What is an acceptable amount of time to wait for a press.

ALEEISS · March 16th, 2012, 03:06 AM

Each of us have heard that once M&R fulfills the other manu's contract, the customers have trouble canceling the order and getting their money back.
Some say that M&R is taking advantage of a late delivery situation, but the question is this, if M&R goes into these customers with immediate delivery of the equipment, is there anything wrong with the customer then breaking the other manu's contract?

pwalsh · March 16th, 2012, 06:52 AM

This story is all old news and was covered on this site a long time ago to include the names of the equipment buyer, the manufacturer, the companies selling agent, the equipment description and the dollar value involved. By my recollection Winston is spot on with his description of who was involved and how much. The other parts to the story that I recall are that the printer involved ordered and prepaid a large deposit on three large format presses and was waiting on delivery.

Around that time the equipment manufacturer had a series of problems with another one of their presses that they had installed just up the road in Carlsbad, CA. These problems resulted in the press manufacturer suspending all shipment to the US while they tried to work the bugs out of their equipment. The guy with the presses on order got nervous that he wouldn't be able to meet his delivery obligations and purchased some Challenger III’s to guarantee his production.

When he went back to the Selling Agent and Manufacturer for a refund of his deposit he was advised that their purchase agreement did not contain any provisions for a return of deposit if the customer canceled the agreement, nor did it have any penalty or cancellation clause if the manufacturer was late or failed to deliver the equipment. It was my understanding that basically the customer was screwed based on the very sales agreement that they signed.

ALEEISS · March 16th, 2012, 09:04 AM

I stand corrected.

Quote:

Ask yourself what the true motives are with the people involved? Look at the law, and question what has happened "behind the scenes"

Why is it that M&R is the ONLY company that magically "saves the day"

Where is Anatol, MHM, and the others?

Here is a link to some case law.

TortiousInterference

Competition is at the heart of our capitalist economic system rewarding businesses supplying the best goods and services at the best value.* Despite the high value we place on robust competition, boundaries do exist.* Conduct that may be perceived as just “in your face” competition, may give rise to serious liability under the tort of tortious interference with economic relations.* This article addresses the liability hooks and the tug-of-war between legitimate competition and inappropriate interference with contractual relationships.

Historical Backdrop

Tortious interference claims originated as far back as the Romans when claims could be brought for injuries to one’s household for loss of services.* In modern time, the tort can be traced to the pinnacle cases Lumley v. Gye, 118 Eng. Rep. 748 (1853), and Temperton v. Russell, 1 Q.B. 715 (1893).* In Lumley, an opera singer was induced to breach her contract to sing for a particular theater, ultimately giving rise to claims for contractual tortious interference.* Temperton went further, declaring that a similar action to tortious interference with contract would lie for tortious interference with business relations that were merely prospective.* Such torts, often unrecognized, continue to this day in a variety of contexts.

Claim Elements

A.Tortious Interference With Contract
Although specific claim elements may vary by jurisdiction, generally, there are five elements:
1) the existence of a valid and enforceable contract;
2) the interfering party’s knowledge of the existence of the contract;
3) the interfering party’s intentional inducement of the contract’s breach;
4) absence of justification by the interfering party; and
5) damages arising from the interfering party’s action.

B. Tortious Interference With Prospective Economic Relations
Interference with prospective economic relations involves interference with a reasonable expectation of profit, or potential contractual relationships, ultimately resulting in the loss of a property right.* To establish a prima facie case, plaintiff generally must prove:
1) they had a reasonable expectation of entering into a valid business relationship with a third party;
2) the interfering party purposely interfered and defeated this legitimate expectancy; and
3) the interfering party’s actions caused harm to the plaintiff.

Plaintiff must prove the interfering party’s conduct was not privileged, as there can be some insulation from liability for certain interference under the privilege of competition.* From a public policy standpoint, society encourages competition, and there is no fault in one business beating its rival to prospective customers.* This protection, however, is limited to bona fide competition.* It does not extend to situations where one party is not seeking to acquire the business diverted from another party, but rather to gratify ill will or further some unrelated interest.

srimonogramming · March 16th, 2012, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALEEISS

Each of us have heard that once M&R fulfills the other manu's contract, the customers have trouble canceling the order and getting their money back.
Some say that M&R is taking advantage of a late delivery situation, but the question is this, if M&R goes into these customers with immediate delivery of the equipment, is there anything wrong with the customer then breaking the other manu's contract?

Hey, welcome back.

Yeah, M&R coming in and making things right for the customer is such a bad thing. They should be ashamed for swooping in and trying to help those who were promised machinery and haven't gotten it in a timely manner.

GraphicDisorder · March 16th, 2012, 09:27 AM

Ridiculous of them to come in and do exactly as they promise.

ALEEISS · March 16th, 2012, 09:42 AM

The subject of this thread is, What is an acceptable amount of time to wait for a press.
Are we changing it to, What is an acceptable amount of time for a competing manu to wait for a missed press delivery date before interfering in another's contract.

The Bumper · March 16th, 2012, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by californiadreamin

Leon Monfort
Skiva Grapics
Carlsbad,Ca
(760)802-6315
I talked to Leon yesterday. He is a great guy,pushing 70 years old.
Paid for 2 presses $150,000, Nothing! Leon is a personal friend,and
I dont like it with my friends get hurt. Leon prints 2 million shirts a
month. Leon's next stop! The Govenor's office The State Of South
Carolina. If you need lots of shirts printed fast and well, keep Leon's
name. He is a real Gentleman. By the way he put in NEW M&R's
and loves them! Let's stand up for Leon! Count me In...

winston

Barnes...this is you up here. Remember screwing this company? Business as usual for you

srimonogramming · March 16th, 2012, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALEEISS

The subject of this thread is, What is an acceptable amount of time to wait for a press.
Are we changing it to, What is an acceptable amount of time for a competing manu to wait for a missed press delivery date before interfering in another's contract.

Is that a question?

So M&R is being accused of interfering with other manufacturer's contracts or could it be that they end up doing what another manufacturer couldn't do? I guess the person accusing has never, ever contacted a customer that had a contract in place for machinery? I really don't think it's a bad thing to be waiting beside a customer in case they run into issues with getting their equipment. Selling equipment is the name of the game and what would you expect a manufacturer to do when a potential customer chooses another? If it's been 6 months and that customer has yet to get the equipment they bought, would you expect the other manufacturers to ignore the situation and not try to make a sale and save the day? If a manufacturer can't install a press within 3-4 months after the deal was finalized then they should get the hell out of the game and sure as hell not get mad when M&R comes in and makes things right. It's always someone else's fault.

Binkspot · March 16th, 2012, 10:18 AM

Thanks for the clarification Peter.

I would think for good reason the customer got nervous and went with another mfg for what ever reason. Nothing wrong with this, understandable. But I would also hope the mfg who lost the deal would refund at least a portion of the monies, at least as a show of good faith or possible future business. 150k is a huge deposit and would be a big hit for anybody, maybe refund 80%-90%. I would assume they had not even started production on the machine so they probably had little if any thing invested. Even if the machine was in production I am sure they could have sold it to someone else.

You should never **** where you eat.

ALEEISS · March 16th, 2012, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbayprint

We just ordered a Diamondback XL - time from order to estimated shipping date is 9 weeks. It doesn't seem unreasonable but I am slightly disappointed that it missed the often quoted 4-6 weeks.

tbayprint is "disappointed" about M&R's delivery being twice as long as what is "often quoted"
Based on what we have read thus far, Would it be ok for another manu like Workhorse to go visit tbayprint and interfere with M&R's contract by delivering a Falcon M?