Are tricks permissible when getting someone to sign a contract?
May 9, 2012 4:32 AM Subscribe
If someone signs a contract, should they be bound by what it is in the contract, under any circumstances?
Let's call this a hypothetical. Bob and Charlie are discussing a business transaction. Bob gives Charlie a written contract to consider. Charlie wants to sleep on it. Bob says OK. Charlie goes home, thinks about the contract, and makes notes all over it.
Morning comes. Charlie wants to agree to the contract. He calls Bob and asks for a clean copy. Bob says, "Be sure you read the contract."
Bob emails a contract to Charlie. Charlie prints it out, signs it, and faxes it back to Bob. Charlie did not read the contract again. Oops. Bob had inserted a new paragraph into the contract. When Charlie finds out, he claims he shouldn't be bound.
Is Charlie right? Should Charlie be required to read the contract again? Did Bob do the right thing by telling Charlie that he should read the contract again?
I'm not asking for your legal opinion on whether the contract is binding under your state's laws. I'm curious about your reaction to the situation.
Let's call this a hypothetical. Bob and Charlie are discussing a business transaction. Bob gives Charlie a written contract to consider. Charlie wants to sleep on it. Bob says OK. Charlie goes home, thinks about the contract, and makes notes all over it.
Morning comes. Charlie wants to agree to the contract. He calls Bob and asks for a clean copy. Bob says, "Be sure you read the contract."
Bob emails a contract to Charlie. Charlie prints it out, signs it, and faxes it back to Bob. Charlie did not read the contract again. Oops. Bob had inserted a new paragraph into the contract. When Charlie finds out, he claims he shouldn't be bound.
Is Charlie right? Should Charlie be required to read the contract again? Did Bob do the right thing by telling Charlie that he should read the contract again?
I'm not asking for your legal opinion on whether the contract is binding under your state's laws. I'm curious about your reaction to the situation.
This post was deleted for the following reason: Sorry, but this is really chatfilter instead of an actual problem to be solved. -- taz
Bob wasn't sneaky at all. Charlie made changes, then Bob made changes. He told him to read it. It's not quite as ideal as saying, "Pay attention to page 4," but there's only so far you can go holding someone's hand.
posted by Etrigan at 4:39 AM on May 9, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 4:39 AM on May 9, 2012 [2 favorites]
Response by poster: Etrigan - Charlie didn't make any changes, he only made notes to himself on the contract and then asked for a clean copy to execute. But, your point is well taken.
posted by starkraven at 4:42 AM on May 9, 2012
posted by starkraven at 4:42 AM on May 9, 2012
He calls Bob and asks for a clean copy.
Did he specifically ask for a same copy to be sent over?
posted by andoatnp at 4:44 AM on May 9, 2012
Did he specifically ask for a same copy to be sent over?
posted by andoatnp at 4:44 AM on May 9, 2012
Did he specifically ask for a same copy to be sent over?
Hypothetically, what should Bob have understood by "Send a clean copy"? - A clean copy of what? - Presumably, a clean copy of the the one that Charlie had marked up. But IANAL (obviously).
posted by carter at 4:50 AM on May 9, 2012
Hypothetically, what should Bob have understood by "Send a clean copy"? - A clean copy of what? - Presumably, a clean copy of the the one that Charlie had marked up. But IANAL (obviously).
posted by carter at 4:50 AM on May 9, 2012
Response by poster: andoatnp - Doesn't the word "copy" in the request "Please send a clean copy" obviate the need to say same?
And everyone else, let me play devil's advocate. When Charlie asks Bob to send a "clean copy" and Bob sends something else, should Bob have the duty to disclose that he has, in fact, not sent a copy at all but rather a new document? Do your opinions change if instead of saying "Read the contract" Bob replies, "OK" to Charlie's request?
posted by starkraven at 4:56 AM on May 9, 2012
And everyone else, let me play devil's advocate. When Charlie asks Bob to send a "clean copy" and Bob sends something else, should Bob have the duty to disclose that he has, in fact, not sent a copy at all but rather a new document? Do your opinions change if instead of saying "Read the contract" Bob replies, "OK" to Charlie's request?
posted by starkraven at 4:56 AM on May 9, 2012
This thread is closed to new comments.
Never ever sign a contract without reading the actual copy you are signing and making sure all the copies are the same. Initial each page.
posted by dg at 4:36 AM on May 9, 2012 [1 favorite]