How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Law Educator, Esq. Your Own Question
Law Educator, Esq.
Law Educator, Esq., Attorney
Category: Business Law
Satisfied Customers: 111442
Experience:  All corporate law, including non-profits and charitable fraternal organizations.
10285032
Type Your Business Law Question Here...
Law Educator, Esq. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

I have a video of a new report that has beed very detrimnetal

Customer Question

I have a video of a new report that has beed very detrimnetal to my business and to me personally. Please review and tell me if I have a case against the TV station and two of the homeownse. One said I lied and that it was a scam from the start. The other said "what kind of person would do this".

http://pahomepage.com/content/fulltext/?cid=102381

Please refer to a Pa attorney Call me at XXX-XXX-XXXX
Submitted: 7 years ago.
Category: Business Law
Expert:  Law Educator, Esq. replied 7 years ago.
Unfortunately, the fact remains that the business took the money and did not perform the work and this would be seen in any suit for defamation as the TRUTH which is an absolute defense. In order to have a case for defamation, it must be a known false statement (not someone's opinion based upon their interpretation of the facts). Here they paid money and got no work. In fact, it was admitted by you they received no work. When someone pays to have work done it is reasonable for them to expect that the money they paid will be used for THEIR WORK and not to pay other bills, so the excuse that it was just a bad economy would not hold with the court. I am sorry to tell you that any claim you would try to pursue against them would fail on this basis and would also lead to countersuits against you, if you have not already been sued, to recover the money that they paid you for work you never performed (regardless of your excuse).

I hope you found my answer helpful, please click on the GREEN ACCEPT for my answer. This is necessary for me to be paid for my work and so that I can get credit for assisting you. Your question will not close, and you will still have the opportunity to follow-up if needed. Leaving a bonus and positive feedback is not required, but doing so is certainly appreciated!

If you have additional questions, please keep in mind that I do not know what you already know or don't know, or with what you need help, unless you tell me. Please consider that I am answering the question or question that is posed in your posting based upon my reading of your post and sometimes misunderstandings can occur. If I did not answer the question you thought you were asking, please respond with the specific question you wanted answered.

Also remember, sometimes the law does not support what we want it to support, but that is not the fault of the person answering the question, so please be courteous.

There can also be a delay of an hour or more in between my answers because I may be helping other customers or taking a break.

Use of this service does not create any attorney client relationship. Any information provided is not the practice of law but intended to direct you in finding an attorney in your locale.

You can always request me through my profile at http://www.justanswer.com/profile.aspx?PF=10285032&FID=39 or beginning your question with “For PaulMJD…”

Law Educator, Esq. and 2 other Business Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 7 years ago.
Yes, I understand what you are saying, however I did place the orders and the money was used to pay those same vendors needed for our operation. The vendor put us on a cash in advance status in one case which caused the delay. In the other two cases we were sued and were making payments to refund there money but fell behind in the payments. Calling me a lying and saying what kind of person would do this is not a fact. The are defaming me. The work was delayed. Everything was explained to them. Is the media responsible for any damages.
Expert:  Law Educator, Esq. replied 7 years ago.
I understand your situation, but unfortunately these parties are not making known false statements, they are expressing their opinions based upon the facts of which they are aware, even if you explained to them otherwise, they had a right to their opinions and the sad botXXXXX XXXXXne on this is they did not get what they paid money to recieve and for that you are indeed liable and from that they are entitled to form their opinion of you as it is based upon the facts of the situation. The media is not liable for any damages for reporting the news as they recieved it from the parties and the media did verify the customers did not recieve what they paid to receive and they are entitled to their opinions about your business as they are grounded in the circumstances and how they percieve the circumstances, they are not making false statements when they claim you took their money and they received nothing in exchange for their money. This would be a different game it they were saying these things when in fact they received what the paid for or they received a refund from you or had you not done the work because they failed to pay you the balance of the money required before you were contractually obligated to begin the work and none of these circumstances exist.
Customer: replied 7 years ago.

Yes, I understand what you are saying, however I did place the orders and the money was used to pay those same vendors needed for our operation. The vendor put us on a cash in advance status in one case which caused the delay. In the other two cases we were sued and were making payments to refund there money but fell behind in the payments. Calling me a lying and saying what kind of person would do this is not a fact. The are defaming me. The work was delayed. Everything was explained to them. Is the media responsible for any damages.

 

Definition of libel 2: use of print or pictures to harm someone's reputation. Until 1964, a person could prove that they had been libeled simply by showing that the statements in question were incorrect. In 1964, the Supreme Court decided that public officials had to prove that the statements in question were made with "actual malice"-for the purpose of harming the person's reputation. As a result of the Supreme Court case, Time, Inc. v. Firestone (1976); private individuals only have to prove negligence, rather than "actual malice," on the part of the press.

Definition of libel 3: Defamation of an individual or individuals in a published work, with malice aforethought. In litigation, the falsity of the libelous statements or representations, as well the intention of malice, has to be proved for there to be libel. In addition, financial damages to the parties so libeled must be incurred as a result of the material in question for there to be an assessment of the amount of damages to be awarded to a claimant. This is contrasted to slander, which is defamation through the spoken word.

Expert:  Law Educator, Esq. replied 7 years ago.
You are free to try to bring this suit, it would be against the parties who actually made the statements not the media, but I am telling you that these cases based upon these types of fact, of which I have had the displeasure of being involved with on at least 3 occasions, never seem to turn out in favor of the plaintiff as you may believe it will (and I have 3 angry clients who insisted on spending money to proceed in their endeavors under similar circumstances and lost). I am trying to explain to you the reality of how the court will see it over the book definition you have pulled out. Also, the media did not make the statements, they were reporting the news and other parties made those statements to the media and there is a difference, the news reported did not call you a liar or a thief, a private person not employed by them expressed that opinion of you.
Customer: replied 7 years ago.

Well I understand your point about your clients. But on the TV report the had a headline on the screen that said "Kitchen Con" meaning that the kitchen contractor was a con artist and intend to scam these people from the beginigng. The customer said I lied to them which I did not. They said they thought it was a scam.

I have dozens of pages or drawings and paper work that was prepered for each job to execute the job. We just ran into cash shortages due to vendors change in credit terms by the time we were ready to order. That along wil a slow sales period and no bank line of credit we had these delays. We were not and are not scaming anyone. I think the TV is malisious. The repeorter admitted it to me he did care about me or the customer. He jsut wanted to tell the story. They just make it much worse purposely just to sensationize the stoty. I tried to give him more facts but he did want to really hear my side of the story. He asked me about 20 other questions. They are all on tape. It would sjow the malisious nature of the reporter

Expert:  Law Educator, Esq. replied 7 years ago.
As I said, your chances with this are not the best. You were interviewed and if you provided them with this proof, then your case gets better because they ignored factual information and if you did that, then your chances increase to about 50-50 from about 10-90 of success.

Related Business Law Questions