1. Welcome to the new Styleforum!

    We hope you’re as excited as we are to hang out in the new place. There are more new features that we’ll announce in the near future, but for now we hope you’ll enjoy the new site.

    We are currently fine-tuning the forum for your browsing pleasure, so bear with any lingering dust as we work to make Styleforum even more awesome than it was.

    Oh, and don’t forget to head over to the Styleforum Journal, because we’re giving away two pairs of Carmina shoes to celebrate our move!

    Please address any questions about using the new forum to support@styleforum.net

    Cheers,

    The Styleforum Team

    Dismiss Notice

Legal advise - item damaged during alteration

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by stilmacher, Oct 10, 2007.

  1. LabelKing

    LabelKing Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    25,745
    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Location:
    Constantinople
    Ok, that makes sense to me.

    But, for the sake of argument, what if you know with 100% certainty that the second time around, the craftsmanship will be superior? Would you object to, say, a visionary sculptor using shopping-carts as a raw material? I guess my question is where you draw the line. Is this an absolutist "preservation of anything that has been designed and produced in the past" principle?


    No, my position is predicated on the fact that the item in question fits certain criteria. Shopping carts and things of that sort really don't fulfill any esthetic canon whereas say, 19th century jewelry or a medieval book does.
     
  2. LabelKing

    LabelKing Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    25,745
    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Location:
    Constantinople
    Oh! Like cows were intended to be shoes?[​IMG]

    I've no qualms about using animal products.
     
  3. HomerJ

    HomerJ Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,561
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    I've no qualms about using animal products.
    I think that's been well established. You sort of remind me of
    [​IMG]
     
  4. LabelKing

    LabelKing Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    25,745
    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Location:
    Constantinople
    I think that's been well established. You sort of remind me of

    On that point, Stilmacher, do you have any sea turtle-skin items?
     
  5. stilmacher

    stilmacher Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,030
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2007
    On that point, Stilmacher, do you have any sea turtle-skin items?

    No, I don't - only my tortoise frames.
     
  6. LabelKing

    LabelKing Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    25,745
    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Location:
    Constantinople
    No, I don't - only my tortoise frames.
    Did you have them newly made? What shade are they? I am waiting for my tortoise-shell frames to come in.
     
  7. mishon

    mishon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,121
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2007
    Location:
    D.C.
    This is NOT meant to interpreted as legal advice, but a contract does not have to be in writing to be enforceable. It could be an express oral contract where the terms are agreed upon orally or an implied-in-fact contract where the agreement is indicated by conduct and where performance indicates agreement. In any case, as someone else already mentioned, it is always better to resolve things in a peaceful manner. Good luck.
     
  8. tonylumpkin

    tonylumpkin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,518
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2007
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    This is NOT meant to interpreted as legal advice, but a contract does not have to be in writing to be enforceable. It could be an express oral contract where the terms are agreed upon orally or an implied-in-fact contract where the agreement is indicated by conduct and where performance indicates agreement.

    I believe you are correct. The problem here is that without tangible evidence of an agreed to design or end result, the whole thing is left up to the personal interpretation of the two parties involved. Ones interpretation of the same conversation (oral contract) might legitimately vary from the others interpretation. If Stilmacher has any hope of satisfaction it would probably be on the basis of quality, which can be quantified to some extent, but is still open to interpretation.
     
  9. mishon

    mishon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,121
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2007
    Location:
    D.C.
    I believe you are correct. The problem here is that without tangible evidence of an agreed to design or end result, the whole thing is left up to the personal interpretation of the two parties involved. Ones interpretation of the same conversation (oral contract) might legitimately vary from the others interpretation. If Stilmacher has any hope of satisfaction it would probably be on the basis of quality, which can be quantified to some extent, but is still open to interpretation.
    Agreed.
     
  10. TCN

    TCN Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,505
    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    BBB is worthless. For the one customer in 10,000 that actually checks these things it's okay, and for the merchant who pays $500 a year for the sticker, it's a nice advert . . . that's about it.

    First, send a letter rejecting the goods and explaining why they are unsuitable (reference the the agreement or understood work order as best as you can), then you don't pay the guy. Advise him that he can sue you for the work, but that you will counter-claim for your lost goods. If you do end up in your local version of small claims court, be prepared. Document what you paid for the belt, further document what it would cost to replace the belt.

    Be prepared to demonstrate WHY the work is substandard and why the belt is useless.

    At the end of the day, I wouldn't expect much success (the adequacy of performance is usually an objective standard - so if you're being picky, you're screwed), but if you're a man of principle . . .

    The theme of your argument is this is an expensive luxury good (see what I paid), and an expensive artisan, the standards should be much higher. I know what I wanted, I showed him pictures, here are listings of these types of bracelets, it is incumbent on him to document the order, not me . . . it's his business, not mine. In essence, don't blame me for sending my wrong order back if the waiter failed to write it own.

    The historical case that all you legal eagles are hinting around is Jacobs & Youngs v. Kent, or the "Reading Pipe" case. This should be required reading for any exacting and litigious customer, even though it carries virtually no weight these days.

    There is no requirement that this particular contract be in writing, but it certainly makes things easier in most (but not all) cases.
     
  11. NoVaguy

    NoVaguy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,529
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2004
    Location:
    Guv'mintFlunkyLand
    The historical case that all you legal eagles are hinting around is Jacobs & Youngs v. Kent, or the "Reading Pipe" case. This should be required reading for any exacting and litigious customer, even though it carries virtually no weight these days.

    There is no requirement that this particular contract be in writing, but it certainly makes things easier in most (but not all) cases.


    oh, yeah, that's a good case to read, decision by cardozo, i think. although contracts was by far my worst subject, even if the contracts professor was one of my favorite professors. i think we read the case as part of the remedies, but i guess it is also

    i think there's another case similar to it that involved sheet metal walls for stores or factories, and the buyer being unhappy about the quality of the sheet metal. I think it was a Posner decision, something to do with objective versus subjective standards, and deciding that there should be a presumption for objective standards, which will not be as helpful for the luxury buyer. or something like that.

    but isn't all of this going on in Europe?
     
  12. TCN

    TCN Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,505
    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    oh, yeah, that's a good case to read, decision by cardozo, i think. although contracts was by far my worst subject, even if the contracts professor was one of my favorite professors. i think we read the case as part of the remedies, but i guess it is also

    i think there's another case similar to it that involved sheet metal walls for stores or factories, and the buyer being unhappy about the quality of the sheet metal. I think it was a Posner decision, something to do with objective versus subjective standards, and deciding that there should be a presumption for objective standards, which will not be as helpful for the luxury buyer. or something like that.

    but isn't all of this going on in Europe?


    EUROPE???? F-it, he's on his own! [​IMG]

    I love the Reading case, and yes it was Cardozo; well written opinion, but I remember reading it for the first time and thinking "this is horrible, if he spec'd Reading pipe, he should get freaking Reading pipe!"

    I vaguely remember the other case you reference, it involved a General Motors factory and was from the early 80's or late 70's.
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by