Legal terminology question

[BitVyper]

Oh, laws always favour businesses. That's okay - life favours me everywhere. Like I said before:

I'm okay with that. Just like I'm sure they'll be okay with me complaining to their bosses every time the office is closed so much as one minute before seven o'clock.

It doesn't sound like much, but they like to close up twenty minutes to half an hour early every day. I've had no problem with that in the past, but if they want to be jerks, I will force them to fulfill every single second of their obligation every single day.

[synkr0nized]

Property managers in general tend to give people the shaft. At least that's been my meager experience with it as a tenant for the last whatever years. It doesn't help that I currently live in a college town, where a lot of undergrads -- who can't all fit on campus in the first place -- rent places and both a)likely deserve to be treated poorly as they are poor tenants and b)don't know their ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to standing up for themselves living on their own and get pushed around easy. Sadly this rubs onto the rest of us as well, and I've learned not to take it sitting down. For example, the last time I renewed my lease, they quoted me one price and then attempted to charge me more when the next year started. So, I kindly pointed this out to them and have not been paying that price since. A simple matter, but I don't want to hazard a guess at how many undergrads in town don't notice or let that one slide.

[BitVyper]

Sadly this rubs onto the rest of us as well, and I've learned not to take it sitting down

Damn right. They will try to get away with anything and everything if you don't fight them.

[Solid Snake]

Oh man.
I could have totally told you the correct answer back fall semester when I was taking Property and Contracts, but now I'm taking Torts, Constitutional Law, and Criminal Justice.
...And it's shocking to reflect on how much of Contracts and Property I've completely forgotten in the interim.

But let me try anyway!

The problem here is that verbal agreements coterminous with the contract itself don't actually nullify the terms of a written contract. What's written on the contract is generally what the law recognizes, and circumstances outside of the written contract itself cannot be used to directly contradict a written term. When the terms as written are ambiguous, you have much more leeway of introducing extraneous facts. But when the terms are directly contradictory, you're in a bit of trouble in Court. (This is called the parol evidence rule.)

What this means is: If the terms of the Contract say "you pay a late fee if the money doesn't come in after the 1st the month," and then they close their office early, and you complain (as you should), and they verbally respond with an "Oh jeez, I guess you're right," but they forward the bill to you anyway, you can't introduce the verbal (non-written) evidence that they said they were totally wrong for closing the office early as an "excuse" to justify you not fulfilling the written terms of the contract. Things would be different if this were still the offer and acceptance stage of the contract, but it sounds like this is a deal you signed onto quite some time ago.

One way out of this is if the terms of the lease happens to specify the hours their office would be open. So long as you have some form of written proof that their office is established to be open certain hours, and so long as you can prove they weren't open those hours on that day, you have a prima facie case. (don't be shocked if they contradict you with testimony in Court, with something to the vague effect of "I seem to remember us being open normal hours that day," even though you know they're lying, just because they're assholes.)

It's an uphill battle, though. You clearly "violated" the plain written terms of the Contract. Of course, we all know you had perfect justification for doing so. They weren't open; how could they accept your money?
Best thing to do is at least try to clear this up casually with the landowner before even resorting to using legal language. If you just say something to the effect of "I had the money before it was due, but your office was closed, and your office should not have been closed then," it's possible the landowner will eliminate the fees, or at least offer to negotiate. The landowner has as much incentive as you do to avoid going to Court over this.

Note: All of this is based in American law. And all of it is extraordinarily rusty. No clue how it might apply elsewhere. Hopefully, upon realizing the place had closed prematurely, you documented it with evidence? Took a photo of the closed building while holding out your watch in broad daylight, or something? Because that'd definitely help.

EDIT: Did the landowner give you any reason to believe, based on a statement made after you confronted them about their premature closing, that they'd waive the late fee? A direct statement to the effect of "We violated the terms of our agreement by closing too early, so we'll modify the contract terms of the due date for this month?"
...Because such a modification to a contract might be accepted, even verbally.

