|
|
|
|
|
by ineedasername
3110 days ago
|
|
I don't think blaming the victim is a useful criticism. Trusting a vendor to perform the tasks for which they've been hired is hardly a fault. Woodshed represented this as a service they had offered clients in the past, and the client had a contractual addendum. In the world or raising money, it is extremely common, even required at times, for a fundraising partner to control some or all aspects of the financial arrangement. Indeed, many times it is this logistical coverage that is a primary service sought by the client. You protect yourself by having the appropriate contractual agreements in place, which the client did here. That is the way modern business works: Not without trust, else all business would be impossible. But with limited trust, and recourse to a legal system when the trust is betrayed. Again, this is the path taken by the client. |
|
I disagree. You protect yourself by doing your necessary homework before you even sign the contracts.
Contracts are helpful, but in the real world, getting a resolution can be very messy. Lawsuits are stressful, expensive and time consuming. If you've been through a lawsuit, you'll know that being right is often very small consolation, especially if your adversary happens to have better legal representation than you.