Drafted by Richard Alan Gaudet, Esq. · Massachusetts Business Attorney · Business Law
Quick Answer: Chapter 93A does more than compensate a loss. Under M.G.L. c. 93A, Sections 9 and 11, a court can double actual damages for unfair or deceptive conduct and triple them when the conduct was willful or knowing, then add the winner’s attorney fees. A $50,000 loss can become a $200,000 exposure, which is why a 93A claim changes everything.
Here is a conversation I have with business owners frequently…. They get sued, the damages look like maybe $50,000, and then they discover a Chapter 93A claim tacked onto the complaint. Suddenly the exposure is not $50,000. It might be $100,000. It might be $150,000. And on top of that they may owe the plaintiff’s attorney fees.
This is the teeth of Chapter 93A…the statute multiplies damages (up to 3x). Let me walk you through exactly how that works and why it matters so much to your business.
How the Damages Framework Works
M.G.L. c. 93A, § 9 covers consumers and § 11 covers businesses, and together they set up a damages structure that looks very different from ordinary contract or tort law.
When you sue for breach of contract in Massachusetts, you recover what you lost. You calculate your actual damages, and you get nothing extra simply because the other side was careless or unpleasant.
Chapter 93A turns that on its head. Here is the framework:
Step 1: Actual damages. Actual damages are the baseline, i.e.: How much money did you lose, and what harm did you suffer? That is your starting point.
Step 2: Double damages. If the defendant engaged in unfair or deceptive conduct, the court can award double your actual damages. Lose $50,000 and you recover $100,000.
Step 3: Treble damages. If the defendant’s conduct was willful or knowing, the court awards three times your actual damages. Now $50,000 becomes $150,000. And that is not the end.
Step 4: Attorney fees and costs. The prevailing party recovers reasonable attorney fees. This piece is large. Attorney fees in a contested 93A case can easily reach $30,000, $50,000, $100,000, or more depending on the complexity and length of the litigation.
So a $50,000 actual loss can end up costing the defendant $150,000 in damages plus $50,000 in attorney fees, for a total exposure north of $200,000.
That is why a Chapter 93A claim rewrites the settlement calculus. The defendant might have been happy to fight a $50,000 breach of contract case. But $150,000 in treble damages plus attorney fees? Now they want to talk.
What Willful or Knowing Conduct Means
Here is where I see a lot of confusion. Owners assume willful or knowing means the defendant meant to cause harm or acted out of malice. That is not the standard.
Willful or knowing under Chapter 93A means the defendant knew, or should have known, that the conduct was unfair or deceptive. It means they were aware of the nature and wrongfulness of what they were doing, even if they did not care whether you in particular got hurt.
Let me give you examples of willful or knowing conduct:
Knowingly misrepresenting a product. You are a retailer. You know a product has a defect, and you sell it without disclosing the flaw. You knew the representation that the product was as described was false. That is willful.
Deliberately concealing information. You are selling a business and you know the biggest customer is leaving. You actively hide the emails and communications that would show it, and you say nothing to the buyer. That is willful, because you knew the fact was material and you concealed it.
Continuing a deceptive practice after being put on notice. A customer complains that your service did not work as promised. You brush the complaint off, then do the same thing to another customer, who sues. You knew your service had problems and continued anyway. That is willful.
Responding in bad faith to a complaint or demand letter. This one is critical. If someone tells you in a complaint that you wronged them, and you dismiss or refuse to engage even though you know the complaint has merit, courts treat that as evidence of willfulness. The law does not force you to settle every claim, but ignoring a legitimate one signals that you knew the conduct was wrong.
What willful or knowing does not require:
Intent to harm. You did not have to want to hurt the customer. You only had to know your conduct was deceptive.
Recklessness. You did not have to be wildly careless. You had to be aware of what you were doing and that it was wrong.
Fraud. You did not have to make a false statement with intent to deceive. The conduct just has to be deceptive, and you have to have been aware of it.
The line between deceptive conduct, which gets you double damages, and willful or knowing deceptive conduct, which gets you treble damages, comes down to one question. Did you know what you were doing was wrong?
The Demand Letter and Its Consequences
Here is something that shocks a lot of business owners. Your response to a demand letter can turn a double damages case into a treble damages case.
Under M.G.L. c. 93A, § 9 and § 11, before you can file a lawsuit you must serve a demand letter. The demand letter must:
- State the unfair or deceptive practice complained of
- State the damages allegedly suffered
- Make a specific demand for payment
- State that if payment is not made within 30 days, the claimant will pursue the claim in court and seek treble damages, attorney fees, and costs
If the defendant receives that letter and responds reasonably, by admitting fault and paying or making a good-faith offer to settle, they avoid treble damages. Many cases end right there.
But if the defendant ignores the letter, responds in bad faith, or rejects a legitimate claim out of hand, the court reads that as evidence of willfulness. It shows you knew the claim had merit and chose not to respond fairly anyway.
Let me give you a real-world example. A customer sends you a 93A demand letter. They paid you $20,000 for a service, you did not deliver as promised, and they want their money back. If you:
- Ignore the letter. Bad move. The court assumes you knew they had a claim and refused to deal with it fairly. Treble damages.
- Respond with a form letter saying your claim is meritless. Also bad. You are not engaging with the actual complaint, just dismissing it. That looks like bad faith.
- Respond saying you dispute the claim but would settle for $15,000. Better. You are engaging and making an offer. Even if the lawsuit proceeds, the court sees you tried to settle fairly, which can limit treble damages exposure.
