>Wouldn't that have at least been a real effort and protected them from being charged with fraud? This is very close to the standard for a defense to criminal

>Wouldn't that have at least been a real effort and protected them from being charged with fraud? This is very close to the standard for a defense to criminal fraud and grand theft (when there is a contract). Basically if you can show even minimal effort was made to comply with the contract, usually that will be a strong defense to fraud and/or grand theft. Off the top of my head there is one case where a guy was contracted to paint a house, he bought the paint and showed up day one but never did any work. He was convicted of theft but on appeal it was over turned because since he made some effort it showed he didn't have intent to defraud when he entered the contract (obviously that is debatable). However, that is just the criminal side he would still clearly be liable in the civil context for at least breach of contract.