全 49 件のコメント

[–]TheCatGuardian 46ポイント47ポイント  (3子コメント)

If you signed a contract stating that you owe for the whole year regardless of attendance then you are going to be bound by what you signed

[–]StillUnderTheStars 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

I wonder if there's a relevant damages argument here.

OP seems to suggest that there are limited spaces available at this preschool and that the school was able to fill the space vacated by their breach of contract. If that is the case, OP has at least a compelling argument that they owe only actual damages for their breach. They'll need better evidence than an evasive email to a friend, though. Good thing discovery is a thing.

OP, get an attorney.

[–]UserDayMonth -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

That wouldn't be unconscionable?

[–]tahlyn 32ポイント33ポイント  (2子コメント)

The contract does say that we were on the hook for tuition regardless of circumstances, but a transfer out of state is one we never contemplated.

That's not how contracts work. You don't get to back out of a contract because of unforeseen complications. Your contract said "no take backsies" and that means no take backsies. "Regardless of Circumstances" means just that. They are owed full tuition.

I began receiving aggressive debt collection calls from a firm claiming to represent the school...These attempts [reaching out to the school] have fallen on deaf ears.

It sounds like they sold your debt to a debt collector, as was their right, and now they don't care about what you do. You are the debt collector's problem.

My Advice: Settle the debt before it ruins your credit. You don't have any legal "out" for this.

[–]RetardedDropBear 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

Many phone calls between my wife and the school leadership ensued, wherein my wife informed the school that we didn't intend to pay for unused tuition. The contract does say that we were on the hook for tuition regardless of circumstances, but a transfer out of state is one we never contemplated.

How ingenious. I should just tell me phone company I no longer intend to pay. That should get the contract waived.

[–]s-dubya 29ポイント30ポイント  (5子コメント)

You do realize the school either sold the debt or hired a third party. Regardless, you owe the debt. It's not their fault you are getting transferred. WTF do you think a contract's purpose is?

[–]thereally 14ポイント15ポイント  (5子コメント)

Not legal but practical advice. You gonna torpedo your ability to buy a house over $7k? Swallow your pride and hash out exactly what this fit might cost you in the long run.

[–]enladistancia 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you signed the contract, you have to pay. I was in a similiar situation. My then husband was laid off 2 weeks after we started our son at an expensive Christian school. We couldn't get out of the contract. It was a very tight year for us. But we had to fufill the contract.

[–]WaywardSparrow 16ポイント17ポイント  (0子コメント)

The contract does say that we were on the hook for tuition regardless of circumstances, but a transfer out of state is one we never contemplated.

You accepted the risks of a foreseeable contingency when you signed the contract. You're going to be stuck with the bill if that's what the school insists on.

The school asked if we would cover tuition until my son's spot was filled, to which my wife replied "you will have no motivation to fill a spot that is being paid for..." which seems fair.

No, it doesn't. They're likely actually an entity that could sue for lost volume and could argue that they weren't at a critical capacity, so they should be entitled to the lost revenue irrespective of another student enrolling.

I have since recorded threats, inaccuracies and untruths during these calls.

Why are you playing this game? Tell them to stop calling you at work and to communicate only through written measures. Do nothing more. Record their follow on attempts and immediately go to a debtor protection attorney. Note that your credit is likely getting a pounding as a result of this.

vitriol that this "agent" of a Christian institution spewed

They are an agent of the institution and plenty of Christians are full of shit and hate, so I'm unclear why you find this to be a paradox.

do we have any recourse as far as the contract?

You've breached it (seemingly) and owe tuition, so....Your best recourse is through your attorney and a FDCPA act. You clearly backed out of a valid debt and refused to satisfy your obligations.

[–]s-dubya 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Side note based on your username. Given that you've already retained a lawyer to sue an "agent of a Christian institution" for violating the FDCPA, and thinking about taking the school itself to court, I'm going to assume that you realize that by doing so you're violating 1 Corinthians 6.

When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints? ... To have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded?

So, you want to know wwjd? He'd pay his bill.

[–]Sunny_Drake 2ポイント3ポイント  (25子コメント)

While most of the other responses are beep-boop imarobot "Contract!!!" responses that didn't read past you admitting you had a contract, I'm going to take a more nuanced approach. Yes, you did sign a contract, but honestly it should be like tenancy where the damages of a breached contract are limited to actual damages of a spot not being filled. I know you told the collectors that you cant receive calls at work, but have you told them to stop contacting you by phone full stop and only do so by mail? How have they identified themselves to you? What all have they told you? Have you sent a debt-verification letter? While there's always the option of waiting it out and challenging any lawsuits in the hopes itll just be dropped, you probably should look into forcing them to reveal how long the spot remained unfilled.

Also, in the future don't sign contracts willy-nilly when they don't have an easy exit if you can help it.

[–]wwjd2u2[S] -4ポイント-3ポイント  (24子コメント)

Thanks Sunny. The violations of the FDCPA and state law have been reviewed and vetted by an attorney. We are proceeding with a lawsuit in that regard. As for the corpus of the debt, I question the amount as those terms weren't set out in the two page contract. Terms were capitalized as though they had been defined/accepted, but they had not. As far as willy-nilly, this is the first contract in 40 years of life that I've not performed on. I would place it in the realm of unconscionable. Apparently most do not. Again I wonder how they'd feel in similar circumstances.

[–]Reddisaurusrekts 19ポイント20ポイント  (23子コメント)

Again I wonder how they'd feel in similar circumstances.

They'd feel "shit I should've considered that I'd be transferring out of state before I signed".

[–]TotesMessenger 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)