Can lease pages be mixed and matched with revisions?

[netfocus]

I could also really use help here: If papers were sent to the leasing realtor (not landlord or landlords agent) and I then asked them to be voided before being given to the landlord for signing, does the leasing realtor legally have to comply with my request?

 

[Searchertwin]

After sending in papers found many appliances broken at apartment and neighbors from hell; I know the law doesn't offer a lease "out" here but its not my headache to deal with repairs that may or may not happen. I think the main fix was the wrong tenants name on the lease; broker had some other tenant he was working with typed in the original.

I misunderstood what you were asking for. I assume you have not moved in the place and wanted to get out of the lease before it was signed. I thought that you were still in the process of leasing and both parties adding changes till final signing.

Those papers that you sent back to the broker cannot be destroyed by him, nor can you back out of the papers that you signed. The lease is ALREADY in placed and you are living there.

Sorry, you are kinda stuck on this.

On repairs, keep everything in writing to protect yourself.

 

[netfocus]

To get this thread back on track, I would like to focus on the main topic; revising pages of a signed contract; again, if you simply replace a page or two that are non-dated without any formal amendment is that really legal? its hard to believe.

I just read this article http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/amending-existing-contract-33348.html and it ONLY mentions amendments as being legal; unfortunately it does not cover the idea of replacing a signed page, but it does seem to point to that being invalid by saying that the best solution even over an amendment is to write up a new contract.

 

[sandyclaus]

I signed the lease, yes. Then I was given several revised pages by themselves days later without the entire packet which I signed and returned individually.

To get this thread back on track, I would like to focus on the main topic; revising pages of a signed contract; again, if you simply replace a page or two that are non-dated without any formal amendment is that really legal? its hard to believe.

I just read this article http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/amending-existing-contract-33348.html and it ONLY mentions amendments as being legal; unfortunately it does not cover the idea of replacing a signed page, but it does seem to point to that being invalid by saying that the best solution even over an amendment is to write up a new contract.

It seems to me that if you signed and returned these individual pages which amended the original lease terms, then yes, the lease as a whole would be valid and enforceable. It shouldn't matter that they weren't specifically dated - if that was an issue, you could have dated your signature yourself. What matters is that if you were going to try to challenge the amendments made in the lease, then you should have requested that an entirely revised lease be presented to you for signing.

IMHO, based upon the limited info you have shared in this and your other thread, you don't have any grounds to invalid your lease just because the amendments were made on individual pages as opposed to a fully revised lease for signature. The "formal" amendment was complete once you signed the pages yourself. That's the argument that the LL will make, and you need to be prepared for them to win any challenge you make based upon your false assumptions.

I really believe that you are trying to nitpick at what you think can and can't invalidate that lease because you just don't want to honor your binding agreement to lease anymore. This ain't gonna do it.

 

[netfocus]

It seems to me that if you signed and returned these individual pages which amended the original lease terms, then yes, the lease as a whole would be valid and enforceable. It shouldn't matter that they weren't specifically dated - if that was an issue, you could have dated your signature yourself. What matters is that if you were going to try to challenge the amendments made in the lease, then you should have requested that an entirely revised lease be presented to you for signing.

First, these were not "amendments" as you keep saying; these were REPLACEMENT pages with revisions and no special amendment notations! The old pages of the lease were thrown in the trash, and these revised copies were put in their place; do you think that is a valid way to amend or alter a contract?

I actually was wrong about what has been done; 1. I signed the lease, but it had a major error. 2. They revised the major error and sent me ONLY that page to redo; however, that page only had one place for me to initial under "acknowledge receipt of a copy of this page" - that was it, no signature required. The last page of the contract has the signature area and I didn't redo that.

 

[sandyclaus]

First, these were not "amendments" as you keep saying; these were REPLACEMENT pages with revisions and no special amendment notations! The old pages of the lease were thrown in the trash, and these revised copies were put in their place; do you think that is a valid way to amend or alter a contract?

