marvin gaejle
LAW OFFICES OF
MARVIN GAEJLE
P.O. BOX 1630
NORTHAMPTON, MA 01061
(413) 268-6500 ·PHONE Bir
FAX
MARYi NCABLE.COM
May3, 2013 David Lamb
Re: -
v. Vantage and Lamb
Dear Mr. Lamb: This firm represents (hereafter . _ regarding the damages he sustained from his relationship with Vantage Press, Inc. (hereafter "Vantage"). He is the author of the literary work,._ (hereafter "Work"). This is a fonnal demand letter sent pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (M.G.L) Chapter (c.) 93A, Section (s.) 9. This letter is sent to you because of your designation as the registered agent for Vantage. If you are not authorized to receive this demand on behalf of Vantage, please provide this firm with the name and address of the appropriate party to whom this demand letter should be remitted. A copy of this letter has also been sent to Attorney Joseph B. Collins, of Springfield, MA We are informed that he might represent you in this matter. Additionally, a separate demand letter will be sent to Lamb in his personal capacity. Please also review the following claims against Vantage as set forth in this letter. During contract negotiations, Vantage failed to disdose its financial situation. This failure violated M.G.L c.93A, s.9: "Regulation iof Business Practices for Consumers' Protection". During contract negotiations, Vantage misrepres:ented its ability to fulfill promises made within the contract. The misrepresentation occurred because of Vantage's failure to disclose its financial situation. 11tls faiJure also violated M.G.L c. 93A, s.9. Also, during contract negotiations, because Vantage: failed to both disclose and represent material facts, e.g. Vantage's likely inability to perform the services so contracted, the formation of a contract never truly occurred.
May3, 2013 Page2 of5 After a contract purportedly was formed, Vantage still did not disclose its financial situation, nor its likely inability to fulfill its side of the contract Indeed, Vantage eventually disclosed its financial situation, but only after it had ceased all business operations. Lastly, besides its failure to disclose and represent material facts, Vantage also conunitted common law fraud. Titls firm has investigated the facts as provided, by and through many documents, letters of correspondence, and other such materials provided to this firm. Beginning from February 2012, contract negotiations occurred between and Vantage. During such time, no single mention, nor accurate representation, was made by Vantage about its dire financial situation and its likely inability to perform services as promised t o _ The negotiations began after responded to one of Vantage's advertisements, as seen b y - in a magazine. Vantage marketed the services of "vanity publishing" in its advertisements. The advertisement targeted authors wishing to have their literary works published in exchange for a fee. was so interested in Vantage's services that he decided to contact them by phone. negotiated with a representative of Vantage via a phone conversation. After the phone negotiations, received marketing materials from Vantage via post mail. reviewed these materials, then called Vantage again to negotiate for its services. On April 4, 2012, based on representations made during these negotiations, Vantage Vice President of Author Relations Selina Peyser memorialized an agreement in a memorandum. This memorandum provided the specific details of the agreement between and Vantage, and detailed payment of $9,450.00 in return for Vantage's services. These services included Vantage's publication of Work in book-bound form, as well as making the book form available on "market-leading e-book platforms," in addition to Vantage's copy-editing, and registering the copyright, to Work. Furthermore, the memorandum stated that Vantage's services would be done within a specific period of time, specifically, the production value of Work would be completed within a year o f - payment of his fee to Vantage. -
then contemplated the terms of the memorandum.
In reliance upon Ms. Peyser's verbal and written representations on behalf of Vantage, signed a copy of the memorandum agreement. He mailed the executed agreement, along with a check for $9,450.00, made out to "Vantage Press".
May3, 2013 Page 3of5 also provided a letter along with the agreement and check. In the letter, he expressed his belief that "in good-faith ....Vanta,ge press will carry through [the agreement]". He also expressed his hesitation in entering into the contract with Vantage, writing, "you probably can't imagine how nervous I am [to enter into this contract]." Internally, Vantage was struggling, financially··speaking. However, this important fact was never relayed to during Vantage's negotiations with him. The financial situation provided a real likelihood that Vantage may not have been as outlined in the agreement Also, Vantage's able fulfill its obligations representatives were fully aware of these limiting issues. lnternally, the company had been instituting drastic measures to combat its financial situation. Since 2010, Vantage had been undergoing financial issues, which, had they been accurately disclosed to would have prompted to reconsider entering into contract negotiations with Vantage.
to
to-
Not disclosing a fact which may influence party from entering into an agreement is considered a deceptive business practice and is also a violation of M.G.L c.93A, s. 9 and 940 C.M.R § 3.16(2). See e.g., Yor~~ v. Sullivan, 369 Mass. 157 (1975); Greenfield Country Estates Tenants Ass'n v. Deep,. 423 Mass. 8 1, 84 (1996); Commonwealth v. DeCotis, 366 Mass. 234 (1974). Furthermore, a party's deceptive misrepresentation of its ability to perform services during contract during negotiations is also violation of M.G.L. c.93A, s. 9 and 940 C.M.R § 3.16(2). Id. And that's not the whole story. Even after contract negotiations were completed, assuming arguendo a contract was formed, Vantage still did not disclose ilt's financial limitations to
-
A few weeks after tendered Vantage his monetary payment, received a response from David Lamb, President of V;mtage, (hereafter "Lamb") expressing that the company has received his money and his signed agreement. In Lamb's letter to no mention of Vantage's history of financial duress was made. Moreover, Lamb expressed his confidence in Vantage personnel's ability to in its initial agreement with him. Lamb wrote satisfy the promises made to that Vantage would "do our best to live up to your expectations". Lamb had "specific concerns or questions" to even went on to write that if contact him "personally". Once again, however, no mention was made t o - of Vantage's financial woes, nor of the likely possibility of its inability to perform the promises made on behalf of Vantage in its initial agreement w i t h -
to-
Meanwhile, made preparations for Work's imminent publication, including notifying local bookstores, magazine editors, etc. of its publication date.
May3, 2013
Page 4of5 After several months passed, grew curious of the status of services promised by Vantage in the agreement. He made numerous phone calls to Vantage regarding the status of Work's publication. Vantage representatives did not return an~ phone calls to the company. There was little to no indication made to~Vantage had actually performed any of the services promised to him. The last conversation had with a Vantage representative was in November 2012, with Sharon Pellitier. She assured via phone, that, per the agreement, the Work would be ready for publication on time, specifically, in April 2013. Again, during her phone call with there was no mention by Ms. Pellitier of Vantage's present dire financial situation. On December 19, 2012, a letter from Attorney Collins and addressed to advised that Vantage had "ceased all business operations" on account of its financial hardships. This communication occurred only a few weeks a f t e r - last conversation with Vantage. Contrary to the prior representations made by Vantage and its agents, there was little chance t h a t - contract could ever, or wou.ld ever, be successfully completed per the terms of the initial agreement with Vantage.
firm.-
has experienced a loss of $9,4500.00, plus other expenses. These has expenses include, but are not limited to, legal fees incurred by this also experienced a loss of financial opportunity in regards to monetizing and publishing Work. In light of the clear and obvious violations of law and damages cause by Vantage, this office requests Vantage settle these liabilities. Specifically, this firm demands Vantage provide for treble damages of $9,450.00, totaling $28,350.00. In addition, this firm demands Vantage provide reasonable legal fees incurred be recouped b y -
M.G.L. c.93A, s.9, allows for thirty (30) days from the receipt of this letter for the respondent to proffer a reasonable tender of settlement. Failure to do so may, by itself, expose Vantage to multiple damages, in addition to the remuneration of reasonable attorney's fees incurred by Law Offices of Marvin Cable for the prosecution of this action. I look forward to your response,
· ~~~£-Marvin Cable Attorney at Law
May3, 2013 Page 5of5
cc:
Joseph B. Collins
101 State Street Springfield, MA 01102
7011 2970 0000 5574 1254
LAW OFFICES OF
MARVIN GABLE
P.O. B ox 1630
NORTHAMPTON,
(41 3) 268-6500 -
MA 0106 1
P HONE 8t F AX MARVINCA B L.E.COM
II
11
1111
7D11 297D DODD 5574 1254
SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION
COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
• Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 If Restricted Delivery is desired. • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front If space permits.
