Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDonk 
The bottom line is that PSO didn't receive what they ordered, and they shouldn't have to pay for work that was done below the agreed standards.
|
Actually all it does is confuse the issue since it isn't relevant.
PSO didn't allow the translator to correct the work (that PSO claimed was inadequate), despite multiple offers to do so. Thus they have no leg to stand on.
There are PLENTY of other "this is not how to do business" lessons here on both sides, but the basic issue is straightforward. You simply have to pay for what you have contracted for, and certainly don't deduct a 'do it yourself' to fix what the contractor is offering to fix.
The only way to look at this is as if we are talking about an article on pre-flop strategy. If the author turns in some looney strategy, you still have to pay what you agreed, but you don't use him anymore.