The Contract
Did you sign it? When you read it did make sense? Was there any meaning in it? Why was it written? Who wrote it?
These questions are just some of the initial points to consider when someone sends you a paper that appears to be overly populated or rather littered with words. Many of the words may seem to be beyond definition. A common pattern for contract zingers (people who put forth one-sided contacts), who angle an agreement to be personally and not mutually beneficial, is for them to insist upon an urgency for the signing of the contract. Anything done in hurry is hasty and ‘haste makes waste’.
Visit: Resale.Condos or BigPitch.ca for more great content.
Now that you have scanned the seeming scam document you have options. You can do nothing. Ignore the agreement and let it begin to gather dust on a shelf or on the floor. You may have received the contract in-person or someone may have had the audacity to hand this one-sided document to you or sent to you by regular ‘snail mail’. This option assumes that you have actually printed it out and thereby invested your money in the agreement process, by paying for the paper upon which it will be printed and paid for the ink used to print the words on the page, not to mention the wear and tear on your printer and the electricity required for the printing process. Also, your tie also has a value. Taken together, just by reviewing the agreement you have made an investment, all this irrelevant as to whether or not you affix your signature on it and / or seal it.
Do people still do that? Seal documents with wax or is now done with a small sticker? Can anyone seal a contract? More importantly can anyone seal a deal? Or does one first require the assistance of a Paralegal, or Corporate Lawyer just to figure out what is meant by the words used in the agreement that has been sent to you. Can anyone make sense out of conjecture and legalistic terminology that was not scribed by a Lawyer?
All of the above has been noted in the opinion that the proposed contract was not a real contract – one that would be of mutual benefit and value to each party who would subscribe to the terms. There are of course legitimate agreements that one can decipher or clearly understand at first glance and upon an initial view.
When one receives a complex or one-sided contract for service one can simply be blunt and explain to the drafter / sender of the agreement that one does not know what it means. One can also ask for amendments to change certain parts of the document. Rephrasing and definitions of terms are also options for improvement of the readability of the contract.
One can also compose a totally separate agreement and send it to the initial sender by way of reply. This attitude is not meant to suggest an argument stance. Obviously the agreement was created to achieve a partnership or working relationship with seemingly clearly spelled out terms. The fact that the document is anything but clear does not necessarily mean that there is an attempt to kybosh or sabotage the potential deal. Rather the one who scripted the incoherent agreement was just doing what seems most natural in the realm of business – looking out for number one, whereby one own self is what matters most. Is that right?