GolfGTIforum.co.uk
General => General discussion => Topic started by: clipperjay on 23 April 2012, 18:23
-
A friends sister is getting married she put a deposit down on the Hall in a hotel and paid by debit card and got a receipt this was back in Feb this year.
She has changed her mind and has forgone her deposit, but the hotel is trying it saying she owes then 40% of the final price of like 5K.
She has a solicitor which said unless she signed a contract to say and accept the terms and conditions she is not liable?
The question is the receipt she got does that tie her into the so called contract?
As they are getting arsy about it I've said screw them and they should contact her solicitors if they want to pursue the issue?
Where does she stand as she has not signed anything!
The terms and conditions did say after 60 days she is liable for 40%, but she was told this and not been given anything on paper to sign or read?
:undecided:
-
im no solicitor but if it aint on paper then i dont think they can do anything i always thought that the deposit would be the thing you lose and thats it
-
im no solicitor but if it aint on paper then i dont think they can do anything i always thought that the deposit would be the thing you lose and thats it
Well thats what I said, everyone changes there mind in weddings funerals etc thats why I thought as they havent got caterers in prepared the food in prior to four months of having the reception?
I think they are trying it, and I can't get involved as its my best mates sister, but wanted some clarification on the legal bit?
-
Yep as long as she didn't sign anything all she wud lose is the deposit... :wink:
-
Pretty sure a verbal contract is binding and as long as it was explained she is liable...
-
I'm pretty sure she could say she was never made aware of their terms and conditions so was unaware of it. Her word against theirs at the end of the day. :huh:
-
Pretty sure a verbal contract is binding and as long as it was explained she is liable...
I dont think she was verbally told about the terms and condtions I thought in this day and age she has to sign something she understands from a legal point? Just dont know where they stand but common sense says you loose deposit not fking 2K worth?
-
i would say that without a signed and witnessed contract, the hotel would find it very difficult to pursue it legally. You could argue that the legal obligations were not explained by someone who was qualified to do so, and that she didn't understand the terms correctly.
-
i would say that without a signed and witnessed contract, the hotel would find it very difficult to pursue it legally. You could argue that the legal obligations were not explained by someone who was qualified to do so, and that she didn't understand the terms correctly.
Yes Alex thats my take on it!
She did recieve a pack with the terms and conditions, but it was all confusing to them and none of it was explained at all! But she definitly did not sign anything!
I'm thinking about finding some sort of association with weddings and such and use that as a leverage for him to threaten them with non compliance of explaining such terms and conditions when this kind of money is involved?
-
I'm pretty sure she could say she was never made aware of their terms and conditions so was unaware of it. Her word against theirs at the end of the day. :huh:
Thats the best we can hope for and the legal costs will be bigger than the £500 they already have :angry:
-
i would say that without a signed and witnessed contract, the hotel would find it very difficult to pursue it legally. You could argue that the legal obligations were not explained by someone who was qualified to do so, and that she didn't understand the terms correctly.
Yes Alex thats my take on it!
She did recieve a pack with the terms and conditions, but it was all confusing to them and none of it was explained at all! But she definitly did not sign anything!
I'm thinking about finding some sort of association with weddings and such and use that as a leverage for him to threaten them with non compliance of explaining such terms and conditions when this kind of money is involved?
So she was handed a pack with the T&C's in it.. I would say that its down to her to read them then. End of the day as harsh as it sounds they are trying to run a business.
As for the verbal side of it, I am in the middle of taken the agency who run my property to court because they have f**ked up on several counts, some of these being verbal contracts but as my solicitor tells me.. They are still binding at the end of the day.
-
i would say that without a signed and witnessed contract, the hotel would find it very difficult to pursue it legally. You could argue that the legal obligations were not explained by someone who was qualified to do so, and that she didn't understand the terms correctly.
Yes Alex thats my take on it!
She did recieve a pack with the terms and conditions, but it was all confusing to them and none of it was explained at all! But she definitly did not sign anything!
I'm thinking about finding some sort of association with weddings and such and use that as a leverage for him to threaten them with non compliance of explaining such terms and conditions when this kind of money is involved?
So she was handed a pack with the T&C's in it.. I would say that its down to her to read them then. End of the day as harsh as it sounds they are trying to run a business.
As for the verbal side of it, I am in the middle of taken the agency who run my property to court because they have f**ked up on several counts, some of these being verbal contracts but as my solicitor tells me.. They are still binding at the end of the day.
Not being funny but when I recieve a pack I usually get my copy of the contract, they didn't give any explanation and never signed a thing?
So that said all my client knew was the deposit was at risk?
After all once its been finallised she would sign the contract and return it signed if she was to proceed?
She understands there is a business to run, but thats what £500 deposit takes care of?
Also TBF 40% when there is over 60 days left is steep over other hotels offering 25% retention over the same period?
-
i would say that without a signed and witnessed contract, the hotel would find it very difficult to pursue it legally. You could argue that the legal obligations were not explained by someone who was qualified to do so, and that she didn't understand the terms correctly.
Yes Alex thats my take on it!
She did recieve a pack with the terms and conditions, but it was all confusing to them and none of it was explained at all! But she definitly did not sign anything!
I'm thinking about finding some sort of association with weddings and such and use that as a leverage for him to threaten them with non compliance of explaining such terms and conditions when this kind of money is involved?
So she was handed a pack with the T&C's in it.. I would say that its down to her to read them then. End of the day as harsh as it sounds they are trying to run a business.
As for the verbal side of it, I am in the middle of taken the agency who run my property to court because they have f**ked up on several counts, some of these being verbal contracts but as my solicitor tells me.. They are still binding at the end of the day.
Not being funny but when I recieve a pack I usually get my copy of the contract, they didn't give any explanation and never signed a thing?
So that said all my client knew was the deposit was at risk?
After all once its been finallised she would sign the contract and return it signed if she was to proceed?
She understands there is a business to run, but thats what £500 deposit takes care of?
Also TBF 40% when there is over 60 days left is steep over other hotels offering 25% retention over the same period?
When I was shopping around for a venue some of them were saying that if you pulled out with 6 months to go you have to cover 50% and then if it was 3 months it was 75%.. I'm not trying to be a cnut here. I am just trying to be real about it. I did sign a contract when it came to my booking, I don't know why they haven't.. All I am saying is that a verbal contract is as legally binding as a written one and they were handed the T&C's plus paid a deposit which I would say is accepting those T&C's.
-
afraid to say , having had a daughter pull the plug on her wedding, B W L is right.
when going round the venues etc, all prices, whats included etc etc is discussed in DETAIL, you then pay a deposit thus a contract is agreed.
if a reciept is given for the deposit then thats all the paperwork they are liable to need.
-
i would say that without a signed and witnessed contract, the hotel would find it very difficult to pursue it legally. You could argue that the legal obligations were not explained by someone who was qualified to do so, and that she didn't understand the terms correctly.
Yes Alex thats my take on it!
She did recieve a pack with the terms and conditions, but it was all confusing to them and none of it was explained at all! But she definitly did not sign anything!
I'm thinking about finding some sort of association with weddings and such and use that as a leverage for him to threaten them with non compliance of explaining such terms and conditions when this kind of money is involved?
So she was handed a pack with the T&C's in it.. I would say that its down to her to read them then. End of the day as harsh as it sounds they are trying to run a business.
As for the verbal side of it, I am in the middle of taken the agency who run my property to court because they have f**ked up on several counts, some of these being verbal contracts but as my solicitor tells me.. They are still binding at the end of the day.
Not being funny but when I recieve a pack I usually get my copy of the contract, they didn't give any explanation and never signed a thing?
So that said all my client knew was the deposit was at risk?
After all once its been finallised she would sign the contract and return it signed if she was to proceed?
She understands there is a business to run, but thats what £500 deposit takes care of?
Also TBF 40% when there is over 60 days left is steep over other hotels offering 25% retention over the same period?
