3 ms·
I agree with what you are saying for the most part. The relationship seems trashed. However, I don't think that the investor is at a disadvantage legally, at
by armored 15y ago
I agree with what you are saying for the most part. The relationship seems trashed. However, I don't think that the investor is at a disadvantage legally, at least he wouldn't be in the US. Here the legal system is the perfect tool for a rich individual/organization to bully and harass anyone without a sizeable legal warchest. See: Scientology. So my advice is still to try every diplomatic strategem you can. Don't just assume this investor is just a total dick. There is some evidence to the contrary: he funded this young guy in the first place. If it is all about emotion, then try to find a psychological solution.
- alexqgb 15y agoFrom what I understand, UK law recognizes this avenue for abuse, and responds (in a way American law doesn't) by making a suit's loser automatically responsible for their opponent's legal costs. It's also worth noting that bullies (which is something the investor seems to be in spades) are famously unresponsive to anything but genuine fear and humiliation. It's a big part of what makes them such a scourge, since peaceful people of good will are so naturally reluctant to respond in kind. All the more reason to hire an experienced lawyer, since they're not only capable of making credible and effective threats, but can safely do so within the narrow, and highly technical constraints permitted by law. If the OP is still interested in being diplomatic, he can honestly say that he and his investor have found themselves at a legal impasse that their contract did not clearly anticipate. For this reason, he's retained a lawyer to advise him on what's likely to be the most mutually beneficial resolution, and will be letting this individual handle the conversation from here.