 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Our Subscribers Say...
I think Credit Today is fantastic. You cover many practical topics in the credit field that I use regularly. Just one recent example—a conversation on the ListServ about preferential payments—gave me tips that I used in an actual case. The specific information I picked up from this one discussion saved me $10,000, enough to cover my membership for many years!
- Steve Savino
Manager of Credit & Collections, ASSA Abloy Americas Division, New Haven, CT
Credit Today's Resource Directory and their online e-mail forum (ListServ) provide information on almost any credit-related topic you can think of. It is a great way to exchange information with other credit professionals. As the saying goes, "You don't know what you don't know."
- Scott Goen,
Credit Manager, Big Lots Stores, Inc., Wholesale Division
"We've recently started using the ListServ tool within Credit Today. This is phenomenal and powerful forum for gaining immediate feedback, ideas, and suggestions, relative to any credit topic under the sun, all in a real-time e-mail format."
-Javier Vela, Senior Credit Manager, Global Credit Services, JDA Software Group Inc.
"Being a part of the Credit Today online community is like having the expertise of hundreds of credit managers at your fingertips. These credit execs are willing to help you solve topical business issues as they arise. In the current environment of ever increasing competing priorities which reduce our opportunities to meet peers out of the office face-to-face, this is the most valuable tool you can have on your desktop! It's important that we have a mechanism to reach out to our counterparts quickly to exchange knowledge as well as to stay on top of industry trends."
- Victoria Artis, Director of Customer Financial Services, Pfizer, Inc.
"Over the last 10 years I've seen Credit Today evolve from a monthly credit publication into a quality source of information and guidance for the B2B credit community. The website, with its user friendly form downloads, will take you from examples of new account credit applications to bankruptcy forms and everything in between.
The Credit Today ListServ has become the pre-imminent online forum, providing an opportunity for discussion and comments (and occasional humor) from an impressive list of credit professionals."
David Dungan, Director of Credit
Justin Brands, Inc. (A Berkshire Hathaway company)
Fort Worth, Texas
"There are numerous credit periodicals available to the credit professional today. How good is Credit Today? Is it relevant? I always have to read it late, or online because my credit analysts want to read it the minute it comes in. When my staff wants to read a publication before I have a chance to read it then something is working in that publication. We have cancelled our other subscriptions. When you have the best you do not need the rest."
Ron Woods
Corporate Credit Manager-World Wide
Thales Navigation, Inc.
"The newsletter, coupled with the website and the ListServ, are to us, more valuable than any other credit publication, bar none. I try to use at least one article out of each newsletter for departmental training/discussion sessions."
D. Mark Constantine
Corporate Credit Mgr
Fulton Paper Company
"I love Credit Today and read every issue cover to cover. For me, the greatest perk of a subscription is ListServ. I believe Credit Today's ListServ members may be the most knowledgeable Credit brain trust in existence today. I have saved and categorized hundreds of contributions on a wide variety of topics which I refer to often. It's an easy and cost effective way to network and learn."
Doug M. Thomas
Kimberly-Clark Customer Financial Services |
|
|
 |
Answer and Analysis
If a party who has the capacity to read and understand an agreement signs that agreement, he may not later avoid his obligations under it by complaining that he did not read or understand it. Otherwise, it is fairly obvious that no one could rely on signed agreements. The same thing applies to the acceptance of is such documents as bills of lading, passenger tickets, insurance policies, bank books, and warehouse receipts where they purport to be contracts between parties. The party accepting these documents is basically assenting to their terms.
Nevertheless, the courts over the years have carefully and systemically developed a number of exceptions to this rule. If the document is not legible or easily read, a party is not bound by the fine print. Or if it was in such small type and so long and crowded that it was physically difficult to read, the court could readily believe that there was no assent.
The courts are reluctant to enforce terms of contract where they are not sufficiently called to the attention of one party, such as printed notices on letterheads, catalogs, or tags or printed notices inside of clothing. Some courts have been reluctant to give effect to clauses that are printed on the reverse side of a document unless it is clearly and conspicuously referred to on the front side of the document.
Legal Issues in Credit
An unsurpassed resource to help credit execs with complex legal issues. We translate often obscure legal language into terms that shed light instead of shadow. Here's what you need to know about liens, contracts, personal and corporate guarantees, UCC issues, security interests, PMSIs, battles of forms, managing lawsuits, antitrust issues and much more!