EDIT 2:

If you take down the lease and explain to them(again) and point out the time plus the fact you didn't get prior notice. Then you should be fine, hopefully the person isn't a douche though.

The problem there is that to hold up in Court you have to be able to prove, via evidence (and more than just one person's testimony) that the office did close prematurely and that in fact you had no prior notice (in the form of something as simple as a letter placed in your mailbox) that the office would be closed early. It'd also help if the due date were included as written in the terms of the lease and included the last possible time (in hours) to submit the check, like "before 5:00pm." As is, the best way to avoid these situations in general is always to make sure you give 'em the money the day before their "due date," because otherwise the terms as written imply that the office could close down for any reason that very day and you might well end up shafted with late fees.

And it's too easy for landowners to sleaze their way out of this. No proof that the office closed early? It's he-said, she-said, and whose testimony does the Court favors? Probably the landlord's assuming they'd have better access to testimonies they could practically manufacture if they were willing to lie. Even if you prove they close early, the landowner just responds with "Well we offered you prior notice to submit the money before the usual time, in the form of..." and they can recite dozens of real or fictitious possibilities. A letter they stuck under your door or in your mailbox that you must've lost, a phone call that for some reason didn't reach you, an e-mail but oh snap, you gave them the wrong e-mail address, it's not correct in their files (hint: You didn't.)

I bet your landowner's also waging that the charge is too low in value for you to seriously want to contest in Court in the first place. It can cost quite a bit of money.

[Wigmund]

This problem could be solved the easy way.

with Fire*





This should not be seen as an endorsement of the use of Fire to solve life's problems such as arguments with loved ones, house-breaking puppies, and removing cats from trees. If one uses Fire to solve one's problems, one shall be mocked by Wigmund who disavows ever seriously recommending the use of Fire to solve one's problems...yadda yadda yadda other lawyerly bullshit...

[BitVyper]

So long as you have some form of written proof that their office is established to be open certain hours, and so long as you can prove they weren't open those hours on that day, you have a prima facie case.

Have the former, don't have the latter. That's okay though, since if it actually reaches the point where the only possible resolution would be court, I'll just pay the late fee and switch to plan "force them to follow their own rules, and be prepared for when this invariably happens again." This is always a great tactic for dealing with bureaucracies on account of most of their rules being there for liability reasons, not because they actually want to follow them.

I was going to talk to them today, but then I wound up working twelve and a half fucking hours, so to hell with that.

And it's too easy for landowners to sleaze their way out of this

See, the fortunate thing in this case is that I'm dealing with a larger company that owns a lot of properties. The guys I have a problem with right now are the lower management. My experience has always been that when you sound like you know your shit and are ready to fight, the next guys up the chain will usually just make the lower management to back down on small stuff like this.

Anyway, that all gives me some ideas for looking stuff up, so thanks a lot, Snake. Now I know.

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by BitVyper

Anyway, that all gives me some ideas for looking stuff up, so thanks a lot, Snake. Now I know.

Just promise me you won't make the critical mistake of acting on the mere words of a first year law student whose experience on the matter extends only to a fall semester basic course in the ABC fundamentals of Contracts!

[BitVyper]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

Just promise me you won't make the critical mistake of acting on the mere words of a first year law student whose experience on the matter extends only to a fall semester basic course in the ABC fundamentals of Contracts!

Oh no, like I said, I just started this thread to get some ideas for refining my search. The goal here is not to take someone to court over a piddling little late fee. I pretty much knew exactly what I was going to do before I made this thread. The goal here is to track down the little bits of law I want to have fresh in my mind when people start going "nuh uh" so that I can make them go "hoshit, this guy sounds serious."

Plus I wanna know a bit more about this stuff anyway.

Edit: Believe me, if I actually planned to end up in court, I probably wouldn't post here about it.