A. Signature
I
1. Article Addrossed to :
0
x B. Received by (Printed Name)
C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from ltom 1? 0 Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
. f3aryke Type i!r
MARVIN GAEJLE
P.O. BOX 1630
NORTHAMPTON, MA 01061
(413) 268-6500 ·PHONE Bir
FAX
MARYi NCABLE.COM
May3, 2013 David Lamb
Re: -
v. Vantage and Lamb
Dear Mr. Lamb: This firm represents (hereafter . _ regarding the damages he sustained from his relationship with Vantage Press, Inc. (hereafter "Vantage"). He is the author of the literary work,._ (hereafter "Work"). This is a fonnal demand letter sent pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws (M.G.L) Chapter (c.) 93A, Section (s.) 9. This letter is sent to you because of your designation as the registered agent for Vantage. If you are not authorized to receive this demand on behalf of Vantage, please provide this firm with the name and address of the appropriate party to whom this demand letter should be remitted. A copy of this letter has also been sent to Attorney Joseph B. Collins, of Springfield, MA We are informed that he might represent you in this matter. Additionally, a separate demand letter will be sent to Lamb in his personal capacity. Please also review the following claims against Vantage as set forth in this letter. During contract negotiations, Vantage failed to disdose its financial situation. This failure violated M.G.L c.93A, s.9: "Regulation iof Business Practices for Consumers' Protection". During contract negotiations, Vantage misrepres:ented its ability to fulfill promises made within the contract. The misrepresentation occurred because of Vantage's failure to disclose its financial situation. 11tls faiJure also violated M.G.L c. 93A, s.9. Also, during contract negotiations, because Vantage: failed to both disclose and represent material facts, e.g. Vantage's likely inability to perform the services so contracted, the formation of a contract never truly occurred.
May3, 2013 Page2 of5 After a contract purportedly was formed, Vantage still did not disclose its financial situation, nor its likely inability to fulfill its side of the contract Indeed, Vantage eventually disclosed its financial situation, but only after it had ceased all business operations. Lastly, besides its failure to disclose and represent material facts, Vantage also conunitted common law fraud. Titls firm has investigated the facts as provided, by and through many documents, letters of correspondence, and other such materials provided to this firm. Beginning from February 2012, contract negotiations occurred between and Vantage. During such time, no single mention, nor accurate representation, was made by Vantage about its dire financial situation and its likely inability to perform services as promised t o _ The negotiations began after responded to one of Vantage's advertisements, as seen b y - in a magazine. Vantage marketed the services of "vanity publishing" in its advertisements. The advertisement targeted authors wishing to have their literary works published in exchange for a fee. was so interested in Vantage's services that he decided to contact them by phone. negotiated with a representative of Vantage via a phone conversation. After the phone negotiations, received marketing materials from Vantage via post mail. reviewed these materials, then called Vantage again to negotiate for its services. On April 4, 2012, based on representations made during these negotiations, Vantage Vice President of Author Relations Selina Peyser memorialized an agreement in a memorandum. This memorandum provided the specific details of the agreement between and Vantage, and detailed payment of $9,450.00 in return for Vantage's services. These services included Vantage's publication of Work in book-bound form, as well as making the book form available on "market-leading e-book platforms," in addition to Vantage's copy-editing, and registering the copyright, to Work. Furthermore, the memorandum stated that Vantage's services would be done within a specific period of time, specifically, the production value of Work would be completed within a year o f - payment of his fee to Vantage. -
then contemplated the terms of the memorandum.
In reliance upon Ms. Peyser's verbal and written representations on behalf of Vantage, signed a copy of the memorandum agreement. He mailed the executed agreement, along with a check for $9,450.00, made out to "Vantage Press".
May3, 2013 Page 3of5 also provided a letter along with the agreement and check. In the letter, he expressed his belief that "in good-faith ....Vanta,ge press will carry through [the agreement]". He also expressed his hesitation in entering into the contract with Vantage, writing, "you probably can't imagine how nervous I am [to enter into this contract]." Internally, Vantage was struggling, financially··speaking. However, this important fact was never relayed to during Vantage's negotiations with him. The financial situation provided a real likelihood that Vantage may not have been as outlined in the agreement Also, Vantage's able fulfill its obligations representatives were fully aware of these limiting issues. lnternally, the company had been instituting drastic measures to combat its financial situation. Since 2010, Vantage had been undergoing financial issues, which, had they been accurately disclosed to would have prompted to reconsider entering into contract negotiations with Vantage.
