Or you pay monthly for a law service. Those types of letters are exactly what those programs are intended to cover.
Comment on Hotels have developed a new revenue stream: "algorithmic" smoke detectors
LilB0kChoy@midwest.social 1 day agoBut when she disputed the charge with her credit card company, they sided with the hotel after it provided the credit card company the same smoke report it sent her.
They tried that. If the credit card denies it you could have a lawyer send a letter threatening legal action but that’s all going to be at an extra cost unless you know and attorney or they think they could make enough to o do it on spec.
halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 1 day ago
socsa@piefed.social 22 hours ago
Unfortunately, at a certain point their "data" will just trump your affidavit that you didn't smoke. You'd really have to press the issue to get beyond that, and pay to have expert testimony and technical reviews of the sensor.
LilB0kChoy@midwest.social 21 hours ago
A lawyer will send a demand letter, not an affidavit.
An affidavit is for sworn testimony given under oath by someone who is unwilling or unable to appear on the witness stand.
A demand letter is a formal written request for action or payment prior with a threat of legal action for noncompliance.
If they ignore the demand letter then the next step is a civil suit. Depending on the amount this might end up in small claims. Also, tort cases only require a preponderance of evidence.
A preponderance of evidence essentially means you only have to prove something is more likely than not which, in this case, would be pretty easy. The big issue is the expense of this process almost makes it not worth it.
The American legal system favors those with resources.
socsa@piefed.social 21 hours ago
That's what I'm saying though - it will come down to sworn testimony, and their data from the sensor will likely constitute a preponderance of evidence.
LilB0kChoy@midwest.social 19 hours ago
The burden is on the plaintiff, not the defendant. Whomever brings the suit needs to prove that it’s more likely than not that they’re were incorrectly fined.
Since these devices se to basically be VOC sensors it wouldn’t be that hard to do this.