Originally Posted by
Dan Druff
This one isn't as simple as it first appeared, and public sentiment is definitely turning against Standard Backing at the moment, due to their unreasonable penalty enforcement.
Many on Twitter are calling them "usurious", and some are even suggesting to Raechel that she should stiff them entirely as a result.
She mentioned "arbitration", yet I don't know what she means. Someone they already know? Professional arbitration? The latter would be way too expensive for a matter of $7,300.
I volunteered to arbitrate for free. We will see if they take me up on it.
In any case, here are the facts:
1) Raechel and Standard Backing both agree that she stole the $7,300 which was supposed to have been paid to Standard Backing. So right there, it's clear that, at minimum, Raechel owes them $7,300.
2) Standard Backing allowed her to pay $50 per week, which she acknowledges was "lenient" (and I agree).
3) Both sides agree that she made 4 payments, and then couldn't keep paying.
4) There is some disagreement/confusion regarding when Raechel knew about the penalty, and the amount of it.
Here's my opinion at the moment:
1) Raechel needs to get a job and start earning the money back. It is ridiculous that she asserts she can't afford $50/week.
2) Standard Backing needs to drop the 100% penalty, regardless of what was agreed to. In fact, that penalty may be illegal anyway. In fact, they should drop all of the penalties and just focus upon the $7,300 owed.
3) Standard Backing DOES have a right to be skeptical regarding her ability/willingness to pay regularly. That was the reason they demanded the penalty, so this way she is incentivized to keep on schedule with the $50 payments, which will indeed take about 3 years to pay off, even if she sticks to it. However, the penalty isn't really the way to go here, and right now we see exactly why.
4) Raechel needs to voluntarily assign $100 from every bi-weekly paycheck (or $50 from each weekly paycheck) to Standard Backing, once she gets a job. If she already has a job, she needs to do this now. A voluntary assignment is similar to a wage garnishment, except it's one where the employee agrees to allow a third party to take part of their wages.
5) The wage assignment above is important, because Raechel seems to have a gambling and self-control problem, and this is the only way Standard Backing can be assured she regularly pays.
Alternately, if Raechel can somehow get backing with another person, in lieu of a job, she needs to have part of the backing deal involving paying back Standard Backing. They can be paid back out of profits, at some sort of agreed-upon rate. And the new backer needs to be informed of this, and agree to it. However, I think a job would be better at this point.
