Assuming the guy has any business acumen at all, of course. They'll be in a LLC or some other way to protect personal assets. The point was only to illustrate the name isn't _necessarily_ the person....
Oh, it has a _long_ way to go to get to that point... :) (or should that be :( ) :)
--
...
I intended to make a comment on this in the other response before I quit but inadvertently snipped more than I intended.
You seem to be thinking my response is mostly on some "high moral ground" basis. While "what's right" is part of it, mostly my objection is really quite pragmatic and self-centered. (Whether in the big scheme of things it is generally effective in making a difference is, of course, a totally different question.)
The point is, if I _were_ a contractor (I am self-employed and have been for some time so I can directly relate) doing business according to the rules I'd be far less than happy at having to compete against the guy who isn't. What little I can do to discourage or make that a little more difficult is only helping me in a competitive sense.
--
It was never stated that the contractor in the case under discussion was incorporated. Most small guys are not. As far as pulling something shady, he can do that regardless of how you paid him. It's just silly to think that he's gonna get anywhere saying you didn't pay him when you have the cancelled check made out to him. You really think he's going to go to court to try to claim that? Especially when many folks here think his purpose for the check in his name was to avoid taxes. BTW, I don't necessarily buy that either, because having a trail of checks that you endorsed and cashed is a pretty stupid way to try to avoid taxes. Not only is it easy to find, it's very hard to explain as an oversight, or innocent omission, like some questionable deduction would be. It's very obvious tax fraud
And...... exactly what is wrong in making out the check to the person\\company that you contracted to have the job done? I don't care what the contractor is doing with the money. All I want to do is protect myself. If the contractor wants to be paid a certain way, let him say it up front or in the contract and let me decide if I want to do it then not after he's finished and hopefully sweeping up his mess.
If you want to protect yourself, buy life insurance. Buy homeowner's insurance. Buy health insurance. Wear a seatbelt and a condom. But I don't see making a check out to Jay Stewart Plumbing or to Jay Stewart making any difference in protecting you from anything. The risk in fact is on the other side, in that your check could bounce. It's just laughable to claim the guy is gonna come back and say he wasn't paid.
Now I think you're being stupid. Why shouldn't a consumer look to protect himself? Don't tell me to buy home or health insurance. You might not see anything wrong but I as a consumer and owner of my money till I part with it see nothing wrong in writing the check to the company. Are you a contractor or self employed. Then I can understand your attitude. Just like a contractor protects his butt by writing contracts, I protect my butt by paying to the company\\person I hired to do the job. If as a contractor or self employed individual you don't like doing work without a contract, go buy home insurance, health insurance and pull a condom over your head. Life is a two way street.
In general, if the only people who were able to give good advice were the people who had never violated that same advice themselves, there would be very few people who could give good advice.
Many people learn from their mistakes, and many learn better than those who have never done the wrong thing.
No one has used the work hypocrite yet, but it's not hypocrisy even for a repeat litterer, or a repeat Casanova or a repeat criminal to tell others not to do the same things he does. Who knows best the problems that come with doing those things but one who does them. It's only hypocrisy if he tries to give the impression that he doesn't do or never did the things he actually does, or did, and even then that doesn't make his advice bad.
If people don't have standards that are higher than their behaviour in some ways, then they are saints or their standards are not high enough.
Never said a consumer should't protect themselves. What I said and you fail to grasp is that whether the check is made out to Jay Stewart Plumbing or Jay Stewart offers you zippo in the way of protection. If anything is stupid, it's to think that the guy is somehow gonna try to get you to pay twice, which is extremely unlikely. There are plenty of ways a contractor can screw you, but this one is just beyond silly. If he does deny payment was made, you just show him the canceled check and tell him to get lost. Which is exactly what you would do regardless of how you made out the check.
Don't tell me to buy home or health insurance. You might not see
Now you're really going off track. I never suggested to do have work done without a contract. That isn't at all what the thread is about. But since you can't explain what great measure of "protection" to the consumer results from making the check out to Jay Stewart Plumbing instead of Jay Stewart, I guess this switch and divert is the best you can come up with. It's like the other blind alley you tried to take us down, by bringing up the bogus issue of what name is on a permit that might have been pulled for the job. Suppose you have a permit for an addition and you have a rough in carpenter, a finish carpenter and another contractor for the railings. Following your logic, they would all have to have pulled permits so you could match the names. Somehow I don't think it works that way.
go
I think I'm the guy you are referring to regarding the guy's business possibly being in financial trouble, so I'll ask this question of the group:
I recall the when we bought our present home, a "spec built" one, from it's builder our lawyer spent some time checking whether subcontractors had been paid and I believe got some certified documents from the builder "swearing" that all subs were satisfied.
