Contract fun n games - hold your ground...
- Thread starter Ed Witles
- Start date
Poor you, Ed, if family politics rears its ugly face upon you. Unless your reported situation is incomplete, the B&G signature is nowhere on a legal document (at least from how this reads. Am I missing something?).
Dad signs the contract, Dad is in charge. Dad signs the contract, Dad is liable. B&G have secondary say so only with FOB's permission. You are now totally legally obligated to Dad unless he signs a specific waiver releasing you.
Dad signs the contract, Dad is in charge. Dad signs the contract, Dad is liable. B&G have secondary say so only with FOB's permission. You are now totally legally obligated to Dad unless he signs a specific waiver releasing you.
Then, with this added to the contract:
both the B2B and the G2B are equal in authority and responsibility.
Man.....again....I got lost at "the" and "and".
I'll just keep checking back and thanking everyone for their killer knowledge.
Love these threads....keep the posts comin'.
I'll just keep checking back and thanking everyone for their killer knowledge.
Love these threads....keep the posts comin'.
90% of your clients are lawyers? :sqconfused::sqerr: That's your primary problem.
How much you want to bet they are more price concious than used car salesmen?
Jeremiah: In essence, the purpose of the bride2b and the grrom2b to sign the contract is primarily to keep your butt out of possible political turmoil. If just the bride signs, she can muscle you by saying (not in front of her new huband2b) to do it her way because she signed the contract.
If the father signs the contract and the groom, at the reception says No Slow Songs the rest of the night followed by Dad asking for Unchained Melody, what now?
Do you honestly think I conjure this stuff up? I've done well over 4,000 weddings and another 1,000 other stuff. This stuff is all born from crap that has happened in real life.
When sexually transmitted diseases disappear, throw away the condoms. When mean and/or dishonest and/or stupid people disappear, throw away the contracts.
Until then, wear them both in good health.
If the father signs the contract and the groom, at the reception says No Slow Songs the rest of the night followed by Dad asking for Unchained Melody, what now?
Do you honestly think I conjure this stuff up? I've done well over 4,000 weddings and another 1,000 other stuff. This stuff is all born from crap that has happened in real life.
When sexually transmitted diseases disappear, throw away the condoms. When mean and/or dishonest and/or stupid people disappear, throw away the contracts.
Until then, wear them both in good health.
DJ Ducky :
If there is an objection, approach it as Ed did. Explain your position, ask for theirs, and then (tah dah) ask them, "If you were my lawyer and represented me and why I'm concerned about ????, how would you write the clause to protect both me and you?"
You simply won't believe how open most quality lawyers are to the challenge and the invaluable information you'll get. Take maximum advantage of the opportunity.
Actually, this is a perfect opportunity for great (and free) legal advice.
If there is an objection, approach it as Ed did. Explain your position, ask for theirs, and then (tah dah) ask them, "If you were my lawyer and represented me and why I'm concerned about ????, how would you write the clause to protect both me and you?"
You simply won't believe how open most quality lawyers are to the challenge and the invaluable information you'll get. Take maximum advantage of the opportunity.
I know I come off sounding like an idiot when I say that stuff....I'm just totally playing man. I really do read and learn from it. I'm just ignorant mostly.
Point taken...but I was kidding around.
If I ever did have a lawyer for a client, I doubt I'd take much advantage of any opportunity to reword the contract, because it would likely end up being written in legalese. I try to keep my contract easy to read and understand because not every client I have has a Ph.D. Besides, the law school is down in Bloomington (Indiana University) - too far away for me to be too worried.
Jeremiah : If I came off as attempting or insinuating in any way that you are less than brilliant, it was an error in my written words. That was not the intent and I too was tongue in cheek. The "making it up" part is for real in the meaning that when a contract clause is presented here with an explanation, the explanation has either happened to me or a close circle of DJ friends who, at one time, pooled our mutual wealth for the original contract development. Deeply sorry for any misunderstanding of the intent of the written word.
To your point, DJ Ducky, we share the same sentiments. Remember the contract battle cry? "The purpose of a well written contract is not so much to win in court, it's to avoid needing to go there in the first place." If the language is not written in plain folk understanding to perhaps 8th grade level, it's indeed, too legalese. In every contract clause in my document, there is nothing to be misunderstood if a person can read and has an IQ of more than 70. If less than 70, they are not completely qualified to enter into contract any way. So in your case of wishing to keep it simple, demand that the clause authors keep it simple. You're the boss.
