X has Special Skills. X worked for Y as independent contractor. Y advertised "all" services will be provided by someone with Special Skills, but does not mention X's name. X does not know Y is marketing services using X's credentials. Y does not have the Special Skills that X has. X is the only person on Y's staff that has Special Skills, but Y tells X he has other staff with Special Skills so X does not know. When Y gets inquiries from potential clients, Y sends X's work product as samples. Client signs up for Y's services assuming services will be provided by someone with Special Skills. After Client pays, Y provides services himself. X finds out from Client that Y used X's credentials, but not give work to X. Y tells X he didn't guarantee X work. What claims does X have against Y?
Securities / Investment Fraud Attorney
Depends is the answer. How your credentials were used and how your name was used.
Did the person profited by that action.How and when
Other issues that can arise are Invasion of privacy and false advertisement .
Disclaimer:Attorney and Fraud Examiner.One of few that are Certified Fraud Examiners (CFE). The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as a legal advice on any subject. No recipients of content from this site,clients or otherwise,should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included in the site without seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue from an attorney licensed in the recipient's state. The content of this website contains general information and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. The Karamanlis Powers Law Offices expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all of the contents of this website, weblogs, twitter, facebook, google+. *the certification is not a specialty recognized by the California State Bar.
Construction / Development Lawyer
I am not sure that X has any claims against Y.
Y's customers might have claims against Y.
But, if Y is agreeing to provide a specific product to customers, and then actually provides that product, it seems to me that Y does in fact have the skills necessary to provide the product.
Perhaps X has some claim against Y for showing customer's X's work product, but if Y paid X for that work product, Y would probably have the right to use that work product in any way he likes.