legal question

[Muxel]

This is not true in US contract law, in fact, quite the opposite is the norm.

....You're right. (Sorry Gonzo )

Webglider and Dr. Jekyll never even discussed what would happen in the event of an early termination (Webglider has to move, reacts poorly to the treatments, whatever?) hence there was NO agreement.

I disagree. Since early termination was never brought up, webglider is liable for the entire contract duration. The lack of an early termination clause does not make null and void a contract by default.

Healer can legally force webglider to continue with the family plan if he wants to, but he has agreed to negotiate a termination with webglider.

I repeat, webglider must choose Option 2 without the $916.66.


As cholas accurately put it:

And it sounds like you might be using the fact that he's not nice to justify this action.

Certain people on this thread were too empathetic, which compromised their ability to advise webglider on a cold hard legal issue, which in turn led webglider astray into the question of ethics (which paradoxically has NOTHING to do with the law), and now webglider is trying to justify not paying ANYTHING?! Webglider, the fact that you are doing the Work is not going to hold up in court! Do you think it's worth investing profuse amounts of energy into blowing this out of proportion, thoroughly revamping the way Healer does business in the future, and setting god-knows-what precedents? If you conjecture that Healer is a failed OP, surely you would want to cut ties immediately, and Option 2 without the $916.66 is the simplest (and legal) way to do it! But nobody listens to me.

 

[Muxel]

I'd also like to retract my previous statement to go2:

I'm sorry go2, but empathy and negotiation are futile when a contract is broken.

Negotiation is not always futile, as webglider managed to negotiate contract termination with Healer (notwithstanding the $916.66 curveball).

 

[Finduilas495]

I would answer his mail, based on what you know now, addressing each point accurately and briefly; just think about the possibility that He'll report the non-payment, and you'll receive the complaint without having a formal complaint or at least a mail response where you clearly state that He never agreed with you any of the above (his mail), and that He is not entitled to invent the terms of resolution, based on the advice you've been given by the Office of Professional Discipline.

And if you don't want to engage with him in order to reach a satisfactory agreement, then you may need to make the official complaint, osit.

I've found that it is better to leave things as clarified as possible before turning away...

FWIW, I agree with Ana. In your situation, I would inform the acupuncturist about what you've been told by the Office of Professional Discipline. If he backs down, I'd leave it at that, if he doesn't, I'd file the official complaint. I seriously doubt that he will follow through with a collection agency or small claims court, since I still suspect that the contract would be considered immoral (if it existed in writing), but if he does, you have the paperwork to prove you owe him nothing.

 

[go2]

Having having said all of this, and knowing what I know about the procession of all the little i's I would appreciate feedback as to whether this is a decision based on objective reality or one created by one of the little i's. I don't want to fall into one of the many traps on this path.

Life happens, when we are asleep. The study of our relationship and reaction to authority shines the light on many hidden Not ‘I’s that keep us asleep. Do you resent the acupuncturist, webglider? Do you identify with a feeling of self-pity because you have to attend to the legal authority vested in an oral contract? What about our reaction to the implied authority of money and law which govern our relationships on all levels in the modern world?

It is my experience that Not ‘I’s of anger, revenge, self-pity, fear, etc. take more energy and time than negotiating with authority and earning the money to render unto Caesar, what is Caesar’ s.

So, yes I do see Not ‘I’s parading around, in your behavior and words and in other's posts, even my own. We hate authority which forces us to pay with our lives, contracts we don’t remember signing. Life is an authority, demanding and ruthless if we rebel or are ignorant of the Laws of Nature. Civilization is an authority I can easily hate. It isn't fair. Yes, that is objective reality on this planet. It challenges us to overcome internal emotional reaction, which makes us ineffective in assuming our own authority as conscious men and women in all aspects of Life.

When you ask for legal advice it triggers Not ‘I’s we don’t see everyday. This thread is a veritable Tower of Babel as individual Not ‘I’s react to authority implicit in money and laws of civilization.

It has helped me to discover and not identify with some of these Not ‘I’s triggered by authority, by writing a recapitulation of my relationship to authority in all its manifestations, beginning with mom and dad. It helps to become empowered with our own authority when we know our history and responsibility. Even the word breech suggests we have done something wrong; it is a hypnotic suggestion to trigger fear and immobilization when faced with a minor threat of legal action.

It is my opinion that your subjectivity inhibits objective perception of this event. It is not uncommon for us to lose objectivity, when faced with the threat of authority of law and money. If this rings true for you, please retain a lawyer as anart suggested pages ago. Life will happen to you, if you do not act to acknowledge the reality of authority of law.