To your point, DJ Ducky, we share the same sentiments. Remember the contract battle cry? "The purpose of a well written contract is not so much to win in court, it's to avoid needing to go there in the first place." If the language is not written in plain folk understanding to perhaps 8th grade level, it's indeed, too legalese. In every contract clause in my document, there is nothing to be misunderstood if a person can read and has an IQ of more than 70. If less than 70, they are not completely qualified to enter into contract any way. So in your case of wishing to keep it simple, demand that the clause authors keep it simple. You're the boss.
After reading about this scenario previously on DJ Chat (and not wanting to be dragged into a family spat), last year I added the following to my contract for any case where the B&G do not sign the contract.
Para 7, part 3) The Client agrees that the Bride & Groom shall have complete control over the planning of and the music selections for their wedding ceremony and reception
DJ Bob : That is almost the waiver mentioned above pre built-in.
Please don't misinterpret this suggestion as it is just that. A suggestion. Re-look at the clause verbiage as posted. It reads (to me) as the authority is relinquished only for the music.
Might I suggest, if this is the course of contract action you choose, " The Client agrees that the Bride & Groom shall have complete control and have the final decision in all facets of the event planning and music selection encompassed by this contract.
Again, not nit picking nor wishing to cause any arguments however that clause says the Bride & Groom but if nowhere within the contract they are specifically named, one might argue the clause ambiguious. After all, you have named who you are, you have named who the client is, so who the hell are Bride & Groom ?
If you name them (the Bride & Groom) as (e.g John Doe and Jane Doe) in your contract as such, your clause cannot be misconstrued or manipulated and is very tight.
Although I've never lost a contract in refusing to allow parental signatures in lieu of the duality of both the Bride & Groom signatures, the inclusion of your waiver, in its revised form, would work very well. May I use it?
Please don't misinterpret this suggestion as it is just that. A suggestion. Re-look at the clause verbiage as posted. It reads (to me) as the authority is relinquished only for the music.
Might I suggest, if this is the course of contract action you choose, " The Client agrees that the Bride & Groom shall have complete control and have the final decision in all facets of the event planning and music selection encompassed by this contract.
Again, not nit picking nor wishing to cause any arguments however that clause says the Bride & Groom but if nowhere within the contract they are specifically named, one might argue the clause ambiguious. After all, you have named who you are, you have named who the client is, so who the hell are Bride & Groom ?
If you name them (the Bride & Groom) as (e.g John Doe and Jane Doe) in your contract as such, your clause cannot be misconstrued or manipulated and is very tight.
Although I've never lost a contract in refusing to allow parental signatures in lieu of the duality of both the Bride & Groom signatures, the inclusion of your waiver, in its revised form, would work very well. May I use it?
Cap,
No problem. If anything I felt like I was being a twit. Seems like every thread in it lately gets that reply from me! lol No more apologies or someone's gonna tell us to get a room.
I'll settle for a cigar and some brandy sometime with ya.
Some day when I get my big boy pants I'm gonna see some of these folks at a convention. Maybe knardini and I need to hop a flight in 2010 or 2011.
No problem. If anything I felt like I was being a twit. Seems like every thread in it lately gets that reply from me! lol No more apologies or someone's gonna tell us to get a room.
I'll settle for a cigar and some brandy sometime with ya.
Some day when I get my big boy pants I'm gonna see some of these folks at a convention. Maybe knardini and I need to hop a flight in 2010 or 2011.
"I just read the contract this evening - and want to see if we can talk or communicate by e-mail to complete it. I am not comfortable with paragraph's 10 and 16, and they are not fully clear to me. I am fine being potentially responsible if something happens to your equipment and music -- but I'm worried about the scope of those paragraph's outside of damages to equipment and music. That is why I asked about your insurance - so that we do not have to worry about any possible mis-step. I see your insurance mentioned in the contract, but we could be still be potentially liable per this contract, before the insurance. Can we go ahead and get this language modified and have paragraph 10 limited to equipment and music, and strike paragraph 16?"
I had the exact same problem last year, with the FOG. He was a lawyer and wanted it removed. I told him no and held firm. Turns out he was really just trying to run me off, he wanted the B&G to hire a band.
I also have the clause that the B&G have full control over the wedding and reception no matter who signs it.
I had the exact same problem last year, with the FOG. He was a lawyer and wanted it removed. I told him no and held firm. Turns out he was really just trying to run me off, he wanted the B&G to hire a band.
I also have the clause that the B&G have full control over the wedding and reception no matter who signs it.
DjDennis
RIP- My Dad (2011), Sister (2013) and Mum (2017)
ok now this gets to contracts
maybe a thread on showing us what is written in everyone's contract for example
maybe a thread on showing us what is written in everyone's contract for example