I actually was wrong about what has been done; 1. I signed the lease, but it had a major error. 2. They revised the major error and sent me ONLY that page to redo; however, that page only had one place for me to initial under "acknowledge receipt of a copy of this page" - that was it, no signature required. The last page of the contract has the signature area and I didn't redo that.

That's NOT what you said before. What you said was:

I signed the lease, yes. Then I was given several revised pages by themselves days later without the entire packet which I signed and returned individually.

So were you lying before, or are you changing your story now to fit with your need to get out of this lease?

I'm sorry, but you can't seem to keep your story straight. I'm going to stick with my previous response that basically said you are so desperate to get out of your lease that you are nitpicking to look for an excuse to use that will work. You've already said, between this thread and your other, that things are so much different than what you thought, but you already signed the lease AND the revised pages (signed and returned individually - YOUR WORDS) and are trying to figure a way out.

You are having a serious case of buyer's remorse, and you are grasping at straws to find a legal loophole to wiggle out of the contract you signed and agreed to. I will repeat - THIS isn't going to do it for you.

 

[netfocus]

That's NOT what you said before. What you said was:

I was trying to simplify this so people can analyze it easier; yes I was sent a few pages but one ended up being not applicable, only one page matters - the one where the tenants name was not my name. And I was simply completely wrong on the signature part, been sick and simply had it wrong, the replacement page was only initialed.

I'm sorry, but you can't seem to keep your story straight. I'm going to stick with my previous response that basically said you are so desperate to get out of your lease that you are nitpicking to look for an excuse to use that will work.

This is a legal amendment I found online, which would seem to fit what I would consider an amendment to be by common sense - note the signatures:

Amendment
Joe Junior and Daphne Danzig entered into the Service Agreement dated August 10, 2006 and wish to amend the Service Agreement.
Joe Junior and Daphne Danzig hereby amend Section 10 of the Service Agreement by replacing such section in its entirety with the following:
"This Agreement terminates on August 1, 2012."
Other than as amended hereby, the Service Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
So agreed, this ___ day of August, 2007.
Joe Junior (signature)
Daphne Danzig (signature)

Source: http://www.newyorksmallbusinesslaw.com/new_york_small_business_l/2007/08/how-to-amend-a.html

And as the NOLO article also said, even an amendment like above may not hold up in court and its best to completely redo the contract; and your telling me you can just throw away a page and replace it with an initialed one? Seems your the one grasping for straws when faced with the actual law as discussed by NOLO and the above attorney.

 

[sandyclaus]

I was trying to simplify this so people can analyze it easier; yes I was sent a few pages but one ended up being not applicable, only one page matters. And I was simply completely wrong on the signature part, no grand conspiracy, just been sick and had it wrong, the replacement page was only initialed.

And according to your first post, you signed and returned ALL the replacement pages.

I signed a lease with another tenants name typed in as the leasee, and then a few days later I initialed a replacement page that had my name correctly typed on it to theoretically replace the original page which would be thrown in the trash I imagine. You really think thats a valid contract fix?

Sure it is. They gave you a revised page with YOUR name on it, which you signed/initialed and returned. Contract fixed.

This is a legal amendment I found online, which would seem to fit what I would consider one to be by common sense - not the signatures:

Amendment
Joe Junior and Daphne Danzig entered into the Service Agreement dated August 10, 2006 and wish to amend the Service Agreement.
Joe Junior and Daphne Danzig hereby amend Section 10 of the Service Agreement by replacing such section in its entirety with the following:
"This Agreement terminates on August 1, 2012."
Other than as amended hereby, the Service Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
So agreed, this ___ day of August, 2007.
Joe Junior (signature)
Daphne Danzig (signature)

Source: http://www.newyorksmallbusinesslaw.com/new_york_small_business_l/2007/08/how-to-amend-a.html

So, you found AN EXAMPLE of a legal amendment online. Just because the way the LL employed the revisions you both agreed upon (i.e., having you initial each revised page) doesn't match that which you found doesn't make it invalid. It makes it DIFFERENT. And since you now have a complete document that includes REVISED pages with your initials/signature, yes, that does make it a perfectly valid and enforceable lease. It contains all of the agreed upon terms and conditions that constitute the body of the lease.