Your visit to the office and the email are a negotiation of what you must pay to breech the contract. It sounds condemnatory, but it is just legal jargon. You can do this yourself; but if you can’t summon your own authority to negotiate, you must retain a lawyer to negotiate ending the contractual relationship or you will pay the full price by default. You will miss the satisfaction and learning from asserting your authority as a conscious human being negotiating directly with Life. Do not fear mistakes, your good will is worth more than you realize, either with the acupuncturist or in a court of law.

 

[Muxel]

I seriously doubt that he will follow through with a collection agency or small claims court, since I still suspect that the contract would be considered immoral (if it existed in writing), but if he does, you have the paperwork to prove you owe him nothing.

Uh, webglider owes Healer the $625 difference that would've been discounted in the family plan, plus a negotiable penalty.

 

[anart]

If you conjecture that Healer is a failed OP, surely you would want to cut ties immediately, and Option 2 without the $916.66 is the simplest (and legal) way to do it! But nobody listens to me.

Are you a contract lawyer?

 

[webglider]

quote by Muxel:

Why are you still talking about little I's and the U.S. Patient's Bill of Rights?

The little I's are everything - the most important insight that can come from this is how these little I's affect how I live my life in this world. When I first wrote about this issue, I believed that I was in the wrong and that I needed to make restitution for breaking a "contract". The sensation I felt in my body was one of expansion. My breathing was regular. All was right with the world - until I opened that email. I was totally stunned.

I analyzed the email for its emotional message. It didn't long to figure out that the tone of the message was that of a threat - if I didn't do
what he asked, by when he asked, some unstated consequence would befall me. At that point I was confused - why was the penalty so high?
And then, the part where he writes that if I take first option and continue treatment everyone wins.

No. I don't want more treatment. It's a win for him if I take the first option - not for me. I felt manipulated nd disoriented and that's why I began this thread.

Laura's response had a major effect on me:

Ummm... a "healer" type person who acts like this is bad news. If you didn't sign anything, ditch him and never go back and never recommend him to anyone else.

The NERVE!

Her advice was to ditch him which I interpreted to mean to not pay him. (I could be wrong)

So now I had another conflict: whose judgement is better - mine or Laura's? I decided to go with Laura's.

The feeling I now had was no longer warm and expansive - it was anxiety. What exactly is going on? How much harm could he cause me? So I stared doing research and learned that oral contraScts are binding. That was news to me, but that bit of information is irrelevant as I had already offered to pay him. I was expecting some sort of acknowledgment of good will on my part. Instead I got a threat.

Most people on the forum also thought that his behavior was inappropriate and even pathological. If the peson I'm dealing with is a psychopath, then his business dealings could very well be dishonest. Do I have to honor a dishonest agreement?

This is why The Patient's Bill of Rights is crucial. It gives me legal standing under the law which states, Profesional Misconduct is Against the Law.

Is his conduct against the law? I think it is. The Patient's Bill of Rights states:

RECEIVE CLEAR EXPLANTION OF THE SERVICES BEING OFFERED OR PROVIDED AND HOW MUCH THEY COST.

REFUSE ANY SERVICES OFFERED.

TREAT YOU WITH RESPECT AND COURTESY

and most importantly:

EXPLAIN YOUR SERVICE OPTIONS, INLUDING THEIR CONSEQUENCES

He violated the law when he did no devulge the consequences. Why didn't he? Maybe he thought if I knew I could be sued for breaking the contract, I wouldn't have signed it. When I told him of the circumstance in which I would leave, he remained silent.

His silence is a lie. Do I owe anything to a man who lies to me? I think not, and since the language of the Patient's Bill of Rights seems to indicate that I don't, and since The Patient's Bill of Rights gives me standing under the law, I feel I am protected.

Do not disparage Legal Standing. It is everything. It is why corporations wanted the Supreme Court to enact Citizens United into law. This gave corprations personhood, legal standing under the law.

Women once did not have Legal Standing and we were treated as chattel. So were African Americans. That's why both groups fought for personhood. Once you have legal standing you have rights. Once you have rights, you have some protection.

That's why there is a movement in the United States to give personhood, legal standing to communities and ecosystems to stop the corporations from raping the land. Pittsburgh has used that argument to enact a ban within its city limits which is still in effect. Ecuador has a Declaration of The Rights of Nature written into its constitution.

So to get back to what differentiating between the little I's and the real I, it is important I think, to revisit to my original motivating cause - what course of action is ethical? Do I have to play by the rules if the other person is breaking them?

If I pay this acupuncturist, aren't I strengthening his pathology and encouraging and abetting him to do the same to others? Laura said ditch him, not pay him.

This $625 difference is true in my moral universe, not the penalty as I was not informed of a penalty.

My reservation in paying the penalty is that it may give credence to the whole list of payments and provide a platform in which he could argue that payment of one part is tacit agreement to payment for every part. I have to find out if paying him will do that.

Quote by Finduilas495

FWIW, I agree with Ana. In your situation, I would inform the acupuncturist about what you've been told by the Office of Professional Discipline. If he backs down, I'd leave it at that, if he doesn't, I'd file the official complaint. I seriously doubt that he will follow through with a collection agency or small claims court, since I still suspect that the contract would be considered immoral (if it existed in writing), but if he does, you have the paperwork to prove you owe him nothing.

I am seriously considering taking your advice.

 

[Muxel]

That was news to me, but that bit of information is irrelevant as I had already offered to pay him. I was expecting some sort of acknowledgment of good will on my part.

Which you might've gotten had you been doing business with the Circle People. In an ideal world, Healer wouldn't even hear of taking another penny from your financially-distressed self. You must navigate within the current Matrix reality where things like contract laws exist.

He violated the law when he did no devulge the consequences. Why didn't he? Maybe he thought if I knew I could be sued for breaking the contract, I wouldn't have signed it. When I told him of the circumstance in which I would leave, he remained silent.

(1) You agreed to the oral contract which lacked an early termination clause. (Ignorance endangers / Caveat emptor)
(2) Your inaction right after your daughter dropped out of the family plan, and during the 2 months of no contact, disqualifies you from "early termination" (assuming you even had an early termination clause).
(3) Generally, a penalty is charged for early termination.
(4) After negotiation, Healer offers to terminate contract with Option 2. However Healer adds in "$916.66 late payment" which violates original contract.

Are you absolutely willing to use "breach of Divulgence of Consequences as per U.S. Patient's Bill of Rights" to void the entire contract and evade a $550 penalty? I'm not saying you can't, I'm asking you if you think it's worth doing. What is stopping Healer from hiring a lawyer himself to debate the loose definition of "consequences" and invoke laws designed to protect businesses? Are you confident that your position has no exploitable holes in it? If Healer gets offended and spitefully forbids termination of contract, then the probability waves have collapsed and you have no choice but to go the route of voiding said contract. All paths are lessons.

Are you a contract lawyer?

No. I think I see what you mean, for my previous insistence shows I was not honoring webglider's free will.

It is my experience that Not ‘I’s of anger, revenge, self-pity, fear, etc. take more energy and time than negotiating with authority and earning the money to render unto Caesar, what is Caesar’ s.

This is a very interesting way of putting it. :) I was thinking about what Gurdjieff, or an Alchemist, or a Wanderer, would say about webglider's situation. Or what they would do in webglider's shoes. Wouldn't they be like sly foxes and sidestep the forces of the Matrix, in order that energy may be more efficiently used elsewhere, rather than openly challenge the Matrix?

 

[anart]

Are you a contract lawyer?

No. I think I see what you mean, for my previous insistence shows I was not honoring webglider's free will.

Not only that, you're writing as if there is no doubt whatsoever that you are correct. In fact, your vehemence is a sign that you're not being at all objective about this situation. What if you're completely wrong?

 

[webglider]

quote by go2

Life happens, when we are asleep. The study of our relationship and reaction to authority shines the light on many hidden Not ‘I’s that keep us asleep. Do you resent the acupuncturist, webglider? Do you identify with a feeling of self-pity because you have to attend to the legal authority vested in an oral contract? What about our reaction to the implied authority of money and law which govern our relationships on all levels in the modern world?

It is my experience that Not ‘I’s of anger, revenge, self-pity, fear, etc. take more energy and time than negotiating with authority and earning the money to render unto Caesar, what is Caesar’ s.

So, yes I do see Not ‘I’s parading around, in your behavior and words and in other's posts, even my own. We hate authority which forces us to pay with our lives, contracts we don’t remember signing. Life is an authority, demanding and ruthless if we rebel or are ignorant of the Laws of Nature. Civilization is an authority I can easily hate. It isn't fair. Yes, that is objective reality on this planet. It challenges us to overcome internal emotional reaction, which makes us ineffective in assuming our own authority as conscious men and women in all aspects of Life.

When you ask for legal advice it triggers Not ‘I’s we don’t see everyday. This thread is a veritable Tower of Babel as individual Not ‘I’s react to authority implicit in money and laws of civilization.

It has helped me to discover and not identify with some of these Not ‘I’s triggered by authority, by writing a recapitulation of my relationship to authority in all its manifestations, beginning with mom and dad. It helps to become empowered with our own authority when we know our history and responsibility. Even the word breech suggests we have done something wrong; it is a hypnotic suggestion to trigger fear and immobilization when faced with a minor threat of legal action.

It is my opinion that your subjectivity inhibits objective perception of this event. It is not uncommon for us to lose objectivity, when faced with the threat of authority of law and money. If this rings true for you, please retain a lawyer as anart suggested pages ago. Life will happen to you, if you do not act to acknowledge the reality of authority of law.

Your visit to the office and the email are a negotiation of what you must pay to breech the contract. It sounds condemnatory, but it is just legal jargon. You can do this yourself; but if you can’t summon your own authority to negotiate, you must retain a lawyer to negotiate ending the contractual relationship or you will pay the full price by default. You will miss the satisfaction and learning from asserting your authority as a conscious human being negotiating directly with Life. Do not fear mistakes, your good will is worth more than you realize, either with the acupuncturist or in a court of law.

We hate authority which forces us to pay with our lives, contracts we don’t remember signing.

quote from go2

Life happens, when we are asleep. The study of our relationship and reaction to authority shines the light on many hidden Not ‘I’s that keep us asleep.

I agree with the asleep part, and if you change the word "authority" to psychopath, I'll agree with the second clause of your sentence.

I'm not really sure what you mean by "authority" here. Authority can be just or unjust. It can also be valid or invalid. I agree that it's useless to hate unjust authority, but that it is necessary to identify and oppose it even if the opposition is only an internal one.

quote from go2:

Even the word breech suggests we have done something wrong; it is a hypnotic suggestion to trigger fear and immobilization when faced with a minor threat of legal action.

Yes, this is true. It's called intimidation. A threat of legal action is not a minor threat. If carried out, it could damage credit, and cast suspicion on one's character. It was the tone of the response that was off and alerted me that something was seriously wrong with this guy. Why threaten someone who has agreed to make restitution? Why did I have to reply by the end of business hours whatever that means? A normal person would, I think, respond with gratitude that I offered such a settlement. At that point, a man I had considered an authority in his field presented himself as having the authority to dictate my response. He has no such authority. He should have just said, thank you, let's come up with a payment schedule that would work for both of us. That's what a normal person would do osits.

It is my opinion that your subjectivity inhibits objective perception of this event. It is not uncommon for us to lose objectivity, when faced with the threat of authority of law and money. If this rings true for you, please retain a lawyer as anart suggested pages ago. Life will happen to you, if you do not act to acknowledge the reality of authority of law.

There is nothing subjective about my perception of this event. The person I spoke to at the office that regulates the practice of acupuncture in New York State was concerned about the incident enough to send me a Professional Discipline Complaint Form. The person I spoke to at The Office of Professional Discipline responded to the acupuncturist's behavior by saying, "That's just wrong to charge for a service that wasn't given." and she sent me the form.

I have contacted two established authorities that have higher authority than the acupuncturist, and I have chosen to heed their advice rather than the acupuncturist's threats. This is not a subjective decision, but rather one made after much research, reading and reflecting on the input of forum members who commented on this thread and much thought.

your good will is worth more than you realize, either with the acupuncturist or in a court of law

Yes, I agree - it has made me food for all these years.





























e done something wrong; it is a hypnotic suggestion to trigger fear and immobilization when faced with a minor threat of legal action. I c
[/quote]

The language use was chosen to have exactly the effect you describe. The threat of legal action is not a minor threat.

 

[Laura]

Webglider, ditch the "be nice" program and file the complaint. The guy's a sloozer and manipulator. Don't respond to any emails. Just file the complaint.

 

[Laura]

Also, get it over with. Enough energy has been wasted on this.

 

[Mr. Premise]

Are you a contract lawyer?

No. I think I see what you mean, for my previous insistence shows I was not honoring webglider's free will.

Not only that, you're writing as if there is no doubt whatsoever that you are correct. In fact, your vehemence is a sign that you're not being at all objective about this situation. What if you're completely wrong?

Muxel, as Anart said, more than free will violation you seem to be claiming expertise where you have none. If you are not a contract lawyer, why are you claiming such certain knowledge about what is probably a very slippery area once the thing goes to court, especially if the contract was verbal and not itself written by a lawyer.

So, since you seem to know a few things about the law, maybe you could tell us where that knowledge came from. That would help Webglider better evaluate your advice

 

[Muxel]

So, since you seem to know a few things about the law, maybe you could tell us where that knowledge came from. That would help Webglider better evaluate your advice

Sure. I very recently witnessed a landlord-tenant dispute where tenant had to suddenly terminate lease and it was too late for "early termination" to be effected. Thus lease could not be terminated and tenant had to pay rent for remaining months though tenant was not physically present for those months. This is actually a common case, believe it or not. So, several elements ran parallel to webglider's case, and, along with a perceived naïveté on the part of webglider, fueled my vehemence/vindictiveness in advising webglider while simultaneously overriding my objective faculty.

 

[anart]

Sure. I very recently witnessed a landlord-tenant dispute where tenant had to suddenly terminate lease and it was too late for "early termination" to be effected. Thus lease could not be terminated and tenant had to pay rent for remaining months though tenant was not physically present for those months. This is actually a common case, believe it or not.

It's very common.

So, several elements ran parallel to webglider's case

No, it's not similar at all.

I completely agree that enough energy has been wasted on this thread.