But, on a smaller scale, if it turns out the paving company, whom I paid a few thousand bucks to last year to rip out and install a new asphalt driveway at our home, went belly up owing their asphalt supplier money, would that supplier have a valid case to come after me for the value of the materials in my driveway?
Does that sort of stuff really happen?
If it does, than other than trying your best to check out everyone you hire to do any work for you that involves installing materials, are their other ways to protect yourself from being hassled over stuff like that.
Jeff
...
It depends on state law, but I think it's generally true (at least has been where I have lived) that yes, the supplier can place mechanic's liens on property where their supplies were installed, not just the contractor who did the installation. And, yes, Virginia, it does happen.
That's why it is important to check them out and in particularly make sure their performance bond and such are in place and current.
--
So, how do you protect you self from mechanics' / suppliers' liens?
I'd make the check payable to "ABC Company (the contractor) and XYZ Building Supply" (the folks who supplied the wallboard / concrete / etc.)
That is the super way to protect yourself. Now you'll see the marginal contractors come in screaming at that idea. They want protection but don't want to offer protection to the consumer.
What will the check help prove? You will have the bill with the payment instructions on it. You will have the canceled check or a facsimile (depending on how your bank works) showing that you paid the bill exactly as requested. Those together will certainly be "proof" that payment was made for the services rendered.
In NYS, the supplier could come after you if they weren't paid -- assuming they know where the asphalt was delivered. If they haven't come yet, then they've probably been paid. Don't worry too much. It is the LAST job that he did where he didn't pay the company -- and then he never got another load.
I think they have a year to file a lien.
I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about people with proper wills who leave money to the federal and state governments.
That's good of you, seriously.
I"m sure. But there is no set price on used merchandise, especially at yard sales.
The tax rates aren't made up on the spur of a Sunday afternoon, and while there are some areas where people who know the tax laws disagree, in most cases they agree.
I used to get tv's off the street and fix them and sell them, all B&W's iirc, for between 20 and 45 dollars. Hard to "make a profit" if I had to buy the Samms notes or any parts. But it was fun too. I had two kinds of customers, the kind that wouldn't pay what I asked no matter how cheap I was, and the kind who didn't dicker. Because of the first kind, I started quoting a price 5 dollars higher than what I really wanted. This worked fine with the first kind of person, but one time, after I helped a non-dickering guy take the tv to the subway, I felt the need to give him back 5 dollars, and an explanation of why I overcharged. I don't know what he thought of that.
I also learned to offer them only two tv's, of different prices. If I offered 3, they couldn't decide. If they were the same price, they couldn't decide. So often they bought nothing. When I learned to offer only two, almost everyone who came over bought one.
i had you lamped for a slightly anemic, well-dressed country n***er
that's the dumbest idea yet. now the contractor would have to go to the lumber yard & have them sign off on his check so he could cash it. There might be a couple people in that lumber yard with the authority to sign a check, then you would need the paper work showing that authority, probably stamped by a notary public. The contractor probably already paid for the materials when he picked it up, so I fail to see why you would ever drag them into this. I would cringe at the idea to work for people so incredibly anal. you offer a service, you do a good job, they pay you. move on to the next job. it's not that hard people.
In a nice world you'd be 100% right however would you be willing to bet the farm on how many illegitimate contractors take the money, don't pay their supplier and run?
Go to
Except that we have a contractor, according to the OP, who is bidding and doing busness on paper, and billing as ABC Contracting. At the end, where the rubber meets the road, the guy wants to change things by getting paid as Joe C, not ABC Contracting
The contractor is telling you, in big bright neon red letters about a hundred feet high that he is into playing cute games with money by telling you that he wants the money going to Joe C instead of the ABC Contracting entity.
Most folks here are actually capable of recognizing that. You, sadly, are either vision impaired, and don't see the warning signs, or, if you see the warning signs, are too dumb tof recognizing their significance.
If the contractor wants to play cute financial games with payments to him, why do you think thats the only place he's playing cute financial games?
If in those circumstances you still dont want to protect yourself, thats ok by me.
For my part, were I faced with the situation reported bythe OP, I'd be protecting myself.
My $ 0.02, ymmv, IMHO, etc.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.