It all depends on how you signed the agreement -
1) as an officer of the corp
Only a reading of the contract would be able to determine such.
Please click on the ACCEPT button for my answer so that I receive credit for assisting you. You may continue to ask follow-up questions after accepting. If the information is helpful, I would very much appreciate positive feedback. Bonuses are also appreciated.
Applicant agrees all invoices will be paid within the terms. CB reserves the right to change terms. If placed in collections for non-payment of account, applicant will be responsible for attorney fees and collection costs. The of any lawsuit to collect shall be in King County.
This is the only thing that I Signed. I can send you the whole contract if you can tell me how to do that.
Here is the latest from the Collector.
The debt is yours; you incurred it, took delivery of my client's product and had the benefit of same. The debt was incurred under the name of Pine Lakes. Our client listed it incorrectly under the name of Pros and the f/d/b/a Pine Lakes was added when the facts came to light. Pine Lakes did not exist at the time you incurred this debt and hence the liability falls to you.
There is no contract under Pros. If you believe a contract with Pros exists then produce it.
You need to focus on the real issue here; your personal liability to the debt and spend less time looking for a rock to crawl under.
Get serious and settle this debt or suit will proceed.
Do they have the notices - that this is an attempt to collect a debt, etc., etc. - within that letter?
What was the name of your company?
Did you ever go by Pine Lakes or what? Is that true Pine Lakes didn't exist at the time you entered the contract?
Pine Lake and the 2nd Company was Prolific
Then I would agree with you under the facts that you described.
As such, I would inform the collections company that if they continue to send you threatening letters or any type of communications you will file a harassment complaint with the police AND with the courts against them.
To, I would inform them that if they do file suit against you in the matter and that the case is dismissed - you will file a malicious prosecution suit against them.
An action for malicious prosecution has three elements. The plaintiff must establish that the prior underlying action (1) was commenced by or at the direction of the defendant and it was pursued to a legal termination in the plaintiffs favor; (2) was brought without probable cause; and (3) was initiated with malice. (These are the elements in all malicious prosecution cases.)
Plaintiff must therefore present evidence to satisfy three primary elements of the malicious prosecution cause of action:
1) Probable Cause -- The California Supreme Court employs an objective test for determining probable cause, i.e., whether based on the facts upon which the attorney acted would lead a reasonable attorney to believe that the action was tenable. (Sheldon Appel Co. supra,47 Cal.3d at p. 878). This element is decided as a question of law by the court. The attorney defendant and the client may not be aligned on this element if the client asserts the "advice of counsel" defense. This defense waives the attorney-client privilege regarding communications between the client and the attorney on the advice given and relied on.
2) Malice -- Plaintiff must plead and prove either ill will or some ulterior purpose distinct from that of enforcement of the alleged cause of action. (5 Witkin, Summary of California Law 9th Ed 1988 § 450 p. 534, citing Restatement 2d. Torts, 676.) This element is a question of fact.
Here it's economic extorsion - that theythink they can just buffalo into paying them for monies you don't owe.
3) Favorable Termination -- It calls for a termination reflecting on the merits of the action and the plaintiff's innocence of the misconduct alleged. (Lackner v. LaCroix 1979) 25 Cal.3d 747, 750-751; Pattiz v. Minye, 61 Cal.App.4th 826-827.) When the termination of the proceeding does not obviously reflect on the merits, the court must examine the reasons for termination to see if the disposition reflects the opinion of the court or the prosecuting party that the action would not succeed. If resolution of the underlying action leaves a residue of doubt about the plaintiff's innocence or liability, it is not a favorable termination sufficient to support a cause of action for malicious prosecution. (Id.at p. 827.)
No, I don't think I need any more information. It seems very clear that you didn't sign the contract to be held personally liable.
Company A had a contract with CB and then Comapny A went out of business and then Company B put an order in with CB and CB used the same terms as Company A had. I am telling them that I had no contract with them and that only Company A Pine Lake had a contract with them.
That although Company B has the same terms with CB - that doesn't hold you personally liable for the debts of A or B.
No, they must look to the corporation for their monies.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).