Ask a Business Lawyer. Get Business Law Questions Answered ASAP.
Thank you for your question. Please permit me to assist you with your concerns.To answer your question directly, I am afraid that the business is indeed liable. This is a situation of 'apparent authority'. Your employees are the agents of the business. Being agents, they represent the business and they therefore can make decisions on behalf of the business, regardless on whether those decisions are ultimately wise or bone-headed. So long as the other person had a reasonable belief that he was speaking with someone who had 'apparent authority' to make such contracts, the contract is valid. "Apparent authority" is what the agent is believed to have rights to do regardless on whether or not it is accurate. For example if you see someone wearing a store shirt, you assume that this person has the ability to help you find items. If that person is, for example, not a store employee, or is employed in a different division, it still does not detract from that reasonable assumption. "Actual authority" is, on the other hand, what the agent can really do. Both of these types of authorities can be utilized for such a situation by a third party. I am sorry, truly, but this is a valid agreement since the decision to enter into this agreement was based on a perceived benefit and it was done during the regular scope of doing business.Good luck.
"ability to help me find items" is a far throw from a $4500 contract for a service.
You mean to say that if I walk in to any store, let's say Home Depot, and I find a half witted employee, convince them to sign up for an expensive service and tape record it ... that it would be legal for me to require Home Depot to pay on the contract?
Cathy,Thank you for your follow-up. Not quite--please notice that I stated that the other party to the contract has to have a 'reasonable belief' that such a contract could be made and be binding. When your employee spoke with the other representative and made the contract, since the communication took place via phone and your employee agreed to the transaction, it can be considered that this 'reasonable belief' was upheld. It would be unreasonable for someone to claim that a store clerk has the apparent authority to make contracts on behalf of the business, but calling a business and having that employee affirm that he had authority is a different story.
From your facts I do not know if your employee was solicited or the employee took the act upon herself to sign the agreement--if she solicited then the claim for apparent authority is even stronger since it can be shown that your employee went to seek out this agreement. In case where she was solicited, if your employee affirmed that she could make such a contract, the contract was deemed valid.
I do not know how much responsibility you give to your employees but if they can pay bills on behalf of the business, then they are entering into contracts daily--this is a similar situation only obviously not as favorable to you and your business. It still does not void out the contract on basis that your employee could not enter into it, however--the better argument may be based on fraud, misrepresentation, and breach of contract for failure to provide the services if that is applicable in this instance.Good luck.
No, none of my employees pay bills on behalf of my business. I am the only one who pays the bills.
My company was solicited by the vendor, not the other way around.
Yes, they provided the service. They listed us on a vague website.
Ok, I'm liable. I get that. Can I take another tack?
Fraud? How would that pertain?
Misrepresentation? She believed she was speaking the THE yellow pages. Would that offer me any help?
Thank you for your follow-up, Cathy.That is exactly why I brought up misrepresentation--if your employee reasonably believed that he was talking to a different company (the real yellow pages) and the other party KNEW of the mistake but chose to not enlighten your employee of the facts, that can be considered a mistake to the contract and therefore grounds under misrepresentation and willful omission or pertinent facts. Fraud would pertain if they intentionally stated that they were someone else--it is a far tougher argument to make in this case. So yes, this can offer you some help but purely from a very practical position that is based on my past experience, I rarely see such contracts overturned by the courts. This is likely going to be binding against you unless you can find a legitimate basis that your employee was actively misled.Good luck.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).