📄 Extracted Text (823 words)
DARREN K. INDYKE
DARREN K. INDYKE, PLLC
301 East 66th Street, 10B
New York, New York 10065
Telecopier: (212) 517-7779
email:
July 27, 2010
VIA EMAIL
David A. Berger, Esq.
Allegaert Berger and Vogel LLP
111 Broadway, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10006
Re: Robert Couturier. Inc. adv. Jeffrey Epstein
Dear Mr. Berger:
I have received your letter dated July 26, 2010 and disagree with your
analysis entirely.
As you concede in your letter, Mr. Epstein advanced $50,000 to Mr.
Couturier's firm, Robert Couturier, Inc. ("RCI"), of which $25,000 was to be credited
against future fees. As Ms. Calabrese acknowledged in her email to Mr. Kahn dated
June 24, 2010, that $25,000 has been deemed by RCI to have been "credited back" to
Mr. Epstein, as no future fees have been earned. As you stated in your letter, the
remaining $25,000 (and not a penny more) was to pay for an interior package that,
notwithstanding your claim to the contrary, has not been delivered. In fact, Mr.
Couturier unilaterally withdrew from the project at its initial stage before RCI was
able to deliver that interior package to Mr. Epstein. As I stated in my July 14, 2010
letter, there has been no furniture and custom furniture selection, and no selection
of antiques, fabrics, carpeting, window treatments and the like; nor have any
furniture plans or plans for custom built-ins been provided. The scant few drawings
that RCI did provide can not under any reasonable analysis constitute the interior
package and, more importantly, have no useful value to Mr. Epstein whatsoever.
EFTA00729241
David A. Berger, Esq.
July 27, 2010
Page 2
Apart from the initial $25,000 to be charged for the interior package, which
was not delivered, RCI's compensation was to be paid as a percentage (15% in the
case of antiques, artwork and antique rugs, and 30% in all other cases) of the direct
cost of all items approved and purchased. Mr. Couturier unilaterally withdrew from
the project, through no fault of Mr. Epstein, before any items were even proposed
for purchase, let alone approved, and, therefore, no compensation is owed. Nor is
RCI entitled to any Architectural Consultation Fees, as those fees were to be for
architectural consultation services above and beyond the development of the
interior package, which was not delivered. Moreover, Mr. Couturier agreed that
Architectural Consultation Fees would be limited to "20% of the construction costs
for the projects as to which such consultation has been provided." No construction
projects have been or will be undertaken on the basis of what little has been
provided to Mr. Epstein, which as I have already stated has no value to Mr. Epstein.
Thus, no Architectural Consultation Fees are payable to RCI.
RCI was paid $25,000 to deliver an interior package and an additional
$25,000 as an advance against future design and decoration fees. Through no fault
of Mr. Epstein, Mr. Couturier unilaterally withdrew from this project before RCI was
able to deliver the interior package or earn any such fees. That Mr. Couturier and
his staff devoted time to this project before Mr. Couturier unilaterally withdrew is of
no consequence. RCI simply has no legal right to charge Mr. Epstein in excess of
$85,000 for its unproductive time. It was Mr. Couturier's decision and his decision
alone to terminate before RCI performed what it agreed to perform and, as a result,
Mr. Epstein is out $50,000, receiving nothing useful in return. In addition, Mr.
Epstein has needlessly incurred substantial costs, expenses and construction delays
in connection with this project and Mr. Couturier's unilateral termination of
services. Mr. Epstein is legally entitled to be compensated for these costs, expenses
and delays as well.
In order to resolve this matter amicably, Mr. Epstein is prepared to forego
recovery of his additional costs and expenses and reimburse RCI for the $6,324.59
of travel related expenses referred to in your letter, which (if RCI and Mr. Couturier
accept this proposal) may be deducted from Mr. Epstein's $50,000 deposit.
However, the balance of $43,675.41 must be returned promptly, failing which Mr.
Epstein will have no choice but to commence legal proceedings to recover both Mr.
Epstein's $50,000 deposit and the substantial costs he has incurred as a result of Mr.
Couturier's and RCI's actions.
EFTA00729242
David A. Berger, Esq.
July 27, 2010
Page 3
While Mr. Epstein bears no ill will towards Mr. Couturier, there is no legal
basis whatsoever to withhold repayment of Mr. Epstein's deposit on an agreement
that Mr. Couturier and RCI failed to perform.
Your prompt reply to this letter is required. In addition, please advise
whether you are prepared to accept service on behalf of your clients should they
choose not to return Mr. Epstein's funds.
This letter is without prejudice to the rights and claims of Mr. Epstein against
Robert Couturier and Robert Couturier, Inc., all of which are hereby expressly
reserved.
Sincerely,
/s/Darren K. Indyke
Darren K Indyke
EFTA00729243
ℹ️ Document Details
SHA-256
1262c5cb1e94b43969703bb8e5edd0b8f629f25a9eb938a9f54425b8ef73f6ea
Bates Number
EFTA00729241
Dataset
DataSet-9
Document Type
document
Pages
3
Comments 0