A question: The fundamentals of backing

[johnnybeef]

[ QUOTE ]

You are 100% correct that he would be well-advised to use a written contract. Were I his attorney, I would have insisted upon it. He apparently deemed you an honorable enough person to make the contract unnecessary. So far, your position on this matter leads me to believe he misjudged you, and that's a shame.

[/ QUOTE ]

atticus, im no lawyer (but my father is, and biz law was one of my fav. classes) but didn't irie and op enter into a contract due to the fact that there was an agreement, consideration, capacity, and legality? im sure that the emails exchanged would be more than enough to prove in court that a contract existed between the two parties.

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You are 100% correct that he would be well-advised to use a written contract. Were I his attorney, I would have insisted upon it. He apparently deemed you an honorable enough person to make the contract unnecessary. So far, your position on this matter leads me to believe he misjudged you, and that's a shame.

[/ QUOTE ]

atticus, im no lawyer (but my father is, and biz law was one of my fav. classes) but didn't irie and op enter into a contract due to the fact that there was an agreement, consideration, capacity, and legality? im sure that the emails exchanged would be more than enough to prove in court that a contract existed between the two parties.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, they have a legally binding oral contract at the very least. It's just easier to prove the terms of an explicitly written contract.

[GauchoFish]

you are correct mr. finch, we have a legally binding oral contract that says that he was to back me for 500 SNG's per month with a specific bankroll and provide 'ongoing bankroll support'. Part of the agreement also states that 'if you lose its a freeroll' and 'if you don't win you don't pay'

We do not have an agreement that states that he is loaning me money to play poker with, and if i lose the money i still have to repay it. When his 'bankroll support' stopped, so did the agreement. End of story.

WD

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
you are correct mr. finch, we have a legally binding oral contract that says that he was to back me for 500 SNG's per month with a specific bankroll and provide 'ongoing bankroll support'. Part of the agreement also states that 'if you lose its a freeroll' and 'if you don't win you don't pay'

We do not have an agreement that states that he is loaning me money to play poker with, and if i lose the money i still have to repay it. When his 'bankroll support' stopped, so did the agreement. End of story.

WD

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you need to give us the exact terms of the agreement you and he made. If it's the same as the one that was posted earlier, then unfortunately you lose. If it's something different, then we'll have to see.

[ QUOTE ]
I was to play SNG's with the backing and chop the winnings 50/50 for the length of the arrangement. I could stop the arrangment whenever i liked by returning the roll i had been provided.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just going by this in the original post, you lose. The "length of the arrangement" isn't over until you hit your 500 SnGs. And you certainly haven't paid him back yet.

[GauchoFish]

i'd love to give them to you, if i had them. there was no agreement. i signed nothing. there was no contract or terms and conditions. we exchanged a few emails and chatted once on the phone. nothing more.

i was to:

A: play a minimum of 500 SNG's per month
B: play only at the specified buy-in
C: end the agreement by returning the bankroll and his half of the profit (i assumed this to mean the bankroll in its current form, $0...he says it means to pay it back...this was never discussed, specifically...it appears we both made false assumptions of the other persons stance on this)
D: turn over his portion of profits on a monthly basis
E: provide weekly updates of whether i was still 'alive'

Thats it. No more. No other details were given.

I would also like to bring your attention to this last point...he wanted me to update him weekly with a note saying whether or not i was still 'alive'. Interesting word to use, and its the exact one he provided.

Based up the logic of all of his supporters here, what this would mean is he wants me to send him emails weekly until i die stating whether or not i am even playing SNG's. I took this to mean that he wanted me to let him know if i still had some of his bankroll left.

I still cannot see how some people, using their logical brain, think that based upon that agreement, that i would owe anything once i lost.

I think there are a lot of people who like, admire and respect Irieguy on this forum (i am one of them) and that because of that, they want me to give him the money because it is the nice, friendly thing to do. But it is not part of our agreement and it is like me handing a bum a wad of hundreds because i feel bad for their plight.

I'm sorry but i am just not willing to do that. I have yet to see one shred of evidence form the 200 or so posts here that says that normal backing arrangments are loans. Until i do i am sorry but i am going to have to side with logic on this one.

WD

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
i'd love to give them to you, if i had them. there was no agreement. i signed nothing. there was no contract or terms and conditions. we exchanged a few emails and chatted once on the phone. nothing more.

i was to:

A: play a minimum of 500 SNG's per month
B: play only at the specified buy-in
C: end the agreement by returning the bankroll and his half of the profit (i assumed this to mean the bankroll in its current form, $0...he says it means to pay it back...this was never discussed, specifically...it appears we both made false assumptions of the other persons stance on this)
D: turn over his portion of profits on a monthly basis
E: provide weekly updates of whether i was still 'alive'

Thats it. No more. No other details were given.

...

I still cannot see how some people, using their logical brain, think that based upon that agreement, that i would owe anything once i lost.



[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I see. You haven't finished playing the 500 SnGs which means you haven't reached the length of the agreement.

You haven't lost yet. During those SnGs, you have made a profit. The agreement said nothing about the deal being over once you busted out of the money he loaned you, but had other specifications for ending.

You have not ended the agreement by returning the bankroll.

You're still being backed by him. That's what I see.

The line that you refer to (about this being a "freeroll") was in a post and not in any further agreement by the two of you. I'd say (from a non-legal person) that an updated agreement means more than the non-specific post he made earlier.

That's what I see.

[curtains]

jedi, it sounds as if the original backer did not give the backee funds to finish his agreement of 500 sit and gos, after he lost the initial stake. In most cases this would mean the end of the agreement.

The backer is completely staking his buyin, however once the backee loses the buyin and the backer doesn't send more money, of course this is no longer the case, thus the deal would be off.

[Baked67]

I'll throw my two cents in... I've read this whole thread (i have a boring job at times) and since I certainly have no ties with any single person at the forums, according to you, my opinion should matter. I'm 100 percent certain that Guacofish is in the wrong here. No doubt about it.

[ QUOTE ]
end the agreement by returning the bankroll and his half of the profit

[/ QUOTE ]

There it is in plain fricking English. How you could be so ignorant as to think that means returning a depleated roll of zero dollars is beyond me. Why would a person give you x amount of money and not expect to be paid back. Its just absolute insanity to me that you think that this isn't a loan. Its ignorant. You seem like a somewhat intelligent person, get real.

Be a stand up guy and repay the loan. Its not even a matter of legality to me its a matter of doing the right [censored] thing...

[EarlCat]

[ QUOTE ]
you are correct mr. finch, we have a legally binding oral contract that says that he was to back me for 500 SNG's per month with a specific bankroll and provide 'ongoing bankroll support'. Part of the agreement also states that 'if you lose its a freeroll' and 'if you don't win you don't pay'

We do not have an agreement that states that he is loaning me money to play poker with, and if i lose the money i still have to repay it. When his 'bankroll support' stopped, so did the agreement. End of story.

WD

[/ QUOTE ]

Was your agreement the same one SuitedSixes posted or not?

[GauchoFish]

dunno let me find it, i'll reply there

WD