given the guy a week to return the equipment before he reports it stolen as he sees it as a bit of bum-seeing (has a mostly good working relationship with the guy, is happy to work with him again if situation can be redeemed). This is the sort of scenario the "internet warriors" were led to believe, rather than being advised of the complexities of the case.

I wasn't having a go at the posters that replied, but it IS a good example why a forum isn't the place for complex legal questions and the OP recognised this and sought the professional advice he needed. No need to take it personally.

[mangled]

Interesting. You don't actually say that you waited until the invoice was paid before giving the equipment back. Is that what happened?

An agreement was reached, confirmed in writing and the equipment sent back. Actual payment was a few days later but I was happy all was going to go ahead OK which proved to be the case.

Also, what did your legal bill come to if any, and was it paid by an insurance policy?

No insurance and actually no bill either, surprisingly. I used a solicitor I had used before for the advice but it didn't get any further than a preliminary chat which he didn't bother to invoice for. I would obviously have put the work his way if the client had disputed but it all passed off fairly easily in the end.

[mangled]

Given the information provided, it was the correct advice. The circumstances were later seen to be slightly more complicated.

Oh here we go, Mr 20/20 Hindsight.

There's a builder that I know in a similar situation but on the other end. His subbie has done one and retained equipment in lieu of being paid (for an allegedly incomplete job). He's given the guy a week to return the equipment before he reports it stolen as he sees it as a bit of bum-seeing (has a mostly good working relationship with the guy, is happy to work with him again if situation can be redeemed). This is the sort of scenario the "internet warriors" were led to believe, rather than being advised of the complexities of the case.

The only "complexity of the case" that was not in my OP was the fact that the item concerned was a development platform which was the subject of the services. That is in fact crucial (in my limited understanding) but none of the replies mentioned it so relying on that now does seem to be 20/20 hindsight : PKB.

I can't really fathom why someone would turn to an internet forum for very specific legal advice, based on limited information, about an issue for which no one responding (including a lawyer) could offer an informed opinion. The range of responses are exactly what you might expect. On the contrary, it's you that seems to be the "internet warrior" here

Absolutely this. We gave our opinion as contractors and not as legal experts. Completely the wrong forum so got completely the wrong advice. You can't say we over charged him for it though.

Overcharged or not, I have to say that I was surprised by the apparent hostility of some of the initial replies, given that this forum is by and for other contractors ?

Also, if you can't ask about points of law on a contractors' forum entitled "Accounting & Legal" then where can you ask it ?

But, hey, it all turned out for the best in the end. Thanks to those who posted helpful advice and well wishes.

[LondonManc]

Given the information at hand, you were supplied with correct answers. I think the complexity of your case is that it wasn't simply kit (e.g. angle grinder, laptop, etc.), despite you saying "My client lent me some equipment". Glad to hear that you've got a full answer from a qualified expert; hopefully that was prompted by the warnings on this thread about keeping the equipment.

[jamesbrown]

Also, if you can't ask about points of law on a contractors' forum entitled "Accounting & Legal" then where can you ask it?

A lawyer perhaps? Of course, you're free to ask what you want, but there's a degree of judgement required and the answers you received were entirely reasonable. In the unlikely event that someone had provided the detailed information you required (based on speculation about your position), you wouldn't have been in a position to judge whether that information was correct. Ultimately, on any detailed point of law, you need to consult a lawyer. That said, I'm glad you've got it sorted and thanks for reporting back because, if nothing else, it's illustrative that equipment can be retained under some circumstances.

[Contreras]

Good on the OP for seeking professional advice and negotiating a settlement without allowing it to escalate. To be fair however the solicitor's opinion is just that, until proven in court.

Had the client have decided to play nasty and report the kit stolen then the OP would be answering to the police and if nothing else that would be an inconvenience.

There has to a line drawn at some point where the kit is no longer 'subject' of the services but is more simply a tool for testing firmware releases. This line is where lawyers make their money and they have a handy knack of advocating a single point of view.