1) As I mentioned earlier. The Outfitters and Guides were there, ready and willing to provide a service. The client didn't show up. That is Breach of Contract.
2) If the client didn't pay in full, the Outfitter could sue based on that Breach of Contract. Even if the client was fully paid and the Outfitter was able to prove certain losses then they could still sue. However these hypothetical lawsuits would likely fail due to Force Majeur.
3) Even if the Contract makes allowances for unsuccessful hunt refunds, rights to delay or postpone the hunt, or other clauses that should result in the Outfitter refunding a portion or all of the funds to a client. The Outfitter then does not fulfill their obligations under the contract, it is Breach of Contract, not Fraud.
4) If the clients paid in full, arrived at the hunting lodge, only to find the lodge was a Yuppie Fat Farm and the "Outfitter" was actually the town drunk, that would be considered Fraud.
I numbered your post for ease. Its quite clear to see where you stand. Let me give you another perspective.
1). Even if the clients found a way to jump the border to get there I doubt any outfitter would have knowingly broken let law and allowed them to come due to the fact they would then be hosting criminals. Therefore the whole the client didnt show arguement and we were there ready comment doesnt really fly as they were not ready to receive the clients anyways.
2). The outfitters loss was in no way caused by the client. I guess they could try to sue the government. Good luck there. Thats the definition of throwing good money after bad.
3). To date I haven't heard of any outfitters saying your screwed we are keeping your money and not rolling your hunt. Also haven't heard of any clients saying "WE WANT IT NOW". From what I have seen on here at least is most guys just want a level of communication out of their outfitter. Now what happens when the border is actually open and hunts can resume. Its anyones guess. A little bit of communication from both sides goes a long ways.
I feel its pertinent to point out that Shockey still has his name on a guide service. http://www.jimshockey.com/hunts.html
My response is screw that guy. Never will he ever be considered after that article he put out.
I'm just a Canadian arguing in defense of an entire industry that seems to be getting targeted unreasonably by many of the comments in this thread. Shockey did a piss poor job of attempting to do the same thing, if anything his comments inflammed the situation. Truthfully I'd rather see fewer Outfitters and their clients hunting in my home Province, but they have a right to earn a living, same as everyone else. I might not like their role in the Province, but I'll absolutely defend small businesses. I'd also rather not see the American clients being screwed, as I mentioned earlier every case is different and I hope everyone is trying to be understanding of the other side. It ain't easy for anyone.
I've heard of several Americans that were guided last hunting season. I don't know how they crossed, but there were certainly loop holes. The Outfitters definitely did not turn them away. Every outfitter that I spoke to in Northern BC, when I was up there Sheep hunting, was heading in to host Canadian or European clients they'd managed to book on short notice. Camps weren't full, but hunts were happening.
The guys I really feel for are the Outfitters up in the Territories. They weren't even allowed to set foot in the Northwest Territories and I believe the Yukon to even work on their camps. So for those hunts, it's a whole other situation.
In Contract Law in our country, the client could actually be sued for not completing the contract. Would it be successful? Given the circumstances, highly unlikely. But as I said in my previous post. The Outfitters and Guides were there to provide a service. The client didnt show up. That is Breach of contract.
This is not fraud. It's a shitty situation for both parties. American laws stop at the 49th parallel. Maybe it's fraud in your country, but not up here.
you are absolutely rightI just read some quotes from our Public Safety Minister, Bill Blair, the guy is Jackass, almost as bad as Trudeau. Apparently they aren't planning on fully easing border restrictions until atleast 75% of the Canadian population is fully vaccinated. This government's only power has come from the lockdowns. They are loving Covid. I'm afraid it might be awhile before we see the borders open.
Never once said some sort of recompense shouldn't happen. My comments have been based on the whole concept of fraud when fraud really wasn't committed and attitude of vengeance exhibited by some without recognizing business expenses are passed down to the customer. It isn't a free service to provide anykind of service to a customer. Airlines rarely issue refunds. Is that fraud as well?No chance.