Check out Credit Today's
Credit Today's Legal Issues Portal
|
Purported contracts that are posted on desks, walls, or other public places may also be an exception unless the particular party to the contract actually observed the particular contractual terms or because the posting was so clearly conspicuous the party should have observed the particular contractual terms. An example is an air traveler purchasing an insurance policy from a vending machine covering only scheduled airline flights. Appearing next to the vending machine was a listing of the non-scheduled airline flights. The court held that it was a question of fact for a jury whether the passenger had been given sufficient notice of the limitation.
Another exception to the general rule of a duty to read is where a party receives a particular document that the party has no reason to believe contains any contractual terms. This would apply to the proverbial parking ticket or the ticket that is issued when a party checks his coat at the restaurant or the ticket that he receives when he delivers a package to a parcel check room. It is a fundamental rule that if a person without fault on his part assents to a document believing that it is something other what it is, the instrument would probably be considered unenforceable. The question is always when consent to the terms of the contract is present, and this determination is often decided on a case-by-case basis by the courts.
Whether the contractual provision is sufficiently called to the attention of a party to a contract probably depends upon whether a reasonable man acting in a reasonable manner and evaluating all the circumstances then and there prevailing would know that there were terms that were intended to be part of a proposed agreement between the two parties. A failure to read a particular document must be considered in view of all the circumstances with regard to the particular situation.
Fraud and mistake are another exception to the rule of duty to read. Where a particular party deliberately misrepresents what the contents of a writing or an agreement are, and the other party relies on that oral representation and then signs without having read the document, many courts will decide that the party had no right to rely on the oral representation because he was entering into a written contract and a reasonable man should know that all of the oral representations are merged into the written contract. While many courts take this position, the majority seem to feel there is a lack of mutual agreement between the parties and that the party who makes the misrepresentation is guilty of fraud and thus cannot enforce the contract.
A misrepresentation becomes more difficult where the contract specifically states that all oral representations made prior to the contract are merged into it. Even here there is a conflict among the courts, with some stating that a failure to read the integration provision in the contract which merges the oral representation into the agreement precludes that party from offering the oral representation even though it was a fraudulent one.
Perhaps the better view is that a party is bound to know the contents of the paper that he signs. Where one party persuades another to sign a contract by fraudulently representing that it contains stipulations agreed upon when in fact it does not, and where the signing party is thereby induced to omit reading the contract, it is well settled that the false representations as to the contract's contents renders it enforceable, and the party so defrauded is not precluded from contesting its validity.
Contracts of adhesion are also exceptions to the rule. An adhesion contract is one between a stronger and a weaker party in which an unconscionable bargain is entered into due to the stronger party's prodigious amount of bargaining power. In those cases, the contract is normally avoidable. An example would be the classic cases where an individual purchased an automobile and contained in the contract of purchase was an express warranty that limited damages to replacement of defective parts. In this instance the individual suffered serious personal injuries. The court stated that the lawmakers did not authorize automobile manufacturers to use its grossly disproportionate bargaining power to relieve itself from liability and to impose on the ordinary buyer, who in effect has no real freedom of choice, the grave danger of injury to himself and others that attends the sale of such a dangerous instrumentality as a defectively made automobile.
The issue of whether a consumer or a business is involved also is an important factor in these decisions. The courts tend to protect the consumer when he or she is dealing with a business. The courts tend to let the written contract stand in those situations between two businesses on the theory that the businesses are sophisticated enough to understand that they have to read the written agreement.
In this area it is difficult to set down black and white rules, because for every decision that carves out an exception, the next court will say that that exception does not apply to this set of circumstances. The facts and circumstances of every case are always different, and there are rarely cases so similar that they are almost identical. Perhaps the best advice is to read the contract so that there will not be a need to avoid the terms of the written agreement. This applies even more so to bills of lading, documents of title and warehouse receipts, because the courts apply a strict liability test to these instruments--more so than to parking tickets and coat checkroom tickets.
In the instant case, because a business is involved the better view is that the guarantee will be enforced, even though it was not executed in the presence of the credit manager. The credit manager should interview the sales rep as to the circumstances of the execution of the agreement. Carving out an exception to the rule in a business situation may be difficult--but some sales reps have no scruples.
Editor's Note: The above article originally appeared in the Credit & Collection Manager's Letter, a newsletter purchased by Credit Today in 2006. This article originally appeared prior to 2000.
<< Previous
| |
|
 |
Outlook 2012
This month's survey explores...
- What the top problems are facing credit execs currently, and
- What the top improvement initiatives are.
Click here to participate!
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
February 2012
|
|
| S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
| |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Webinars