Are they still responsible for fulfiling the contract?
2007-12-30 05:33:02 · 9 answers · asked by Cybele 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No he is not of legal mind and sole to care for the obligation, They may still attempt to get it filled, and may even try to get family to. They are not legally committed to pay it.
2007-12-30 05:41:15 · answer #1 · answered by simplysuewi 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In the case of an incompetent, a court so declaring would appoint a conservator for the affairs of the incompetent. My guess would be that the conservator would be a successor in interest to the agreement, unless some excuse to breach of the agreement were found to apply, such as lack of competence or frustration of purpose. As a general rule of law, an incompetent should be excused from further performance, unless and until such time as the incompetent was ajudged competent again. In the case of a lease, the question then becomes against whom a remedy might be available. If the incompetent is married, the remedy is against the spouse, since the contract would be a joint obligation, unless specified otherwise in the language of the document, or otherwise not possible due to circumstance.
Otherwise, the agrieved party would have to make "best efforts" to relet the unit in a commercially reasonable manner and without undue delay. The damage available would be the daily rental rate for the unit, or "mesne damages."
In summary, incompetence is an excuse for the party declared incompetent, but the other party to the agreement does have recourse, as outlined above.
2007-12-30 05:49:24 · answer #2 · answered by Jeffrey V 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most everyone here is answering from their heart.
Yes, the person is still responsible for the contract. However, depending on the circumstances of the disability and the conditions of the contract, there are ususally ways to remedy the situation equitable for both sides. Most people in this situation will be glad to try and work something out fairly, but they are not supposed to take a large financial hit because someone else did not take any precautions concerning this possibility.
Whenever you sign any contract, you must consider the impact and consequences of just such incidences. If it is a $200 financing arrangement for a new stereo, probably not too big a deal. However, if it is several thousand dollars, then you must plan for whatever reason could occur that would leave you unable to pay for it.
Someone representing the person in the coma will have to show that evidence to the landlord and then work with them to resolve the issue.
Otherwise, the landlord will be forced to take legal action to assert his rights and recover his damages. Again, for small amounts, if the landlord is convinced of the situation (aware of the actual disability) and can rent the property again, most will probably not look to recover every dollar from this situation. But, he must have a legal way to be assured of the disability so that he can appropriately make the correct decision to protect his own interests.
2007-12-30 06:50:59 · answer #3 · answered by bkc99xx 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wrong, wrong, wrong - EVERYONE!
Not even death absolves a person from legal responsibilities. The only thing that changes in the scenario described is the name of the person signing the cheques, if you will - the guardian/trustee appointed either by coma or the state to oversee the decision-making until coma wakes up or dies. If coma dies, executor of the coma's estate will likely become the decision-maker.
This scenario illustrates why it's important to make a will / representation agmt ASAP. As well as providing for dependants, the making of a will forces us to turn the mind to powers of atty (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_of_attorney and http://www.cba.org/BC/public_media/wills/180.aspx) and so on.
Coma's rep here will have to tell landlord about the change in coma's health affecting contract IF it will affect contract. Family may wish to remain bound, in which case landlord must be informed of the new source of payments. A new lease may even be required depending on place and landlord.
2007-12-30 06:00:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The contract is good providing that it happens in a leap year & the coma must start during a full moon on an odd number day. Other than that, no, it's no good.
2007-12-30 05:49:19 · answer #5 · answered by donronsen 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO. Such people become wards of one of their family members or the State. You will have to contact an attorney or a paralegal to find the best way to terminate the lease and free yourself from the terms of the lease that apply to you.
2007-12-30 05:43:12 · answer #6 · answered by Mocha 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Null and Void.
2007-12-30 05:40:29 · answer #7 · answered by ed 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
no
2007-12-30 05:53:27 · answer #8 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No...
2007-12-30 05:39:29 · answer #9 · answered by jlohlinger 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