Select Page

Not that the upcoming Anita Baker CD was anywhere near being at the top of the list as far as music I might consider buying, but this story makes me want to boycott it anyways.  According to this article, Anita Baker hired a painting company to do a bunch of work on her home, to the tune of $15,000 and change, and promptly stiffed them.  Now, the painting company is taking her to court, but since she seems to have no money, good luck to them to see a nickel.

This isn't the first time I've heard of celebrities with lots of money getting sued for services not paid.  Now, I'm sure that in some cases the celebrities have justification for not paying.  Maybe the companies or individuals are trying to milk them or over-charge them, but it seems like this is happening way too often to make me think that there isn't something to this.

Many of these companies that are hired to do work obviously have employees do the work.  If the owner paid them, assuming they were going to get reimbursed (as they should) for the services rendered, and then suddenly they get no money, that puts the business owner in a pretty tough spot.

What do they do?  Stiff their employees?  Go out of business?  Spend time in court with a lawsuit taking time away from their business?

None of those ideas sounds very appealing to me.

As I said, while I'm sure that not all celebrities are guilty, I guess I've seen this story often enough (and Anita Baker, specifically has shown no regard for proper money management) where celebrities think that they can sign up but then not pay.

Maybe Anita's new album should be called “Buy Me So That I Can Pay My Bills”?