- Respond saying you were right, we did not deliver, here is your $20,000 back. Best. No lawsuit, no multiplier, problem solved.
The point is simple. How you respond to a demand letter directly shapes your exposure. A thoughtful, good-faith response can shield you from treble damages. Ignoring it or blowing it off nearly guarantees treble damages if you end up in court.
How Treble Damages Affect Settlements
Let me explain why understanding treble damages matters for your business. It should change how you approach these disputes.
If someone sues you for breach of contract, your lawyer might tell you to fight hard, because damages are limited to what you actually owe. Lose a $50,000 breach of contract case and you pay $50,000.
But if someone sues you for breach of contract plus Chapter 93A, the calculus shifts. If you lose and the judge finds willful conduct, you are paying $150,000 plus attorney fees. That is entirely different math.
This is why settling earlier makes sense in a 93A case. Say the plaintiff’s actual damages are $50,000 and your lawyer thinks you have a 60 percent chance of winning outright, with a 40 percent chance you lose and get hit with treble damages. Your expected loss is roughly (0.6 times $0) plus (0.4 times $150,000 plus attorney fees), which comes to about $60,000 plus trial-related fees.
But if you settle for $60,000 or $70,000 now, you avoid the risk of $150,000 plus attorney fees. You also skip the litigation costs, the management time, and the stress. Many defendants who start out wanting to fight find that settlement makes economic sense once they see the treble damages exposure.
The reverse holds too. If you are the plaintiff with a strong Chapter 93A case, you carry real leverage. The defendant knows that losing means paying three times the actual debt plus attorney fees, and that knowledge drives settlement.
The Attorney Fees Issue
I want to underline this because it is so often underestimated. Attorney fees under Chapter 93A are substantial.
If you lose a Chapter 93A case, you pay the plaintiff’s reasonable attorney fees and costs. Reasonable in a contested case generally means market rates for competent lawyers. In Massachusetts, that is typically $200 to $400 or more per hour depending on the lawyer’s experience.
A 93A case that goes to trial can easily rack up 500 to 1,000 or more billable hours. Discovery, depositions, motions, trial preparation, and the trial itself all add up. At $250 per hour, that is $125,000 to $250,000 in attorney fees.
Lose, and you pay it. Win, and you collect the other side’s fees. That is a powerful incentive to settle, because neither side wants to carry that risk.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between double and treble damages under Chapter 93A?
Double damages, or two times actual damages, apply when the defendant engaged in unfair or deceptive conduct. Treble damages, three times actual damages, apply when the conduct was willful or knowing. Either way, the prevailing party also recovers attorney fees and costs, which raises the total exposure sharply.
What does willful or knowing conduct mean in Chapter 93A cases?
Willful or knowing means the defendant knew, or should have known, that the conduct was unfair or deceptive. It does not require an intent to harm. It means the defendant was aware of the nature and wrongfulness of what it did, not merely that it was careless or made an honest mistake.
Why does failing to respond to a demand letter increase damages?
If you receive a 93A demand letter and ignore it, respond in bad faith, or reject it unreasonably, courts treat that as evidence of willfulness. It shows you knew you were wrong and chose not to fix it. That can trigger treble damages even where the underlying conduct alone might have justified only double damages.
Do I have to pay attorney fees if I lose a Chapter 93A case?
Yes. Under M.G.L. c. 93A, Sections 9 and 11, the prevailing party recovers reasonable attorney fees and costs. If you lose and the plaintiff pursued a 93A claim, you pay their lawyers, which can add thirty to fifty percent or more to the total liability.
The Bottom Line
The key takeaway is this. Chapter 93A is not just about recovering what you lost. It is about doubling or tripling damages and adding attorney fees, and that dramatically changes the economics of a dispute.
If you are facing a Chapter 93A claim, take it seriously. Do not ignore demand letters. Respond thoughtfully and in good faith, and consult a lawyer before you take any position that could be read as admitting willfulness.
If you are bringing a Chapter 93A claim, understand the power you hold. A demand letter served under 93A is not the same as a routine demand for payment. It signals that you are serious, and it sets up the framework for treble damages and attorney fees if negotiations fail.
Either way, the presence of a Chapter 93A claim fundamentally changes the dispute. If you are in this situation, you need experienced counsel to navigate it. I have handled many 93A cases from both sides, and I know how to assess your exposure and negotiate or litigate effectively. You can also review the Massachusetts Attorney General’s consumer protection resources at mass.gov.
For more on how to respond to a 93A demand letter, see my article on receiving a 93A demand letter. If you need immediate help, call my office at 978-273-8337 or visit gaudetlawoffice.com to schedule a consultation.
About the Author
Richard Alan Gaudet, Esq. is a Massachusetts attorney at the Law Offices of Richard Alan Gaudet, LLC in Middleton, Massachusetts, who advises clients on Chapter 93A damages exposure and business litigation. His practice focuses on professional license defense, business law and litigation, family law, and landlord representation, serving clients across Northern, Eastern, and Central Massachusetts. Reach him at 978-273-8337 or rgaudet@gaudetlawoffice.com. Office: 35 Village Rd., Ste 100, Middleton, MA 01949.
ABOUT THIS ARTICLE
This article was prepared by a Massachusetts attorney and is provided solely for general informational and educational purposes directed to members of the general public. It does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. The law applicable to any particular situation depends on the specific facts and circumstances of that matter. Readers are encouraged to seek the advice of a licensed Massachusetts attorney before taking any action.
