Being Sued for a chargeback?

I recently purchased a website for 3,000 which the owner said had generated about ~$700 a month income from adsense and paypal. However I get the website and it's generating like $30 a month...I'm obviously upset and tell the owner I want to push the domain back or else I will do a chargeback as the website has been misrepresented. They said the sale was final and they never guaranteed the website would make that much money. They said they will be filing a lawsuit against me and a summons if I do the chargeback.

Do they have a case? Not sure what I should do as I do not really have money for my own lawyer

 

I don't think you're charge back will go through so it's not an issue.

Did the seller certify revenue?

Did the seller guarantee a minimum income?

Did the seller give a conditional refund, up-front and prior to the sale?

The disparity in the amount of alleged prior income versus current income is great and that's sad, but I'm not sure what recourse you have without something to back up a claim of fraud.

Sorry, but that's how I sadly read this one ...

A site earning 700 a month. Didn't the 3K price seem a little suspicious?

 

That's why you write up a contract in which they sign these claims as true. Right now you probably don't have a leg to stand on.

 

Neither a lef nor a leg ... sorry

 

Seller had screen shots and all the stats proving income. I'm pretty sure my credit card company would honor my claim... just worried about being sued afterwards.

 

Then again, maybe those screenies were correct and it's just bad luck or bad management from your part.

 

Isn't a chargeback more related to charges that you did not initiate? In this case you did get exactly what you purchased, a website. The fact that the stats are not what you expected is not the fault of the credit card company. You have should used an escrow service if you wanted to test the waters as such.

 

No, you can initiate a charge back for a variety of reasons, even service related and not necessarily just for goods. If the seller did not perform the service, or provide a product substandard to what was advertised, the consumer generally has the option of initiating the procedure to recover the funds from their CC company. Depending on the company, they will send notice to the seller (recipient of the funds) and give them varying amounts of time to respond.

I'm not sure how strong the case is in this situation, but if the buyer truly feels ripped off, it can't hurt to discuss the matter with their credit card company. IF the seller knows that they truly defrauded the buyer, they're not likely going to attempt or risk small claims lawsuit that could come back to bite them in the butt and cost them more than refunding the 3K ...

 

Do a chargeback. If they sue you, that's going to be small claims court in your county. If they are not local, they'll have to travel to where you live (expense)
You don't need a lawyer, small claims judges are used to litigants who represent themselves. He misrepresented the goods. Not having a written contract does not mean that there is no contract. In most jurisdictions, any contract is good - written, oral, implied, whatever.
P.S. I am assuming you are in the US...

 

I'm certainly not an attorney, but I would do a chargeback and defend a lawsuit. It's probably hot air anyway just to scare you. It will cost them more than it's worth to prosecute such a suit. Just my two cents.

 

do a chargeback, if it succesful give them their crap back IMO

 

The problem is that the $700 a month revenue could have been from a $1000 a month in advertising. Once the seller stops pumping money into the site, earnings drops to what you see now. When you're looking at a site you should really be looking at what its potential is rather than its current revenue and traffic. You have to remember that if a site is making easy money on its own it's not likely someones just going to sell it for no reason.

Like T0PS3O pointed out it is possible the sale was made in good faith. Maybe the guy was using a good promotional method you're not aware of. If the guy is legit, and you haven't pissed him off too much maybe he'll help you out and tell you what he was doing to promote the site.

 

Even though the chances for a successful chargeback are slim, you should try anyway. When you do the chargeback don't tell the bank your story - just tell the bank that the charge was not authorized, and that you have no idea where it came from. ANYTHING else you say will mess up any chance of success you might have at a successful chargeback.

Assuming you are successful with your chargeback, he may elect to sue you. First, if he is in another state or another country, he will spend far more than $3,000 to prosecute this case. Additionally, he would have to prove you authorized the transaction. The first thing he would probably do is hire a lawyer for $100 to send you a scary letter. Ignore it.

Anything serious will come via constable from the county or district court as a certified letter requiring a signature. Anything thing else is an empty threat.

With that said, next time you decide to buy something like this, spend a couple hundred dollars on an attorney to work the deal out for you. It will save you a TON of grief later.

 

Unless you used PayPal to transfer the money, then a whole new set of rules applies.

 

Yes the person lives in another state and I am in MA. I paid by paypal..he said he will have his lawyer contact my credit card company if I try anything.

The problem is if I tell my credit card company I did not authorize the charge he has email messages I sent to him regarding the website...couldn't they use that as evidence that I indeed initiated the transaction? Also won't the person try to sue me for 3 times the damage? i.e $9,000 ?

 

yes,
your only argument is that the goods were not delivered as stated. so you need hard proof of that if you are going to court

 

Would fraud website sale count as faulty goods, or just simple fraud?

Rob

 

The burden of proof falls onto the person trying to sue me..isn't this correct? All I have to do is defend myself.

 

idk why he would sue you, wouldnt the cost of legal fee's and lawyer etc be more than what he paid himself?
what would be the point of sueing if he would waste that amount just to get it back, and he would be still at a loss.
Did you get anything from his lawyer yet? if you did he is serious.
If not, he might just be scaring you to get his money back.

 

Exactomundo. It's highly unlikely he'll sue. Even more unlikely that he wins. And if he wins and you still don't pay, unlikely that he will be able to collect. The court won't collect for him