I don't read that at all. I read from guys that have patiently waited a year of their lives for some sort of financial relief or reinstatement of a service promised. And obviously we're not talking a few hundred bucks, we're talking many tens of thousands.
To add insult to injury, they read an article like this JS crap. Pretty shocking really.
I'd be far less patient than I have read here.
They took money to provide what they've always done up to that point per their business model. I don't know what their business model is. If it takes $5k to make all the arrangements to then be ready for the hunter to show up and pay the remaining balance to complete the "in consideration of" portion of the agreement is money that is legitimate and used properly.So same question to you: If not fraud what would this be called in legal terms? They took money, provided nothing. Technically they did provide opportunity, I suppose, not their fault and all that, but maaaan, I would not sleep well playing that game.
Seriously? Let's see here........the border is closed, but the outfitter still expected the clients to show up?As I mentioned earlier. The Outfitters and Guides were there, ready and willing to provide a service. The client didn't show up. That is Breach of Contract.
Seriously? Let's see here........the border is closed, but the outfitter still expected the clients to show up?
I can totally see that.......a bunch of guys standing around looking at their watches and wondering where the clients are. They spent all week stocking food in the camps, everything is fully fueled, and where the heck are the clients?? LOL. Now I'm thinking Bob and Doug McKenzie as Canadian outfitters.
This is an excellent analogy. You can't blame the taxidermist for the tornado and you can't blame the outfitter for Covid.Hypothetical situation.
A guy shoots a nice mule deer. He wants to do a shoulder mount. He takes it to a taxidermist that has a fairly good reputation. The hunter drops off the cape and horns, tells the taxidermist how he'd like the mount to look and drives away. One year goes by and the call is made to the hunter to come pick up the mount. A month goes by, nothing. Call is made again, and another month goes by an nothing. Calls a third time a two weeks later and nothing. Calls a fourth time and tells the customer his mount is ready and is needing him to come and pick it up. After 6 months roll by, the taxidermist has moved on to other work and finally one year since the first call was made, the taxidermist discovers the hunter took another job out of state and moved. The taxidermist is now out the shop labor to prep the cape, tan it, order the form, use materials to do the mount including shop labor and now has $750 of his business capital wrapped up in a mount he will not be able to recover. Legally, he can sell it and hope to get 50% of that amount to offset cost.
Another hunter shoots a nice antelope buck. Same scenario above unfolds except this time the hunter has a death in the family and then his house is destroyed by a tornado. The hunter is forced to rebuild and has to upfront 10% of the cost to rebuild for his deductible. Funds are tight because his son broke his arm in a baseball game and has to pay his copays and deductibles for medical bills. The antelope is never picked up after multiple attempts to contact and work something out with the hunter and the taxidermist sells the mount again in hopes of recovering the half the invested cost.
The taxidermist has now learned his lesson and requires a 50% deposit going forward on all taxidermy work, regardless of what it is.
Which hunter is a deadbeat customer? Neither picked up their finished product stiffing the taxidermist twice on the full cost of the mount. Work was done, taxidermist was ready for the hunters to show up.
Switch gears now. The hunter drops off an animal he shot, biggest ever of that species for him, and spent 15 years trying to draw that tag. After one year goes by, a deposit was made, the first call issued for pickup and the hunter is planning on getting it the next day and pay in full the remaining balance. A tornado rips through the community and destroys the taxidermist' shop and destroys the biggest ever and took forever to draw animal the hunter had mounted.
Does the taxidermist owe the deposit back to the hunter...?
Simple yes or no. And yes, the answer is obvious. Don't live in tornado alley...
The thing about the taxidermy analogy is the costs are blown out of the water. Materials are pretty cheap, if you send your capes to get tanned you have some higher costs, but it's not near what many want you to believe.
I doubt the outfitters are running on the thin margins they want you to believe either.