Reply to: You get what you pay for - ha!!

[mudskipper]

There's a right way of doing these things. If I didn't pay my rent, my landlord isn't allowed to show up and padlock the place whilst I'm out. He has to go through a proper procedure to have me evicted.

Actually, I think with business leases he can.

He can also seize and sell your goods to pay for arrears.

http://www.birkettlong.co.uk/cms/doc...ses_beware.pdf

[mudskipper]

NLUK where are you?!

It's OK - he's prowling the accounting forums growling at noobs and telling them to get an accountant.

[d000hg]

If you've delivered a product and it's not been paid for, then it's not theirs. If you were the landlord and they didn't pay their rent, you probably would do the padlock scenario. If you deliver a website, then you take it down.

If you're a landlord, you own the building. The online analogy here is the ISP/hosting provider who CAN legitimately turn the site off. The web designer is more like a decorator or plumber.

Unless a contract says so, not paying doesn't mean the work you do stops belonging to the client. A contract normally transfers IP ownership. Non payment is a separate matter.

Jeez, and you lot claim to run businesses... without understanding the legal ramifications. NLUK where are you?!

[VectraMan]

If you've delivered a product and it's not been paid for, then it's not theirs. If you were the landlord and they didn't pay their rent, you probably would do the padlock scenario. If you deliver a website, then you take it down.

There's a right way of doing these things. If I didn't pay my rent, my landlord isn't allowed to show up and padlock the place whilst I'm out. He has to go through a proper procedure to have me evicted.

Similarly, if somebody doesn't pay you for work you did on a website, you should go through the courts to get your money, and perhaps ultimately the court orders the website to be taken down. But you can't decide unilaterally that you've been wronged and therefore you can do what you want.

It might be different if the server is yours, but if it's just the content, then accessing it without the owner's permission is probably a crime, and even if not the client could sue you for damages.

[No2politics]

You get what you pay for - ha!!

I think that this is the more accurate analogy than d000hg's

Plus 1

[cojak]

If you've delivered a product and it's not been paid for, then it's not theirs. If you were the landlord and they didn't pay their rent, you probably would do the padlock scenario. If you deliver a website, then you take it down.

I think that this is the more accurate analogy than d000hg's

[mudskipper]

So what if you get stiffed by a nonline company? Should you go and put massive padlocks on their retail outlets and spray-paint "you can't get in until we're paid" on the doors/windows? Because that's basically what you're doing.

I feel deciding how to act in an online scenario is best modeled on a nonline scenario rather than adopting the common attitude that the internet entitles you to act like a colossal dick the moment anyone upsets you.

If you've delivered a product and it's not been paid for, then it's not theirs. If you were the landlord and they didn't pay their rent, you probably would do the padlock scenario. If you deliver a website, then you take it down.

[d000hg]

The website mentions that this is the last resort - what else do you do if every other avenue has been exhausted?

As for unprofessional, it may be impolite to be so direct but it might also get the job done where other professional approaches have failed.

So what if you get stiffed by a nonline company? Should you go and put massive padlocks on their retail outlets and spray-paint "you can't get in until we're paid" on the doors/windows? Because that's basically what you're doing.

I feel deciding how to act in an online scenario is best modeled on a nonline scenario rather than adopting the common attitude that the internet entitles you to act like a colossal dick the moment anyone upsets you.

[RasputinDude]

You get what you pay for - ha!!

This wasn't a small company, but a multi million pound international engineer firm. My intention wasn't spite, but I wanted the issue resolved quickly. To be honest, I didn't want the business any more as they were more of a problem than the job was worth.

[VectraMan]

It's not professional, but in my case when the company didn't pay for over six months, I was left with very little recourse. I wasn't prepared to subsidise them any longer. At what point do you give up trying to be the better man?

Did you not try to use the courts to get the money? (I haven't read the whole thread - apologies if you've said). It strikes me this sort of thing is counter-productive. If a company genuinely is struggling, then taking away their e-commerce site may well finish them off, and then you definitely won't get paid. Plus by ultimately not providing the service, they're justified in not paying.

If your intent is to get the money, this probably isn't the way. If your intent is spite, then fair enough.

(I have personal experience of trying to get money out of someone with no ability to pay, and of having what I thought was a good relationship with a client go sour as soon as it was time for payment. So I certainly know how it feels).

[cojak]

You get what you pay for - ha!!

It's not professional, but in my case when the company didn't pay for over six months, I was left with very little recourse. I wasn't prepared to subsidise them any longer. At what point do you give up trying to be the better man?

Quite.

[RasputinDude]

You get what you pay for - ha!!

It's not professional, but in my case when the company didn't pay for over six months, I was left with very little recourse. I wasn't prepared to subsidise them any longer. At what point do you give up trying to be the better man?

[Archangel]

I was going to recommend this guy to a customer, went to his site to get his contact details and found

Zine Photography - Sowerby Bridge - Halifax - [email protected]

[original PM]

it may be unprofessional - but then so is not paying your bills...

but it just comes down to greed - big boss in bigco wants more bonus so is happy to tulip on the little guy....

[cojak]

Is there another way?

This sort of thing has always happened to little guys. I worked for a blue chip engineering company in the 1980s, where the unwritten policy (from high up the food-chain) was to not pay for three months regardless of terms, and then only on the xth demand for payment. The small companies had no choice. They hated the BigCo but needed the business, and couldn't match BigCos lawyers anyway. If they caused trouble, they could easily lose business from other BigCos.

But at least they mostly got paid in the end, even if it had fecked their cashflow. So I'm glad this lot have gone public, if only to highlight what happens.

WDSS

They probably thought that they could screw a small off-shore company by simply ignoring them once they'd done the work.

The website mentions that this is the last resort - what else do you do if every other avenue has been exhausted?

As for unprofessional, it may be impolite to be so direct but it might also get the job done where other professional approaches have failed.