Verbal promise and contract

Rhode Island

I signed a written "agreement" in January 2005 to pay for advanced acting classes in installments at a local theater company. The total amount was $250.

I paid my first installment (balance $200) and attended two of the classes Then I was offered a new job. I spoke with my acting teacher regarding the situation - that the new position would be very time-consuming - that I wanted to continue acting but I was exhausted at night. I specifically asked about the payments - I asked if I could take another acting course when my life became more settled and apply the agreement to that course but start from scratch ie - pay the initial installment all over again. He said yes - that something could be worked out.

So, I left the course and had intentions of signing up for a new class over the winter. If he had told me that nothing could be done and that I was stuck - I would have tried in some way to continue attending the classes.

I was astounded to receive a letter in the mail last week from the theater company - stating that I owed them $200 immediately. I wrote a thoughtful email to the company manager - explaining that there must be a communication glitch - that I would be soon signing up for a course, etc.

I was even more shocked to get the extremely terse response - that my acting teacher was not an official employee of the theater company so couldn't speak for them, and further, that they would no longer offer acting classes this year.

I wrote back that I should not be expected to have knowledge of the internal hierarchical employment structure of the theater company - but that I took the advice of the person I thought could, in fact, give me the definitive answer.

On top of this - while I love my new job - I am not making ends meet and fall within the poverty level - so I don't even have the money to pay them.

In sum, I was told that my "agreement" could be rolled over for another course - I based all of my actions on that verbal promise by a person who taught for the company. Now I am being told that I should have had an awareness of who was and wasn't authorized to speak for the company and that I have to pay the remaining $200.

I would greatly appreciate advice.

What does the initial contract say, therin lies your answer. NO one here knows what you signed at the beginning. In addition if you had a new arrangement, verbally, it should have been made a part of your WRITTEN contract.

Thank you for RESPONDING - I will post the contract language when I return to my apt. I am staying with my parents for the weekend.

I wonder - your comment regarding incorporating the verbal into the written - I have never had any sort of dealings with legal issues in my 40+ years on earth. Yet, there is an assumption that I should be knowledgeable about incorporating verbal into written when I thought that our new agreement was valid? I think it's expecting a little much of a person who has never experienced such issues in the past.

slmojave said:

Thank you for RESPONDING - I will post the contract language when I return to my apt. I am staying with my parents for the weekend.

I wonder - your comment regarding incorporating the verbal into the written - I have never had any sort of dealings with legal issues in my 40+ years on earth. Yet, there is an assumption that I should be knowledgeable about incorporating verbal into written when I thought that our new agreement was valid? I think it's expecting a little much of a person who has never experienced such issues in the past.

Click to expand...

The theatre company has the legal right to expect payment. They are also correct (insofar as your post is concerned) in that the instructor is not their agent but an employee.

Unless you have proof that the instructor has the authority to enter into contracts with his/her students, the verbal statments hold no legal water.

Pay the amount owed or be sued. You have no legal grounds to contest.

Very very interesting -

My first foray into a legal problem certainly brings clarity to the perception of law and lawyers as less than decent concepts.

Structually, this can be reduced to that fact that I trusted someone - and in terms of law, trust is nonexistent.

I just wonder - if a doctor gives you a diagnosis - are you expected to have the medical knowledge to overrule the diagnosis? In other words, is the average citizen expected to have such an intimate knowledge of the field that they have the discretion to know what it a valid concept and what isn't?

Put it on my terms - I have PhD in Modern Genocide. If you were to find youself in circumstances which you deemed as potentially genocidal, I should inform you of the fact that for this or that reason, your situation isn't technically "genocide" - that you should be aware of that to begin with -- and good luck.

slmojave said:

Very very interesting -

My first foray into a legal problem certainly brings clarity to the perception of law and lawyers as less than decent concepts.

Structually, this can be reduced to that fact that I trusted someone - and in terms of law, trust is nonexistent.

I just wonder - if a doctor gives you a diagnosis - are you expected to have the medical knowledge to overrule the diagnosis? In other words, is the average citizen expected to have such an intimate knowledge of the field that they have the discretion to know what it a valid concept and what isn't?

Put it on my terms - I have PhD in Modern Genocide. If you were to find youself in circumstances which you deemed as potentially genocidal, I should inform you of the fact that for this or that reason, your situation isn't technically "genocide" - that you should be aware of that to begin with -- and good luck.

Click to expand...

Now you're just getting ridiculous. Grow up.