cross-posted from: https://linkage.ds8.zone/post/341870
I signed an agreement with a creditor that obligates me to pay them using a bank inside the country. This was fine initially but then I moved out of the country and the acct was closed. Other banks will not open an account for me and the creditor refuses cash. So the creditor is treating me like a non-payer to a quite harsh extent.
I have over-simplified here but I just want to know very generally what the common practices are around the world for contract law situations where someone without much bargaining power signs a contract that obligates them to do something that’s only achievable if other 3rd-parties agree to serve them, and then those other 3rd-parties later refuse.
BTW, I am not interested in advice on situational hacks and angles like “find a friend to pay for you”. I want to know how courts treat the situation when all options have failed. Are people typically held accountable for agreeing to something which relied on actions of others?
(the situation is not in the UK but I am still interested in answers as to how these kinds of situations are dealt with in the UK)
The post was composed with the understanding that different countries have different laws. It is not an attempt to practice UK law outside of the UK. It’s to get a general grasp on core legal theories and common practices and concepts.
For example, I learnt basics of contract law from Nolo. Nolo gives a good basic understanding of legal concepts and norms. Of course Nolo is not an all encompassing reference and does not cover variation from one jurisdiction to the next in detail. But I find that what I have learned from Nolo is very similar concepts span many different jurisdictions. You can imagine that if a law school were to only teach legal concepts that apply specifically in the location of the school, it would be a school of low standards, where lawyers could not easily adapt to other jurisdictions.
I don’t even know if the legal scenario at hand has a wild variation across jurisdictions. Some situations have more variation than others. I’m in the very early stages of trying to get a grasp on what question to ask. I don’t even speak the language of the laws that apply to me, so without even knowing the common concepts for the situation, searching for the relevant statutes is quite an undertaking. If there were some kind of latin jargon to describe the situation of being bound by the action of non-contracting actors, even that would help in finding my way to the precise statutes (or case law) that I need.
I qualify for a free lawyer since I have no income. But the agency that allocates pro bono lawyers has very narrow verification requirements (in short, I must have a certificate that proves I am in in the unemployment system). So because I am not in that system, I fall through the cracks. Which means I have to work pro se in this case.
I get it, I don’t want you to think I’m trying to dismiss you. The reason I say to consult a lawyer in your own country is not just because laws are different in different places, because yes small differences between countries can make a big difference, but law is interpreted, and the culture of the country has an impact on how the law will be interpreted. A good lawyer understands not just how to interpret the law, but how to argue that interpretation in the context of their country’s legal system. You might be able to find one who would work pro bono; if your courts are anything like the US or UK, pro se is an expensive way to guarantee a loss.
If you know a little about contract law then you should also know that if the clause about paying from a local bank was in the contract, then there’s very little you can do to get out of it. You agreed to the terms; it was on you to uphold the terms of the deal you made. Anything that’s going to get you out of that is going to be reliant on the specifics of the law your country.