Lawsuit: Adjourned Tesla v. Giggly999legs

WhyEve

Department of Economy
Department of Economy
Lawyer
WhyEve
WhyEve
EconomySecretary
In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic
CIVIL ACTION
Date: 01/22/2023

Tesla
WhyEve

v.

Giggly999legs

I. Description of Case
The Plaintiff brings forth the following causes of action and alleges the following against the Defendant:
On October 23rd 2022, Giggly999legs had picked up a Green Tractor from the Tesla company, rental (they had paid beforehand). On November 18th 2022, they failed to return the vehicle and still haven’t returned the vehicle, even after countless pings and reminders.

II. Parties
1. Tesla
2. WhyEve (attorney)
3. Giggly999legs

III. Sequence of Events
1. October 17th 2022, Giggly999legs opened a ticket in the Tesla discord server.
2. October 19th 2022, Giggly999legs successfully paid 80kr for the rental of the Tractor. (See: proof_of_payment1 & proof_of_payment2 )
3. October 23rd 2022, Giggly999legs picked the Tractor up from Covington Mall.
4. November 18th 2022, the rental time was over and it was time to return (was not returned). (See: rental_time_over )
5. December 4th 2022, Giggly999legs finally responds to countless pings and asks to extend. No agreement was established.
6. January 6th 2023, the ticket was closed after no response. (See: Ticket_closed )

IV. Claims for Relief
1. Giggly999legs had broken the 3rd and 4th paragraph in the Tesla terms of service (see: Tesla_terms_of_service & Giggly_signature )

V. Damages
1. 240kr for the time of rent.
2. 200kr in legal charges.
3. 500kr for breakage of the Tesla TOS.
4. Either the Tractor to be given back or the money for the tractor’s cost.



In advancing this form to the court, you acknowledge and concur with the rules of court which highlight the importance of honesty at all times. Moreover, you understand the punishments for breaking these rules and/or committing perjury and deception in the court.
 

Attachments

  • rental_time_over.jpg
    rental_time_over.jpg
    33.9 KB · Views: 36
  • ticket_closed.jpg
    ticket_closed.jpg
    51.1 KB · Views: 33
  • proof_of_payment1.jpg
    proof_of_payment1.jpg
    40.7 KB · Views: 34
  • tesla_terms_of_service.jpg
    tesla_terms_of_service.jpg
    193.7 KB · Views: 33
  • proof_of_payment2.jpg
    proof_of_payment2.jpg
    45.1 KB · Views: 32
  • giggly_signature.jpg
    giggly_signature.jpg
    16.3 KB · Views: 36

TeddyTaps230

Citizen
Banned
Executive Office
Department of Justice
Lawyer
Donator
TeddyTaps230
TeddyTaps230
Special Advisor
@giggly999legs is hereby summoned to the court to acknowledge the case. If the Defendant, @giggly999legs , does not acknowledge the case as a reply in 2 days, the case will close in the Plaintiff's favor.

Court is in Session

This case is presided by Judge Teddytaps230 Bear in mind to not reply to court cases unless summoned by the Judge!
 

TeddyTaps230

Citizen
Banned
Executive Office
Department of Justice
Lawyer
Donator
TeddyTaps230
TeddyTaps230
Special Advisor
As this case was not posted in Court Announcements due to me being extremely busy and unable to access discord, the defense is given a 24 hour extension to respond to this case now that it has been posted.
 

TeddyTaps230

Citizen
Banned
Executive Office
Department of Justice
Lawyer
Donator
TeddyTaps230
TeddyTaps230
Special Advisor
Thank you for responding. I assume this means you are representing yourself.

I will now allow you 24 hours on top of the remaining 10 hours you have, to respond to the claims brought against you.
 

giggly999legs

Citizen
Lawyer
Donator
giggly999legs
giggly999legs
Lawyer
Hello your honor!

First of all I am representing myself (as you can see, I have the lawyer qualification).
Secondly, I am very thankful for the extra time given to me.

Now; time for to respond to the claims part.

First piece of evidence (Named "rental_time_over.jpg" is just showing a bot named "Reminder" saying that a rental has expired (on November 18, 2022 at 9:40 PM, not displaying what the channel is, or whom it is directed to, E.G. I can make a server, add a bot, with that exact message.

The 2nd piece of evidence (named: "ticket_closed.jpg".) yet again, that a bot named "Ticket Tool" is saying that the ticket has been closed, by a discord user with the ID of "657617913620070403", of which that is the owners discord ID "Nightmare98765".