You simply aren't understanding that each time you pick at a little bit of this, it doesn't make a difference in your argument.

And, by the way, one of the reasons that I personally quote the original post in my replies is to catch people revising the original post/replies to suit the changes in their story, which I keep pointing out, and which I noticed that you have been doing. Tsk tsk.

But hey, if you disagree with what we are all telling you here, you just feel free to hire yourself that attorney you are looking for - you know, the one who is going to successfully get you out of that lease because it's what you want and expect to happen over these revised pages you keep debating about. Good luck with that.

 

[netfocus]

And according to your first post, you signed and returned ALL the replacement pages.

As I said, the only option to sign was on the last page; I was simply wrong, I just looked at the pages in question tonight and was surprised to see they only had initials. I guess you can accept that or go with your conspiracy theory, your choice.

doesn't make it invalid. It makes it DIFFERENT. And since you now have a complete document that includes REVISED pages

Here is the flaw in your argument; once the Revised and initialed page replaced an old page the contract was then DIFFERENT; yet my signature on the last page was not an acknowledgment of this DIFFERENT contract, it was an acknowledgment of the ORIGINAL contract. There is no new signature acknowledging acceptance of this new and DIFFERENT contract.

 

[sandyclaus]

As I said, the only option to sign was on the last page; I was simply wrong, I just looked at the pages in question tonight and was surprised to see they only had initials. I guess you can accept that or go with your conspiracy theory, your choice. But all of your points still seemed to be tied up with the idea of a signature, if there is no signature I think you've got nothing.

You're the one stuck on a point. Those initials, because they are YOURS and you put them there, constitute acknowledgement of each changed page. Most leases have only one signature page- which you ALSO signed.

You asked for the changes/revisions. The LL complied and revised the lease according to the changes you requested. You signed and/or initialed all the pages that were revised. There was a meeting of the minds, and the lease is now complete, including all the revisions you agreed to by your signature and/or initials.

As my son so eloquently pointed out, the only page the LL needed you to sign and accept in order to enforce the contract was the one with your corrected name on it. They were under no obligation to revise any other parts of the lease according to your liking. Once they had the signed contract that bore your correct name, the lease would have been complete and enforceable as it was. The LL did, however, agree to further revise according to your requests, and each page that was revised was given to you to initial in order to signify that they were revised according to the meeting of the minds. You initialed each one of those pages and returned them, as you have already stated.

The fact that the current lease, with all its revisions, no longer suits you and you have decided you want out makes NOT one bit of difference to anyone but you. As far as you are concerned, the fact that you didn't specifically SIGN each revision page should count for something and gives you an out - but you also pointed out that there is only one page that bears a signature on it, and that page has already been signed and dated by you.

We can go round and round, the answer will NOT change. As stated before, hire that attorney to review your logic. They should also see it as flawed, and charge you a whole bunch of money to tell you the same thing you are hearing here.

 

[netfocus]

As my son so eloquently pointed out, the only page the LL needed you to sign and accept in order to enforce the contract was the one with your corrected name on it. They were under no obligation to revise any other parts of the lease according to your liking.

Thank you for your points, but you need to re-read my last post, I did not sign the revised page with my name on it - I initialed it, there seems to be a material misunderstanding of the situation. I never requested ANY changes to the lease. The landlord realized the lease was a joke as it had the wrong tenants name on it, and sent 1 (applicable) revised page to me which I initialed.

As this revised page was different than the page that was on the original lease which I had previously SIGNED the last page of - then my signature pledge does not apply to the terms of this new revised page under my logic.

Now if you want to make an argument that my initials are just as binding as a signature then lets hear it; but you can't make a case that my signature relates to this page, because the contract I originally signed and pledged my signature to had a different page/terms.

 

[sandyclaus]

Thank you for your points, but you need to re-read my last post, I did not sign the revised page with my name on it - I initialed it, there seems to be a material misunderstanding of the situation. I never requested ANY changes to the lease. The landlord realized the lease was a joke as it had the wrong tenants name on it, and sent 1 (applicable) revised page to me which I initialed.

As this revised page was different than the page that was on the original lease which I had previously SIGNED the last page of, then my signature does not apply to the terms of this page under my logic.

Now if you want to make an argument that my initials are just as binding as a signature then lets hear it; but you can't make a case that my signature relates to this page, because the contract I signed and pledged my signature to had a different page/terms.

In response to your argument, riddle me this... If the contract was "a joke as it had the wrong tenants (sic) name on it", then why did you sign the original lease document if it didn't meet with your approval? The answer you don't want to hear is that the signature on the original lease makes the contract valid. The initials on the revised lease pages acknowledge AGREED UPON changes to the original lease, that now has YOUR name and not the name of the wrong tenant, with your signature on it.

If you didn't agree to the revisions, then why did you initial the revised pages presented to you and return them? You could just have easily NOT returned the revised pages with your initials, and you might have a valid argument here. But you did, and now here you are.

I sure hope someone else chimes in here soon. I get the feeling you think I'm the only one who thinks the way I do. You'll soon find out that I have several members who will back my play - and when that happens, you might just realize your argument doesn't make sense anymore.

 

[netfocus]

In response to your argument, riddle me this... If the contract was "a joke as it had the wrong tenants (sic) name on it", then why did you sign the original lease document if it didn't meet with your approval?

You seem to be asking the wrong question - I saw it had someone else's name on it and thought it would be completely invalid and non-binding - so thats the reason I signed! What do you have to lose right? lol

I sure hope someone else chimes in here soon. I get the feeling you think I'm the only one who thinks the way I do. You'll soon find out that I have several members who will back my play - and when that happens, you might just realize your argument doesn't make sense anymore.

The landlords actions prove that he thought the lease was junk; but me and the landlord both have the same un-founded paranoia in respect to the validity of the original lease according to you.

That NOLO link I posted clearly says that even a proper signed amendment may not hold up in court - that its best to redo the entire contract; and your trying to say that 1 initialed page with no new signature will somehow revise a contract and that will hold up?

 

[sandyclaus]

You seem to be asking the wrong question - I saw it had someone else's name on it and thought it would be completely invalid and non-binding - so thats the reason I signed! What do you have to lose right? lol

So, in other words, when you signed, you had NO intention of actually fulfilling the terms of the lease you signed? Nice. Now I can see why you are fighting so hard to try to invalidate this revised.

The problem with your logic is that you did, indeed, sign. And kept initialing revision pages that the LL gave you that signify your agreement with the revisions that were made to the original lease - that now has YOUR name on it. If you had NO intention of ever following through on the lease, then you could have just walked away. Your signature on a lease that didn't bear your name already kept you from being bound to the lease. But NO - you decided to play along, and kept initialing the pages the LL gave you to initial. Each time you did that, you closed a loophole.

The landlords actions prove that he thought the lease was junk; but me and the landlord both have the same un-founded paranoia in respect to the validity of the original lease according to you.

While you and the LL may have agreed the original lease was junk, that ALSO meant that you were under no obligation to agree to the revisions he presented you with, asking you to initial and return to him as acknowledgement of the agreed-upon changes. And even then, the revisions could have been reversed had you just not returned them to the LL. Once you did, your fate was sealed.

Sorry. Three strikes and you're OUT.

 

[netfocus]

While you and the LL may have agreed the original lease was junk, that ALSO meant that you were under no obligation to agree to the revisions he presented you with, asking you to initial and return to him as acknowledgement of the agreed-upon changes. And even then, the revisions could have been reversed had you just not returned them to the LL.

So lets say you are right and initials are just as good as a signature; so I initialed 1 page by itself on a later date and returned; what part of my initial gives someone the authority to then use that page to replace a page on the original contract when there was nothing on this initialed page granting that authority or action?