If you are feeling the pain and anxiety of making monthly lease payments to Norvergence's commercial leasing partners for useless and overpriced Soho or Matrix equipment, you are not alone.
I was surprised when I reread my Norvergence contract after my lease was assigned to Preferred Capital in Brecksville, OH. More specifically, I was surprised to find out that the lease was what is known as a "hell or high-water" lease; one that requires unconditional payment regardless of the performance of the equipment, and provides the lessee (you) with none of the remedies against the lessor that you would have against Norvergence themselves.
The contract also specifically requires you to waive warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose (i.E. That it does what the company says it does, or is necessary for the company to provide its services).
The contract also contains a choice of law clause and a choice of forum clause that provides that any legal actions against the lessor must be brought in the lessors home state and according to its laws.
All of these provisions, contained in the fine print you may have read, are very anti-consumer in nature.in fact, I suspect that Norvergence targeted small businesses rather than consumers for this very reason, since this contract would not likely stand up against the U.S. Consumer Protection Laws.
You are not without recourse, however. Prior to passage of the Magnuson - Moss Warranty Act, the common law of contracts provided protection against unconscionable contracts or provisions within them, especially where the bargaining power of the drafter of the contract dwarfed that of the other party.
While it may be more financially beneficial for you to settle this debt than to try to make it go away, I would encourage you to consult a local attorney to discuss this matter. As a minimum, if you can get the court to accept your case, you will be able to determine through discovery how much your leasing company paid Norvergence to purchase your contract. If the leasing company was in on the scam and appreciated the risk involved, you can count on the fact that they only paid a fraction of what they hope to collect from you. This should be the upper limit of any settlement agreement you might wish to pursue.
0 comments