to
to-
Not disclosing a fact which may influence party from entering into an agreement is considered a deceptive business practice and is also a violation of M.G.L c.93A, s. 9 and 940 C.M.R § 3.16(2). See e.g., Yor~~ v. Sullivan, 369 Mass. 157 (1975); Greenfield Country Estates Tenants Ass'n v. Deep,. 423 Mass. 8 1, 84 (1996); Commonwealth v. DeCotis, 366 Mass. 234 (1974). Furthermore, a party's deceptive misrepresentation of its ability to perform services during contract during negotiations is also violation of M.G.L. c.93A, s. 9 and 940 C.M.R § 3.16(2). Id. And that's not the whole story. Even after contract negotiations were completed, assuming arguendo a contract was formed, Vantage still did not disclose ilt's financial limitations to
-
A few weeks after tendered Vantage his monetary payment, received a response from David Lamb, President of V;mtage, (hereafter "Lamb") expressing that the company has received his money and his signed agreement. In Lamb's letter to no mention of Vantage's history of financial duress was made. Moreover, Lamb expressed his confidence in Vantage personnel's ability to in its initial agreement with him. Lamb wrote satisfy the promises made to that Vantage would "do our best to live up to your expectations". Lamb had "specific concerns or questions" to even went on to write that if contact him "personally". Once again, however, no mention was made t o - of Vantage's financial woes, nor of the likely possibility of its inability to perform the promises made on behalf of Vantage in its initial agreement w i t h -
to-
Meanwhile, made preparations for Work's imminent publication, including notifying local bookstores, magazine editors, etc. of its publication date.
May3, 2013
Page 4of5 After several months passed, grew curious of the status of services promised by Vantage in the agreement. He made numerous phone calls to Vantage regarding the status of Work's publication. Vantage representatives did not return an~ phone calls to the company. There was little to no indication made to~Vantage had actually performed any of the services promised to him. The last conversation had with a Vantage representative was in November 2012, with Sharon Pellitier. She assured via phone, that, per the agreement, the Work would be ready for publication on time, specifically, in April 2013. Again, during her phone call with there was no mention by Ms. Pellitier of Vantage's present dire financial situation. On December 19, 2012, a letter from Attorney Collins and addressed to advised that Vantage had "ceased all business operations" on account of its financial hardships. This communication occurred only a few weeks a f t e r - last conversation with Vantage. Contrary to the prior representations made by Vantage and its agents, there was little chance t h a t - contract could ever, or wou.ld ever, be successfully completed per the terms of the initial agreement with Vantage.
firm.-
has experienced a loss of $9,4500.00, plus other expenses. These has expenses include, but are not limited to, legal fees incurred by this also experienced a loss of financial opportunity in regards to monetizing and publishing Work. In light of the clear and obvious violations of law and damages cause by Vantage, this office requests Vantage settle these liabilities. Specifically, this firm demands Vantage provide for treble damages of $9,450.00, totaling $28,350.00. In addition, this firm demands Vantage provide reasonable legal fees incurred be recouped b y -
M.G.L. c.93A, s.9, allows for thirty (30) days from the receipt of this letter for the respondent to proffer a reasonable tender of settlement. Failure to do so may, by itself, expose Vantage to multiple damages, in addition to the remuneration of reasonable attorney's fees incurred by Law Offices of Marvin Cable for the prosecution of this action. I look forward to your response,
· ~~~£-Marvin Cable Attorney at Law
May3, 2013 Page 5of5
cc:
Joseph B. Collins
101 State Street Springfield, MA 01102
7011 2970 0000 5574 1254
LAW OFFICES OF
MARVIN GABLE
P.O. B ox 1630
NORTHAMPTON,
(41 3) 268-6500 -
MA 0106 1
P HONE 8t F AX MARVINCA B L.E.COM
II
11
1111
7D11 297D DODD 5574 1254
SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION
COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
• Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 If Restricted Delivery is desired. • Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front If space permits.
A. Signature
I
1. Article Addrossed to :
0
x B. Received by (Printed Name)
C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from ltom 1? 0 Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: 0 No
. f3aryke Type i!r