The 3rd piece of evidence (Named: "Proof_of_payment_1.jpg") is the owner "Nightmare98765" sending a screenshot of a mail saying "You have revived 80 from giggly999oegs while you were offline". That is showing that I sent 80kr, but it is not showing what I paid 80kr for, it could have been for anything (E.G., Cobblestone.)

In the 4th piece of evidence (Named: "tesla_terms_of_service.jpg", that is obviously displaying the terms of service, but with no date & time of when the "terms of service" was posted, if it was edited, and if it is in a publicly viewable channel, on my understanding, part of the lawsuit is ". 500kr for breakage of the Tesla TOS.", in the evidence that they have provided, no where does it say 500kr, or any amount for any breach of the TOS.

In the 5th piece of evidence (Named: "proof_of_payment2.jpg", it is yet again only proving that I sent 80 kr to the owner "Nightmare98765", but it does not display a reason, it could have been 80kr for anything (E.G., Cobblestone.)

In the 6th piece of evidence (Named: "giggly_signature.jpg"). It is clearly showing me saying "I Giggly999legs agree xD.", yet again it is showing me agreeing to something, but not showing what I am agreeing to, (E.G., Me agreeing to skydive off the Burj Khalifa.)


(Key:
TOS = Terms Of Service.)
 

TeddyTaps230

Citizen
Banned
Executive Office
Department of Justice
Lawyer
Donator
TeddyTaps230
TeddyTaps230
Special Advisor
@WhyEve I am hereby requesting you send a transcript of the ticket in question. Either here or to me directly. Thank you.
 

TeddyTaps230

Citizen
Banned
Executive Office
Department of Justice
Lawyer
Donator
TeddyTaps230
TeddyTaps230
Special Advisor
I have been sent the transcript of the ticket as requested. Here is a link below for the defense to see as well.


Following the reading of these messages, I am going to request the DoJ minister punishes @giggly999legs for Contempt of Court. This is because the defendant has lied to the court on multiple occasions in their statement and this can be found by cross referencing their statement with the ticket script.

This will be a punishment for 4 counts of obstruction of justice

I now as the plaintiffs lawyer @WhyEve to make their next statement. or state no comment, if they feel that it is not necessary at this time.
 
Last edited:

TeddyTaps230

Citizen
Banned
Executive Office
Department of Justice
Lawyer
Donator
TeddyTaps230
TeddyTaps230
Special Advisor
the defense may now make their arguments
 

giggly999legs

Citizen
Lawyer
Donator
giggly999legs
giggly999legs
Lawyer
Your honor,

The transcript does not display me agreeing to the TOS, but instead this.
1674726012042.png
Furthermore, the TOS could have been edited since the time of agreement.
Adding onto that, with the two images provided (One from WhyEve, and one from me), I am sure that we can all agree on the fact that there is noting about 500kr for breach of contract, or in fact any fine for breach of it.

Another thing, is how is the "Time of rent" calculated?

From what I can see, from the day of writing this (26.01.2023, at 9:35 GMT.), the cost should only be 197.1428 kr.
See images of how it is calculated.
(20 kr a week, the message of the rental was sent on Nov 18, 2022 7:40 PM, then to today is 69 days, (That is 9.85714 weeks, times that by 20 for 20kr per week, then you get 197.1428 kr.
1674726154014.png
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2023-01-26 095703.png
    Screenshot 2023-01-26 095703.png
    49.5 KB · Views: 9
  • Screenshot 2023-01-26 095723.png
    Screenshot 2023-01-26 095723.png
    13.6 KB · Views: 7
  • Screenshot 2023-01-26 095736.png
    Screenshot 2023-01-26 095736.png
    14.7 KB · Views: 7
  • Screenshot 2023-01-26 095756.png
    Screenshot 2023-01-26 095756.png
    9.8 KB · Views: 9

WhyEve

Department of Economy
Department of Economy
Lawyer
WhyEve
WhyEve
EconomySecretary
Your Honor,

I) The Defendant did indeed agree to the terms of service if you scroll just a little bit in the ticket transcript: A76232B1-D5ED-440A-A826-45B91E26CBDF.jpeg
The message was long; giggly999legs had pressed enter many times then added this sentence, in response to the conversation above:
3D2483BF-2D6B-482A-A422-C113D5826B52.jpeg

II) Below, Your Honor, is a screenshot taken on May 15th 2022, showing the same exact TOS. It has been taken from the Tesla v. Hamb_y ( https://mcbusinesscraft.com/forum/threads/tesla-v-hamb_y.16290/ ) case, which was the same situation as this case. The Terms of Service have not been edited since giggly999legs’s agreement.

5F60336E-C40C-4B89-B383-A64948246145.jpeg
III) As for the 500kr breach of the TOS, below is a paragraph taken from the Terms of Service (above). It clearly states that you will be charged additional costs.
92A481B1-1712-48B5-96FB-0E53777F2FA1.jpeg
IV) The time of rent calculation was a human mistake, the fee for the rent calculation should be changed to 200kr, as Tesla charges by weeks and not by days.
 

giggly999legs

Citizen
Lawyer
Donator
giggly999legs
giggly999legs
Lawyer
Yes your honor, I in fact do.
(Thank you to all party's involved with being so quick with this case.)

1.
"Additional costs/expenses" is very vague wording, along with no wording of boundaries, (E,G., it could be 1,000,000 kr, or 1 kr.)
Instead of "500kr for breakage of the Tesla TOS.", it should be "xxxkr for Additional costs/expenses".
The only example of "Additional costs/expenses" is "Legal fees", they are requesting "legal fees", meaning that that is an additional cost/expense.
Contracts are not meant to be as vague as what the one shown is.
The 500kr should not be a request, as it states no whare in the contract about it.


2.
The part of "The message was long; giggly999legs had pressed enter many times then added this sentence, in response to the conversation above:" Is not relevant to this matter.
 

TeddyTaps230

Citizen
Banned
Executive Office
Department of Justice
Lawyer
Donator
TeddyTaps230
TeddyTaps230
Special Advisor
It has been requested that the plaintiff says one last statement. I will move to judgment after this. @WhyEve
 

WhyEve

Department of Economy
Department of Economy
Lawyer
WhyEve
WhyEve
EconomySecretary
Your Honor, before I reply to the Defense’s response, I’d like to shift your attention to a point the Defense made one response before that:
The transcript does not display me agreeing to the TOS, but instead this.
Giggly999legs said that it doesn’t show them agreeing, and then I showed that the transcript did. I believe this proves Giggly had lied on the subject.

Moving On:

I) The 500kr for breaking the Tesla TOS was calculated before given (Every situation would cost differently, we can’t put exactly how much), it is not just a number.
If you look into the TOS, the section where it says Additional Costs is under what happens if the rental car had not been given back. The expenses would be for breaking that rule, therefore breakage of the TOS. Legal fees is an obvious example of additional fees.

“Contracts are not meant to be as vague as what the one shown is.”

The contract is a general contract, and we cannot give giggly an exact amount of how much we would charge them if something goes wrong in that contract. As I said, every situation is different.

II) I mentioned about the sentence to show that giggly999legs didn’t add anything that breaks their agreement and therefore making it invalid.
 

TeddyTaps230

Citizen
Banned
Executive Office
Department of Justice
Lawyer
Donator
TeddyTaps230
TeddyTaps230
Special Advisor
I hereby request the DoJ punishes @giggly999legs for another count of obstruction of justice.

@giggly999legs you may now make your final statement as the plaintiff has made theirs.
 

giggly999legs

Citizen
Lawyer
Donator
giggly999legs
giggly999legs
Lawyer
Your honor,
1.
The plaintiff has already said "I) The Defendant did indeed agree to the terms of service if you scroll just a little bit in the ticket transcript:"
therefore there is no need for what the plaintiff said in the statement above.
And you have already punished me for "contempt of court", this is a old statement I made.
There has been multiple messages since that.

2.
Even though it is situation dependent, there can still be a minimum / maximum to give people a rough idea (E.G., 100 kr - 1000 kr.)
There could not be that much variation between the prices, as they still request the vehicle, or the value of the said vehicle.
This is purely for "Breach of contract", and not the vehicle. The example of "Legal fees" is quite far from "Breach of TOS". If a vehicle glitched, and staff recovered it, there is no need to tell them, as it is fully recovered, but then they can still sue you for "Breach of contract".
4. Either the Tractor to be given back or the money for the tractor’s cost.

3. 500kr for breakage of the Tesla TOS.

If I wanted to be really picky, the contract is for "CAR RENTAL!!", and a "Tractor" is not considered a "car" by most, if not any laws.
1674828791176.png
1674829323619.png

Nightmare closed the ticket, so if I had any issues (E.G., If the vehicle got stolen, or glitching out.) I could not have told a manager in the ticket, therefore immediately putting me in "Breach of contract".
 

TeddyTaps230

Citizen
Banned
Executive Office
Department of Justice
Lawyer
Donator
TeddyTaps230
TeddyTaps230
Special Advisor
I shall now move on to making a judgment. This will be released within the next 24 hours.
 
Top