Post reply

Repetition and further clarification... (by KC):

jayjay wrote:

Well Ken, we'll just have to agree to disagree ... no signed contract = invalid = null and void.

I didn't have to go to law school to know that ! A signed contract is the ONLY legally binding parcel in a court of law, period, a verbal conversation is NOT valid at all.

You are absolutely, 100 % dead wrong, but I'm not going to engage in pointless argument; you obviously have no legal background or subject knowledge whatsoever on matters of contract law. I believe that your intentions are good but, unfortunately, your facts and comprehension on this matter are completely uninformed and entirely incorrect. Clearly, you have absolutely no actual knowledge or legal experience in the arena of contract law. Whether or not you understand, accept or like the legal facts of the matter does not for one moment influence or change the simple and straightforward fact that verbal contracts are common, valid and eminently enforceable if and when all aspects of performance and consideration are mutually agreed upon.

Despite your complete lack of knowledge and /or understanding on the matter of verbal contracts, you are nonetheless still absolutely correct that the OP is in NO danger here --- NOT because "there is nothing in writing" (...which doesn't matter one bit) but instead because the "consideration" (i.e., payment) aspect was never agreed and resolved to the mutual satisfaction of both parties in order to actually consummate the "contract".