california breach-of-contract civil-judgment
What award can an unpaid independent contractor expect? What are the legal incentives to pay contractors?
<p>I (Washington State, USA) worked, under contract, for an LLC (Los Angeles, California, USA) and never received payment.  I was considered an independent contractor; contract specifies Californian jurisdiction.  I have limited legal counsel and anticipate legal action in small claims court.  I anticipate that no representative of that LLC will come to court, and expect a default judgment.  For purposes of this question, let's say that the contract specified US$500 for my services, and I have received none of this.</p>
<p>What awards can I expect?  In what ways would a judge's decisions about awards be legally limited?  $500?  Interest?  Time spent pursuing collections?  Filing fee?  Anything else?  My research so far suggests $500 plus reasonable (less than credit card) interest.</p>
<p>I am primarily interested in this because it doesn't seem that there are any legal incentives for LLCs to actually pay their contractors; if only a fraction of contractors seek justice, and the award never exceeds the originally agreed upon amount, then the rational decision would seem to be, don't pay the contractor.  Are there any other legal disincentives for this behavior?</p>
<p>I'm aware that Los Angeles has recently passed a Freelancer Protection Act, but to my knowledge, I am not covered by this act-- I am located outside of LA and the contract was entered into prior to the passage of this act.</p>

<blockquote>
<p>What awards can I expect? In what ways would a judge's decisions about
awards be legally limited? $500? Interest? Time spent pursuing
collections? Filing fee? Anything else? My research so far suggests
$500 plus reasonable (less than credit card) interest.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Your lawsuit would be for breach of contract, probably filed in California small claims court for this small dollar amount.</p>
<p>An award for breach of contract includes:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>the amount not paid pursuant to the contract,</p>
</li>
<li><p>pre-judgment interest from the date that payment was due at the statutory rate in California (the legal rate specified in the contract applies until the contract is superseded by the verdict, but if the prejudgment interest rate is not specified in the contract, the rate is ten percent per annum from the date of the breach, California Civil Code § 3289),</p>
</li>
<li><p>post-judgment interest at the statutory rate in California (<a href="https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2007/ccp/685.010-685.110.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10% per annum in a contract if not otherwise specified</a>), and</p>
</li>
<li><p><a href="https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2007/ccp/685.010-685.110.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">out of pocket costs incurred in filing the lawsuit</a> (typically, the filing fee, the service of process fee, postage, copying costs incurred for trial exhibits, and <a href="https://law.justia.com/codes/california/2007/ccp/685.010-685.110.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">any court fees incurred to collect the judgment</a> if it is entered).</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>Attorney fees are not available unless the contract says so. You are not entitled to any recovery for time spent pursuing collections.</p>
<p>Often you have have a collections agency collect it for a percentage of the amount recovered (probably 50% in a claim of this size) plus a small fee, although they might not accept such a small dollar amount debt to collect. The main virtue of this is that it hurts the credit of the person who owes the money, a harm to the non-paying customer that is often far worse than not paying the amount owed on time.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Are there any other legal disincentives for this behavior?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>A well drafted contract can provide for an award of attorney fees incurred in collecting the debt, can set a non-usurious interest rate and late fees for non-payment, and can take steps like requiring a deposit up front, or consenting to service of process by mail, to make collection more likely and to create stronger incentives to pay.</p>
<p>Also, if the non-payment rate is low enough and the value of your time doing what you normally get paid to do is high, it may not make economic sense to pursue bad debt which takes some time and some money to get a small potential recovery, as opposed to letting it slide and doing more work that does pay.</p>
<p>A small claims lawsuit is probably ten to thirty hours of work for which you will not be compensated even if you win. Depending upon your average hourly rate for your labor, and the percentage of your billings that go uncollected, it may not make economic sense to collect the unpaid bill, or you may want to delegate the job to someone else whose effective hourly rate of labor value is lower.</p>
<p>Courts are cost effective places to collect large debts, and can be cost effective if many people owe you money and you can mass produce your collections process (as, for example, credit card companies do). But courts are often not cost effective for collecting one off small dollar amount debts, despite the streamlined process and reduced filing fees that are available in small claims court.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>if only a fraction of contractors seek justice, and the award never
exceeds the originally agreed upon amount, then the rational decision
would seem to be, don't pay the contractor.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Consumers are not purely rational actors on a transaction by transaction basis in these matters. The vast majority of the time, people pay as agreed even though they could get away with paying less by forcing the person who did business with them to sue them to get paid. On a case by case basis, this is often not rational, but as a long term strategy for all transactions that a consumer enters into, it often does make rational sense.</p>
<p>In small dollar transactions, blacklisting people from future business and harming their credit records is usually enough of an incentive to make uncollectible invoices an acceptable cost of doing business. But a good business person does evaluate every customer to whom trade credit is extended for creditworthiness if the customer does not pay in advance.</p>
<p>On the other hand, as a business person, you may have a strategic interest in pursuing every unpaid invoice even if it isn't cost effective to do so when considering that unpaid invoice in isolation, in order to instill in your customers the knowledge that when you say you will sue them if you aren't paid, that you are making a credible threat. This may discourage people from not paying you in the first place.</p>
