Miranda aka Mirandaleigh

[col-eviscerator.livejournal.com]

WHO: Mirandaleigh, Mirachan, Miranda



WHERE: http://smokingpen.com/ http://mirandaleigh.deviantart.com/ https://www.furaffinity.net/user/mirandaleigh/

WHAT: Five quick ink sketches in return for a papo allosaurus from her amazon wishlist


WHEN: First made the arrangement in March 2010, asked for an update via FA notes in December 2011, and by email on October 2012 as well as in a journal on her FA page.

PROOF: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/50799487/stuff/MirandaLeigh/Mirachanemailcap01.png
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/50799487/stuff/MirandaLeigh/MirandaLeighSS2.png

EXPLAIN: Okay, in 2010 she made a journal offering five sketches in return for objects from her wishlist.  I purchased one and sat in to wait.  For the past two and a half years I've contacted her...three times I think asking for updates and received nothing until I asked on a recent journal here: 
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/50799487/stuff/MirandaLeigh/MirandaLeighSS1.png and here: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/50799487/stuff/MirandaLeigh/MirandaLeighSS3.png
And continuing in the journal itself: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/3908827/ Dunno if AgentKira is just a sockpuppet or what, but I blocked them because....it just ain't worth a flamewar.

It's only twenty bucks, I'd accept a refund gladly. It's just..the principle of the thing. Being patient, getting no response, then..just...how she handled it when I asked in public.  Anyhow, if I left anything out, I'll edit in more screencaps.

UPDATE: Received email from Miranda : https://dl.dropbox.com/u/50799487/stuff/MirandaLeigh/MirandaLeighEmailCap01.png I do not know how I should proceed.

Comments

[neolucky.livejournal.com]

I do not think her journal constitutes as a binding contract, as there is no place for the client to agree to it or sign on it. Having a "no refunds or deadline" policy would not legally be viable, or hold in a court of law.

[shukivengeance.livejournal.com]

I believe it could be considered a verbal contract, and those can be binding.

[neolucky.livejournal.com]

True, but I wonder if the charge of theft would trump that contract? Withholding money without a product (upon agreement of working for it) would certainly be considered that. I certainly don't know the law well enough to say one way or the other.

I also wonder if ANY of her customers actually agree to her tos, or even realize they're being bound to one? She doesn't seem to make that very clear.

[sintocat.livejournal.com]

If a commissioner states "I agree to the terms of this commission" in a note, than it can be considered binding - you don't need a signature. Even a handshake without verbal conformation can be held up in court as a binding contract. I'm a little iffy on the no refund bit, but in all honesty if the commissioner agrees, it doesn't really matter. Saying you wont refund money isn't illegal - though it is extremely bad business.

[neolucky.livejournal.com]

Ah I totally agree, but that's on the assumption the client agreed to anything at all.

I believe it is against the law to steal money and not deliver a product, and that's technically what she's doing right now by withholding his money/item/trade. The no refund thing is incredibly gross in general, I hope the people who bought commissions from her under this premise realize how bad a deal it is to agree to.

[col-eviscerator.livejournal.com]

Irrelevant really, as it was never stipulated in the commission journal I responded to or terms I accepted.

[sintocat.livejournal.com]

I agree, it's a horrible contract and people should stay far away from it :(

After reading over her terms, the only way she could get away with not having to give a refund is if she stated "No refunds will be given even if no work is provided." If that was agreed to, than she would never have to pay. That is not the case though.

Also, was flipping through my law book (taking several law classes for my major, only reason I know any of this nonsense lol) And that she is in breach of the contract. There is a factor of time in a contract, that it must be completed in a designated time or in a reasonable amount of time depending on the job. It being over two years is not a reasonable time, and there for she is in breach, making it void. :P

Not that I think he would every bring this to court, but always good to know.

[0acorn0.livejournal.com]

I think verbal contracts are only applicable in some states anyways.