Can a company withhold payment for retained consultant services rendered if a time frame was not blatantly stated in the agreement? Eventhough the agreement fee was agreed upon the time frame conversations and email discussions prior to signing an agreement. Especially if they deceitfully and intentionally don't hold up to their end of the agreement by purposely not communicating, providing feedback, responding or taking action after interviews to allow a person to fulfill their end in a timely manner.
They say because a time frame was not specifically stated in the agreement they don't have to pay me the balance for services rendered or candidates they may hire. And can make me pay back the retainer fee because they have not filled the positions yet. I requested payment which is stated due upon receipt because they have not shown integrity towards the agreement or services rendered. And stated they could hire any of the candidates forwarded at no additional payment to me if they dissolved the agreement because of their actions.
Example: An original fee and discussion was based on four positions taking 30 days to fill at a higher rate. But as discussed my services could fill the roles in two weeks and the fee was assessed at a lower rate with a retainer fee payment on this time frame to build an initial relationship of trust for payment and services between both parties. I was assured by the manager that I would be paid. I kept my end of the agreement by forwarding qualified candidates to be interviewed for hire for the agreed upon roles. Afterwards the manager intentionally is not filling the positions or forwarding communication, responding to move forward with hires after expressing interest in hiring the candidates supplied for the roles in the agreement.
Even continued deviating and changing the original roles and requirements from the original agreement while trying to hire the candidates in other positions. And when an additional fee was discussed to be assessed per the agreement that this would be done for additional positions. He would not hire the candidates but contacted them saying they were still interested. And would then request additional qualifed candidates again and again for the original positions. It has been well over the two weeks and 30 days and they have yet to hire a candidate they showed interest in and the candidate was interested as well.
You may have something here worthy of pursuit, but more info is needed. Use caution when chasing down customers.
The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is an inherent provision in every contract, even if not spelled out in writing. The covenant requires parties to act in good faith and act fairly when dealing with counter parties. Its violation arises when one party manufacturers the circumstances where the other party can do nothing but breach the agreement (the breaching party cannot perform until the other party acts first).
This argument may or may not be applicable directly to your circumstances, but it's worthy of further examination. The terms of contract which create the obligation to pay you need to be carefully reviewed to understand whether there is a no-fault failure to perform the obligation of paying you, and the facts should be further evaluated to determine whether your client used reasonable efforts in furtherance of the agreement, but the results didn't pan out creating no obligation to pay you.
Be advised that getting tough with customers has to be done diplomatically, as you could get a reputation as a person not-so-great to engage because of your inclination to bring lawsuits and dispute issues. A fair work-out with your client should be considered so as to extend the relationship and give you the opportunity to gain new business from the client, but payment-in-advance next time. Also, consider revising the conditions in your retainer agreement which give rise to your payment and retention of your retainer without recourse from your customers.
Your fact situation calls for a sit down with an attorney with you bringing your agreement, and the pertinent communications. The other side's position does not seem reasonable, but I would have to see the documents to provide an intelligent assessment.
In general, if a specific time is not specified, and time is not declared to be of the essence, the party obligated to undertake performance can do so within a reasonable time. How much time is reasonable depends on the particular circumstances.
Since you are in the Dallas area, you may wish to take advantage of my free hour of consultation for new clients. If you make an appointment, please bring copies of your pertinent paperwork.
Hope this helps. If you think this post was helpful, please click the best answer tab below and/or designate my answer as the best answer. Thanks.
Get free answers from experienced attorneys.
28,591 answers this week
3,056 attorneys answering
Get answers from top-rated lawyers.
28,591 answers this week
3,056 attorneys answering
Don't speak legalese? We define thousands of terms in plain English.Browse our legal dictionary