When I was shopping around for a venue some of them were saying that if you pulled out with 6 months to go you have to cover 50% and then if it was 3 months it was 75%.. I'm not trying to be a cnut here. I am just trying to be real about it. I did sign a contract when it came to my booking, I don't know why they haven't.. All I am saying is that a verbal contract is as legally binding as a written one and they were handed the T&C's plus paid a deposit which I would say is accepting those T&C's.
I appreciate your unbias point of view so we know what to expect, but even you say you signed a contract and T&C were explained very clearly as their T&C are bloody steep! :shocked:
I think if they were to legally pursue it it would fail due to the non signing of any contract which is why this is confusing the hell out of me. There should be a contract to protect the hotel and the parties hiring the venue?
I'm supposed to have a confrence call with the couple to establish what actually happened on the day of the deposit???
Damage limitation will be my final suggestion offer 25% and end the stand off if it comes to it?
The manager of the hotel was away this weekend so they are waiting to hear back from him, but if I'm right he knows already and is waiting for them to give in.
Chuff its a hard one 4K is actually the figure at stake here?
-
afraid to say , having had a daughter pull the plug on her wedding, B W L is right.
when going round the venues etc, all prices, whats included etc etc is discussed in DETAIL, you then pay a deposit thus a contract is agreed.
if a reciept is given for the deposit then thats all the paperwork they are liable to need.
I went through the same thing Chuff.. But I pulled the plug!Plus I then had to buy my Ex out the house too.. Still paying for it now
-
http://www.cheap-wedding-success.co.uk/wedding-scams.html (http://www.cheap-wedding-success.co.uk/wedding-scams.html)
Everything I have read states a contract and this situation doesnt have one?
-
PM elvi on here, he went to law school and is quite familiar with contracts.
I would of thought you are bound to a contract by orally agreeing on the venue and depositing the money, plus going to court would be my last means of doing so as it becomes out of your control and in the hands of a judge and costs could stock pile more.
-
oh i understand jay, i know how much it cost me. :cry:
then the wedding dress :lipsrsealed:
-
She has a solicitor?
Surely better to ask him..
-
PM elvi on here, he went to law school and is quite familiar with contracts.
Already done PM jon before starting the thread!
I would of thought you are bound to a contract by orally agreeing on the venue and depositing the money, plus going to court would be my last means of doing so as it becomes out of your control and in the hands of a judge and costs could stock pile more.
This was posted from a wedding planner! she has a point!
Its a bunch of crap if they say a deposit is deemed to be acceptance of their terms, because they are changing their terms....and without a contract .....what terms are they talking about?
Chuff I feel for them there young and just starting out sad thing its there saved money not the grooms father either :cry:
Yes she does and I'am going to suggest if it gets ugly the hotel contact the solicitors :lipsrsealed: rather it get sorted than 70per hour to them :lipsrsealed: :lipsrsealed:
-
oh i understand jay, i know how much it cost me. :cry:
then the wedding dress :lipsrsealed:
Was you going to lend the groom your Simpsons tie :huh: :grin: :grin:
-
oh i understand jay, i know how much it cost me. :cry:
then the wedding dress :lipsrsealed:
Was you going to lend the groom your Simpsons tie :huh: :grin: :grin:
:laugh:
no, i was wearing it :smug:
-
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :lipsrsealed:
-
Ok.
Jay, first off, verbal contracts are binding. But offer, acceptance and the terms must be clearly agreed and understood by both parties, and both must agree and understand what will happen if the contract is breached. As it's verbal, it's often difficult to prove or disprove, often ends up in court. Any supporting evidence like emails, and receipts is taken into account.
Contract = Offer + Acceptance + intention to create a contract + Consideration (money)
If She was given this pack AFTER she paid the deposit, and was not taken through it's contents, Or explained the % of total cost for cancellation, then I would say that she can tell then to get lost.
I take it there was a formal written contract in this info pack. If this contained the terms of cancellation then it needs to be signed by both parties to be binding.
If however she was made aware, in clear unequivocal terms, that a % of the total cost will be paid on cancellation, then even if it was verbal, and witnessed, BEFORE SHE PAID THE DEPOSIT, then a court may find for the venue.
