Sentences with phrase «never agreed to the contract»

Is it so that latter in a dispute, if a person claims they never agreed to the contract,...

Is it so that latter in a dispute, if a person claims they never agreed to the contract, their signature could be used as evidence that they did?

Not exact matches

Actually, several months passed before the contract was formalized and we left for T&T, enough time for Mary Jane to agree to be a co-author and to buy some «Punch M - 3» capsaicin spray (she never had to use it).

while I agree he should have never ever have been offered a new contract in the first place I'm pretty certain Stan didn't hold a gun to his head and forced him to sign again.

He's probably not going to sign until it's already 2015, as his agent, Scott Boras, is never in a rush for this sort of thing unless someone floors his client with a deal that just can't be turned down — think back to Jacoby Ellsbury agreeing to a seven - year, $ 153 million contract with the Yankees in early December of 2013 for an example that sort of thing.

Free agents Olivares and Velarde agreed to below - market contracts to stay with the A's, as did Jaha, who never even spoke to another club before signing a paltry two - year, $ 6 million deal.

Time for some brutal honesty... this team, as it stands, is in no better position to compete next season than they were 12 months ago, minus the fact that some fans have been easily snowed by the acquisition of Lacazette, the free transfer LB and the release of Sanogo... if you look at the facts carefully you will see a team that still has far more questions than answers... to better show what I mean by this statement I will briefly discuss the current state of affairs on a position - by - position basis... in goal we have 4 potential candidates, but in reality we have only 1 option with any real future and somehow he's the only one we have actively tried to get rid of for years because he and his father were a little too involved on social media and he got caught smoking (funny how people still defend Wiltshire under the same and far worse circumstances)... you would think we would want to keep any goaltender that Juventus had interest in, as they seem to have a pretty good history when it comes to that position... as far as the defenders on our current roster there are only a few individuals whom have the skill and / or youth worthy of our time and / or investment, as such we should get rid of anyone who doesn't meet those simple requirements, which means we should get rid of DeBouchy, Gibbs, Gabriel, Mertz and loan out Chambers to see if last seasons foray with Middlesborough was an anomaly or a prediction of things to come... some fans have lamented wildly about the return of Mertz to the starting lineup due to his FA Cup performance but these sort of pie in the sky meanderings are indicative of what's wrong with this club and it's wishy - washy fan - base... in addition to these moves the club should aggressively pursue the acquisition of dominant and mobile CB to stabilize an all too fragile defensive group that has self - destructed on numerous occasions over the past 5 seasons... moving forward and building on our need to re-establish our once dominant presence throughout the middle of the park we need to target a CDM then do whatever it takes to get that player into the fold without any of the usual nickel and diming we have become famous for (this kind of ruthless haggling has cost us numerous special players and certainly can't help make the player in question feel good about the way their future potential employer feels about them)... in order for us to become dominant again we need to be strong up the middle again from Goalkeeper to CB to DM to ACM to striker, like we did in our most glorious years before and during Wenger's reign... with this in mind, if we want Ozil to be that dominant attacking midfielder we can't keep leaving him exposed to constant ridicule about his lack of defensive prowess and provide him with the proper players in the final third... he was never a good defensive player in Real or with the German National squad and they certainly didn't suffer as a result of his presence on the pitch... as for the rest of the midfield the blame falls squarely in the hands of Wenger and Gazidis, the fact that Ramsey, Ox, Sanchez and even Ozil were allowed to regularly start when none of the aforementioned had more than a year left under contract is criminal for a club of this size and financial might... the fact that we could find money for Walcott and Xhaka, who weren't even guaranteed starters, means that our whole business model needs a complete overhaul... for me it's time to get rid of some serious deadweight, even if it means selling them below what you believe their market value is just to simply right this ship and change the stagnant culture that currently exists... this means saying goodbye to Wiltshire, Elneny, Carzola, Walcott and Ramsey... everyone, minus Elneny, have spent just as much time on the training table as on the field of play, which would be manageable if they weren't so inconsistent from a performance standpoint (excluding Carzola, who is like the recent version of Rosicky — too bad, both will be deeply missed)... in their places we need to bring in some proven performers with no history of injuries... up front, although I do like the possibilities that a player like Lacazette presents, the fact that we had to wait so many years to acquire some true quality at the striker position falls once again squarely at the feet of Wenger... this issue highlights the ultimate scam being perpetrated by this club since the arrival of Kroenke: pretend your a small market club when it comes to making purchases but milk your fans like a big market club when it comes to ticket prices and merchandising... I believe the reason why Wenger hasn't pursued someone of Henry's quality, minus a fairly inexpensive RVP, was that he knew that they would demand players of a similar ilk to be brought on board and that wasn't possible when the business model was that of a «selling» club... does it really make sense that we could only make a cheeky bid for Suarez, or that we couldn't get Higuain over the line when he was being offered up for half the price he eventually went to Juve for, or that we've only paid any interest to strikers who were clearly not going to press their current teams to let them go to Arsenal like Benzema or Cavani... just part of the facade that finally came crashing down when Sanchez finally called their bluff... the fact remains that no one wants to win more than Sanchez, including Wenger, and although I don't agree with everything that he has done off the field, I would much rather have Alexis front and center than a manager who has clearly bought into the Kroenke model in large part due to the fact that his enormous ego suggests that only he could accomplish great things without breaking the bank... unfortunately that isn't possible anymore as the game has changed quite dramatically in the last 15 years, which has left a largely complacent and complicit Wenger on the outside looking in... so don't blame those players who demanded more and were left wanting... don't blame those fans who have tried desperately to raise awareness for several years when cracks began to appear... place the blame at the feet of those who were well aware all along of the potential pitfalls of just such a plan but continued to follow it even when it was no longer a financial necessity, like it ever really was...

«to be fair it would be harsh for wenger to force ospina to spend another year on the arsenal bench» i completely disagree with you we are talking about professional players with contracts to honour, if wenger decides to keep ospina he would have to bite the bullet and give his best to compete with cech you never what could happen the season is long and there are many games to be played and with our luck we have to expect some injuries, also wenger is already guilty of being too loyal towards certain players it, s about time he shows his ruthless streak!do you agree??

Any country could claim to have an unwritten contract with the people that applies even though some / all never agreed to it.

RE: terms and conditions... I'm sure they are in the service contract which every user agrees to (but never reads) when they register for the service.

For example, if a buyer makes an Offer in writing and the seller accepts verbally and then backs out; the contract is considered to never have been agreed upon or accepted.

I'm asking is the confidentiality clause legally of the contract itself, legally binding, though I never expressly agreed to it?

I find it rather hard to believe you can actually disclaim liability with a notice buried in part of the book which no one reads (unlike contract law, the reader never explicitly «agrees» to this disclaimer), but it probably doesn't hurt.

There is obviously no contract between us because I never agreed to one.

Instead, the contract agreements compel a driver to agree to enter into a binding transportation contract with a rider whose identity they will never know, to a destination that will not be revealed until the journey begins.

Of course you have to provide personal information such as the pertinent details of your resume or the specifics of your hiring needs, however as a candidate you will never need to provide banking details or your sin number for example, and as an employer you will never need to provide any financial details until a contract is agreed and signed.

You can not bypass copyright law by asking your members to agree to a contract they were never explained or never had proper legal council to consider.

But if you don't disclose it and they file a lawsuit, you can be sure they'll testify that they would never have bought the property — at least not on the terms agreed to in the contract — had the condition been disclosed to them.

An Illinois appellate court has considered whether a buyer could claim specific performance of a real estate contract based on a right of first refusal the parties had agreed to negotiate but had never reached an agreement on its specific terms.