Legal contracts are an integral part of conducting business, as they help define the terms and conditions under which parties agree to work together. However, some contracts can be overly complex, containing terms that may not be immediately apparent to the signatory. Two companies that have come under scrutiny for their contractual language are Innovation Refunds and Bottom Line Concepts.

Innovation Refunds is a company that specializes in helping businesses claim tax refunds. Their contractual language has raised eyebrows due to their contingency fees, which are set at a staggering 25% of the refund amount. Additionally, if the business does not pay the fees within five days of receiving the refund, they are charged a late fee of 1.5% per month.

One of the most egregious clauses in their contract is the section that grants them a first lien security interest in the client's tax refund claims, as well as any proceeds and collections related to those claims. This means that if the client defaults on payment, Innovation Refunds has the right to seize their tax refunds as collateral.

Furthermore, the company explicitly states that they are not providing any legal, tax, or accounting advice in connection with the agreement, leaving clients to navigate the complicated world of tax refunds on their own. To make matters worse, Innovation Refunds also takes an IRS Form 2848 power of attorney for the years 2020 and 2021, which may cause issues with the client's payroll service if they already have a power of attorney on file for those years.

Bottom Line Concepts is another company that has been criticized for their contractual language. They offer cost-reduction services for businesses, but their contracts contain clauses that allow them to charge fees for any savings they generate, even if those savings were the result of the client's own efforts. Additionally, their contracts contain a confidentiality clause that prevents clients from disclosing any information about the services they received from Bottom Line Concepts, effectively silencing any negative feedback or reviews.

Check out the raw feedback on these companies in this thread:

There are additional concerns about Bottom Line Concepts' contractual language, including a clause that states they are not providing legal or accounting advice. Instead, they position themselves as consultants, suggesting they are not responsible for any issues that may arise from their services.

This lack of accountability can be concerning, especially for businesses that rely on the services of consultants to manage their finances. By not providing legal or accounting advice, Bottom Line Concepts may be exposing their clients to unnecessary risk, leaving them vulnerable to legal and financial repercussions.

Furthermore, some critics have highlighted the company's use of language that can be difficult to understand. For example, the use of industry jargon and technical terms can make it challenging for non-experts to fully grasp the meaning of the contract. This could lead to misunderstandings and confusion down the line, especially if clients are not aware of their rights and responsibilities under the contract.

In conclusion, businesses must exercise caution when signing contracts with companies like Innovation Refunds and Bottom Line Concepts. It is essential to carefully review the terms and conditions to understand the risks involved and seek legal advice if necessary. Remember, signing a contract is a legally binding agreement, and it is essential to fully understand the terms and conditions before committing to them.