Here is some detail:
"In order to form a contract, the parties must agree on what either party will do under the terms of the contract; they must have the intention to form contractual relations; and there must be consideration.
It is immaterial whether the contract is verbal, in writing, or partially verbal and partially written, although common sense says that recording the agreement in writing creates a document that may be referred to for its terms in the event of a dispute between the parties. Obviously, this is particularly important when disputes arise in respect of the agreement, whether the dispute arises in respect to the work to be performed or sums to be paid under the agreement.
Both verbal contracts and written contracts are equally legally binding contracts, subject to the existence of the usual requirements for formation of a contract.
Certainty and Completeness of Agreement
Agreement is reached between contracting parties when an offer is made by one party which is clearly and unequivocally accepted by the other party. (Important here Jay, was she made clear on the T&C's and did she agree?)
The offer must be sufficiently certain so as the parties know what is to be performed, and the agreement must be complete. An agreement is incomplete when an essential term has not been agreed or there are further matters to be agreed.
Agreements in principle are usually considered not to be complete, as are contracts expressly stated to be ‘subject to contract’. In deciding whether a contract is complete, a court will consider a contract to be formed when, from the viewpoint of an officious bystander, the parties have agreed in the same terms on the same subject matter.
Verbal Contracts
There is no legal impediment to the parties entering into a contract based on their conduct and verbal statements or representations. When parties agree the terms of the contract by verbal statements, the binding terms of the contract are more difficult to ascertain.
Usually a court will look to the history of the statements made by the parties and the performance of the parties to obtain assistance in determining what was actually agreed by the parties. Where one person however has not performed their part of the bargain, and court is left to more uncertain means in reaching a decision.
Draft contract documents, emails, letters and order forms may lend assistance to deciding the terms of a verbal agreement, and courts have used similar agreements with third parties to apply a standard of reasonableness in determining the terms of the contract in the absence of writing.
In the event that a party refuses to sign a contract, it is essential to write to the person and confirm the terms of the contract as they are understood, to provide a evidence at a later date as to the terms of the agreement reached.
In the absence of any other evidence these communications are may be key in assisting the resolution of disputes relating to the terms of the contract. It may be useful to know that where an verbal agreement has been reached, which is later confirmed in writing but the written document does not properly record the terms, that it may be rectified using the doctrine of rectification."
Though it best to include all that as it as a learning experience for all of you.
Jonathan.
:wink:
-
Cheers Jon was the answer I was looking for!
I had spoken to her last night and said what had gone on?
She said she was never sure about the venue and wanted to finalise the arrangements at a later date. Apparently she suffered with lack of support and unfriendly staff and also answering her direct questions became a chore. She was in direct correspondence with the hotel coordinator not the hotel manager though.
She thought the deposit was all she was going to loose as she had not been chased up by anyone from the hotel on the contract.
Apparently the event coordinator had just handed the pack and said there are documents you need to go through, but at that stage she never wanted her signature and never chased up the contract or discussed T&C.
I’ve already had a go at her for being naive on this subject and said she is in the wrong, if the contract had been signed she should pay! But due to the legalities of not signing the contract that is in theory what has saved her! Also I have said to mention best practice has not been used by the hotel especially when large amounts of money is at stake, plus the hotel could have pulled out on her on the big day as there was no contract to say otherwise , with that she finally understands the importance of contracts. The hotel manager is getting back to her to try and resolve the situation, but I think it’s not worth pursuing as the hotel is a big group and proberly just going to right it off?
-
Tell her to best leave it Jay. Cut and run, as it were.
If she gets into correspondence with the hotel, she may let slip, or inadvertently say/write something that they will use against her.
-
Okay mate I've already said to her if they get complicated just to write correspondance to her solicitors who should deal with it, but she is clever enough to watch what she writes I hope :lipsrsealed:
-
Hey thanks for everyones help in this matter it helped a great deal!
They sent me a email
"We will not pursue the matter any further" :smiley: