“Timely manner” is not simply a matter of opinion. It is preposterously unreasonable to give a date of Dec 19th, 2009 and then not contact me as of the date of writing this, Jan 11th, 2010. Every contract presupposes completion within a reasonable time frame, notwithstanding the condition that “requested date is just a request not a guaranteed date”. For example, the company cannot take until Dec 19th, 2012 to fulfill its obligations under the contract and still claim due performance of contractual obligations.
Recall the contract was signed on Nov 16th, 2009 and in more than the month the company had between then and Dec 19th, 2009, there was never any mention of possible delays due to holidays. On the contrary, on Nov 16th, 2009, I told the company’s representative, Mr. Baldwin that I was leaving California on Dec 21st, 2009 whereupon he suggested that the request pick-up date be set to Dec 19th, 2009. He assured me that with this pick-up date, the car would be picked up before I left California.
When I got in touch with the company on Dec 21st, they told me that they were unable to assign a driver and would definitely find one before Christmas. I was put through the hassle of having to find someone to leave my car keys with. The company has had plenty of good weather days and working days to pick up the car but they have simply ignored to do so. There has never even been any effort whatsoever on part of the company to intimate me of delays on their part. They never returned my phone calls and every time I was able to find them on the phone, they provided excuses and reassurances.
On the phone conversation with the company on Dec 30th, 2009, they explicitly told me that they could find me a driver right away if I were willing to pay more than the contractually agreed amount. This suggests to me that their problem really was not non-availability of drivers, it was non-availability for the amount they agreed to provide service for. I called up other companies and they were happy to deliver around then and mere inconvenience on the part of this company to discharge contractual obligations does not absolve them of the obligations per se. It is an unbecoming business practice on their part to first lure me with an attractive rate, charge me a security deposit and then claim they cannot find a driver.
They state in their response dated Dec 31st, 2009 that they “have been working on her order and have should go out as soon as holidays pass.” In contrast, on Dec 30th, 2009, they told me over the phone that they were canceling my order. When I tried to ask them about my security deposit of $199, they hung up the phone on me saying “there will no more talking”. I immediately tried to contact them via e-mail saying that since they were canceling the order I had placed with them, I understand this to mean that they will be refunding the $199 of security deposit.
They never responded to my e-mail either. Given all of this, I am led to conclude that their true intent was to cancel the order and pocket the security deposit in a blatant misuse of their terms and conditions. I was forced to dispute the amount of $199 with my credit card company and find another car mover. While Mr. Baldwin and his company have always given excuses, this other car mover has been able to move my car in a prompt and efficient manner. This further exposes the hollowness of the excuses that Mr. Baldwin’s company has been making.
Note there is nothing in their terms and conditions that covers a circumstance where they cancel the order. Consequently, I would expect that the general practice prevalent in the trade would prevail and under those the security deposit of $199 should be refunded to me. That is, the amount that they claim they have “fully earned upon customer placing the order” stands un-earned upon them canceling the order and should revert in full to me.
I am not even claiming any compensation for the extreme inconvenience they have put me through. I am simply asking for refund of the amount I have been charged.
