RedQuanta and a small claims lawsuit solution

Hi guys, I, like many of you have done multiple food shops for this company and have not gotten paid. It appears this company is no longer listed as an MSPA member company both in the States and the Asian market. The CEO of Red Quanta, Pankaj Guglani is also the Director of Engineering of Google India. This should tell you something. I've heard some people batting about the idea of a class action. In my opinion, this is a waste of time, the easiest and quickest way to get a response usually within 30 days is to file a small claims action against the company that contracted with RedQuanta to provide mystery shopping services. The cost of the small claims suit is minimal and in most states can all be done online. First, you need to go to your states Secretary of State website and search for the contracting company (you know who), gather the info including their Agent for Service of Process (This is where you will serve the small claims action) and continue with the paperwork process. The legal reasoning for filing the suit could be fraud, breach of contract or several additional state laws specific to where you live. If 10 of us do this, it will get them to fix it for all of us....

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/01/2019 08:40PM by hagie25.

Create an Account or Log In

Membership is free. Simply choose your username, type in your email address, and choose a password. You immediately get full access to the forum.

Already a member? Log In.

One other thing you may want to do is to see what their ICA states. It may tell you what happens if there is a dispute and what they are/aren't responsible for. I do not know as I am not a shopper for them GLTA
There is a whole separate issue with Redquanta as it appears they have not registered to do business in the United States, their US address, which is a WeWork executive office space has no corporate registration in DC. Anyone is allowed to file a small claims action, it would then be up to the contracting company to file an objection to the venue with the court and state the ICA as the reasoning. This route is meant to legally force a response from the contracting company and start a dialog when RedQuanta is refusing to do so.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/01/2019 08:41PM by hagie25.
@hagie25
I agree with your approach. If Red Quanta wants to continue doing business in the U.S., they will eventually have to pay you - assuming the judgment is in your favor.

Hard work builds character and homework is good for your soul.
@MFJohnston
Thanks for the reply, 9 times out of 10 the small claims suit will be settled long before it ever gets to court or a judgment is rendered. In part because a win in court sets a precedent that the company would rather not have that other lawsuits can point to.
With RQ, I would not be surprised if they did not respond to the lawsuit and you end up going to court and winning by default. Whereas I agree about the precedent issue this is "I worked and they didn't pay me." There is nothing they can do about such a precedent.

Hard work builds character and homework is good for your soul.
For those considering the small claims lawsuit route, it's important that the suit names the contracting company, not RedQaunta as they are not registered to legally conduct business anywhere in the United States. The ordering platform used for these food shops all across the Country were on the contracting companies platform and thus leaves them liable. If one were to name RedQuanta as the sole defendant, the case would be thrown out as there would be no way to serve them because they're not registered with any Secretary of State. The additional benefit of naming the contracting company is that because they are so large they have entire firms usually in each state to handle small claims and will respond quickly.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/01/2019 07:53PM by hagie25.
The thing with Red Quanta is that even if you win in court, they STILL won't pay what is owed to you.
@Eric in Tampa
I would say that you are 75% likely to be correct.

Hard work builds character and homework is good for your soul.
If the contracting company paid Red Quanta, I would be shocked if they were to be held accountable. The most likely effect would be that they drop RQ. I would anticipate them filing a motion to have themselves removed from the lawsuit as they do not have contractual relationship with you.

Hard work builds character and homework is good for your soul.
Legal precedent holds employers responsible for their employee's actions, in this case the client or contracting company​ would be liable for RedQuanta's actions.

Respondeat Superior

The general legal theory that is used in cases involving employer liability for employees is “respondeat superior.” This legal theory means “let the master answer.” It holds employers liable for the actions of its employees. However, this rule only applies to actions that are within the course and scope of employment. Generally, if an employee caused harm while performing work duties or acting on the employer’s behalf, the employer will be found liable for its employee’s acts.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/01/2019 10:45PM by hagie25.
There is not an employee - employer relationship here.

Hard work builds character and homework is good for your soul.
Vicarious liability is often applicable to employer-employee relationships, but it is also applicable to other situations where a superior is held responsible for the acts of a subordinate. It can apply whenever a third party has the right and duty to control the activities of the negligent person.
Yeah.... but the CEO of RedQuanta also works for the client/company.

@MFJohnston wrote:

There is not an employee - employer relationship here.
How do you know that the CEO also works for Google? I'm not disputing it -- I just don't see it on his LinkedIn or in any of the online profiles of RedQuanta.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login