Re:Noncompete Clauses: Signing Away the Right to Get a New Job
by concede_pluto on Sunday May 14, 2017 @12:51AM
(#14334276)
How can there be a valid meeting of the minds if you're expecting me not to notice my words have been tampered with?
Re:Noncompete Clauses: Signing Away the Right to Get a New Job
by emiliobumachar on Sunday May 14, 2017 @02:43AM
(#14334566)
That is a very good argument, but some banks are very dependant on nobody reading the fine print. Can you call that a meeting of the minds?
Re:Noncompete Clauses: Signing Away the Right to Get a New Job
by big_spammer on Saturday May 13, 2017 @09:10PM
(#14333754)
This extreme case of sending the modified application back is the perfect countermove!
"In rare cases where a person still hesitated to sign his or her name, I might add 'The legal people won't approve of any changes'. Keep in mind that the legal people didn't even know they wouldn't approve of any changes. Nevertheless, the phrase worked like a charm, since 'legal people' projects, on a wide screen, a powerful image of legitimacy. One theoretically doesn't fool around with the legal people."
Part of the magic of contracts is that everyone seems to believe they are magic. But a contract is simply an agreement between two parts. You are more than welcome to suggest changes to it.
As for the PDF, just because the company makes it harder for you to change its terms it doesn't mean that you can't still do it. For an extreme case, this guy[1] scanned a credit card contract, modified its terms, and send the modified application back. He then sued the bank, and won (they settled during a later appeal).
[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing...