Terminating a contract with verbal notice
Discussion
My turn to be the idiot. Contract between 2 parties states that 90 days' notice needs to be given in writing. Would a verbal notice suffice or would the written notice requirement be enforceable? I have written evidence of the fact that verbal notice was given in the form of an email saying this needs to be confirmed in writing. No work has been done by the party seeking payment as they stopped doing the work when notice was given, which would be another piece of evidence to demonstrate that they knew it was terminated, but they want payment anyway. The payment was to be for work done, it was not for being available or on call etc.
If anyone knows the chapter and verse on this, or would be willing to provide it for a fee, please let me know. This could be pretty disastrous if written notice is legally required and it's making me feel rather sick.
If anyone knows the chapter and verse on this, or would be willing to provide it for a fee, please let me know. This could be pretty disastrous if written notice is legally required and it's making me feel rather sick.
I know that under ideal circumstances, I should've confirmed this in writing. In fact, I had that with me but it was them who insisted that I don't give notice there and then, but change the termination date to the end of year 1 of the contract instead of the 90 day notice period because we had already paid up for any work to be done till then. It was their email which acknowledged this and said to quote X clause in reply. Unfortunately, I wasn't well at the time and missed the email. They haven't done any work since, they aren't going to any work now and they knew they had been given notice. I tend to have a softly softly approach and they were the classical pressure sellers so I'm annoyed with myself for having fallen into their trap.
I don't want to be ungrateful for any advice, but if it's going to be "you should've given written notice", it's irrelevant to the situation I'm currently in so please don't. I've learned my lesson etc. etc. What I need now is to know where I stand, or the contact details of someone with the appropriate qualifications who is capable of telling me where I stand.
I don't want to be ungrateful for any advice, but if it's going to be "you should've given written notice", it's irrelevant to the situation I'm currently in so please don't. I've learned my lesson etc. etc. What I need now is to know where I stand, or the contact details of someone with the appropriate qualifications who is capable of telling me where I stand.
giantdefy said:
A verbal termination is not worth the paper it's written on
What are you basing that on? Do you have any references to case law or acts of parliament? Verbal contracts are binding in UK so I would expect that verbal contract terminations are also binding. The piece of paper is only the evidence of the conversation having taken place, and I can prove this in other ways so I would like to know the legal standing of the evidence I have in my possession. QuickQuack said:
giantdefy said:
A verbal termination is not worth the paper it's written on
What are you basing that on? Do you have any references to case law or acts of parliament? Verbal contracts are binding in UK so I would expect that verbal contract terminations are also binding. The piece of paper is only the evidence of the conversation having taken place, and I can prove this in other ways so I would like to know the legal standing of the evidence I have in my possession. NGee said:
QuickQuack said:
giantdefy said:
A verbal termination is not worth the paper it's written on
What are you basing that on? Do you have any references to case law or acts of parliament? Verbal contracts are binding in UK so I would expect that verbal contract terminations are also binding. The piece of paper is only the evidence of the conversation having taken place, and I can prove this in other ways so I would like to know the legal standing of the evidence I have in my possession. You might need the parrot as you've missed that though! As I was typing that, I was thinking that I could put a laughing a smiley here but I feel too upset even for that.
I once had a verbal job offer then denied as a new manager came in and said no - he stopped the written contract being sent.
All the legal advice was telling me a verbal offer was indeed a contract BUT that it would still be tough in court as it was all about the actual course of events.
It appears you have evidence they accepted the verbal notice so I would keep repeating that.
They will need to prove it was all very clear that you did nothing and it appears they cannot, so depending on the money involved it might be too risky/not good business for them to take it to court.
Not much you can do except keep playing the 'you were told and acted upon it ' card (plus keep any responses) and hopefully they will agree and drop it.
All the legal advice was telling me a verbal offer was indeed a contract BUT that it would still be tough in court as it was all about the actual course of events.
It appears you have evidence they accepted the verbal notice so I would keep repeating that.
They will need to prove it was all very clear that you did nothing and it appears they cannot, so depending on the money involved it might be too risky/not good business for them to take it to court.
Not much you can do except keep playing the 'you were told and acted upon it ' card (plus keep any responses) and hopefully they will agree and drop it.
Your post is light on detail, but you've acknowledged that you have breached an explicit term of your contract. Negotiate and settle for as little as possible. But settle.
You haven't mentioned any numbers, but I'll wager even the full amount would be dwarfed by the cost of going to court on some spurious ancient case law, or convoluted arguments on estoppel or repudiation, or some trumped-up counterclaim. Even if you won.
You haven't mentioned any numbers, but I'll wager even the full amount would be dwarfed by the cost of going to court on some spurious ancient case law, or convoluted arguments on estoppel or repudiation, or some trumped-up counterclaim. Even if you won.
another-steveb said:
if they claim they have not been given notice, can you claim against them for not doing the work they were contracted to..?
Just what I was thinking. If they claim that they have not been given notice then, from my layman's view, are they not in breach by not doing any work?giantdefy said:
A verbal termination is not worth the paper it's written on
A verbal contract can be either written or spoken. A spoken contract is an oral contract. So you (as well as Samuel Goldwyn) were (may be) incorrect 
Edited by stemll on Friday 23 October 08:28
QuickQuack said:
NGee said:
QuickQuack said:
giantdefy said:
A verbal termination is not worth the paper it's written on
What are you basing that on? Do you have any references to case law or acts of parliament? Verbal contracts are binding in UK so I would expect that verbal contract terminations are also binding. The piece of paper is only the evidence of the conversation having taken place, and I can prove this in other ways so I would like to know the legal standing of the evidence I have in my possession. You might need the parrot as you've missed that though! As I was typing that, I was thinking that I could put a laughing a smiley here but I feel too upset even for that.
In any case, if you have a contract that says you need to provide 90 days notice in writing of termination and you do so orally then no it is not valid. Other party may accept it, but they don't have to.
Edited by AngryPartsBloke on Friday 23 October 08:44
jondude said:
I once had a verbal job offer then denied as a new manager came in and said no - he stopped the written contract being sent.
All the legal advice was telling me a verbal offer was indeed a contract BUT that it would still be tough in court as it was all about the actual course of events.
...
You either had bad legal advice, or you misunderstood the advice. All the legal advice was telling me a verbal offer was indeed a contract BUT that it would still be tough in court as it was all about the actual course of events.
...
An oral* offer can lead to a contract if the offer is accepted, and the other ingredients of a contract are present. An offer by itself does not make a contract. An offer has to be accepted. Unless a particular mode of acceptance is stipulated by the offer, then the offer may be accepted by spoken words, by writing, or by conduct.
* A verbal offer could be one made in writing or by spoken words. People often use the term "verbal" when they mean "oral".
Whether termination has to be given in writing or not, what does the contract say about payment after termination? If it explicitely says you will pay the full contract amount, then you are probably on dodgy ground. If it is silent, then I suggest the damages could only be payment outstanding for work done. And yes, if they are denying it has been terminated and they want paying, then insist that the work is completed. If they don't they are in breach and damages start to flow the other way to your benefit.
HootersGsy said:
stemll said:
A verbal contract can be either written or spoken. A spoken contract is an oral contract. So you (as well as Samuel Goldwyn) were (may be) incorrect
A verbal contract can be written? Edited by stemll on Friday 23 October 08:28
Hmm
The term for a spoken contract is, as stemll correctly observes, an oral contract.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff