Contract for Services

[pizzatacos]

Jurisdiction

Oregon

New to this forum and I'm not 100% sure I have the right topic thread for this - but here it goes!

I recently engaged with a company for a service, essentially to provide some professional services. The contract we agreed on and signed just a few months ago outlined responsibilities for each party and seemed like a pretty standard-fare contract. Chief among the commitments outlined in their portion of the contract was "We will continue to work with you until you [get the desired outcome]".

This company does this same service for hundreds, if not thousands of folks. Today they sent a template/canned email to their entire user base saying that the intention of their service was to achieve the outcome within 90 days, and as such they now will limit access of their support and the services they provide to 12 months, 'effective immediately'.

This doesn't sit right with me, and I'm curious of what my recourse, if any, is. I wouldn't consider myself an expert in any legal matters, but I very much thought the terms of a contract can't be changed without mutual agreement, and if mutual agreement can't be reached then a cancellation of the contract and refund is in order.

Things to note:
-I paid 10k for this service
-I've not gotten my desired outcome yet (but I believe I will)
-There is no modifications clause in their contract
-There is a no refund clause in the contract that reads "All sales are final and no refunds will be afforded and you waive any rights to charge-back your purchase with your credit card processor."
-There is a dispute resolution clause in the contract that sets arbitration to Florida, and that disputes can only be made on an individual basis and not class action.
-The email received today did not include updated agreements to be signed.

I have my contract and email if it's helpful for someone to review individually to provide advice, but did not want to post it publicly.

 

[Zigner]

As mentioned on the other forum that you posted this to, contract review is beyond the scope of this (or any) internet forum. You will want to have your contract reviewed by a local attorney.

 

[welkin]

As mentioned on the other forum that you posted this to, contract review is beyond the scope of this (or any) internet forum. You will want to have your contract reviewed by a local attorney.

While that is good advice, this forum has many, many times looked at contracts, with all party's information redacted, to answer specific questions. If this is no longer permissible, I suggest that admin. make a policy statement, so we all know the rules.

 

[Zigner]

While that is good advice, this forum has many, many times looked at contracts, with all party's information redacted, to answer specific questions. If this is no longer permissible, I suggest that admin. make a policy statement, so we all know the rules.

General advice is one thing (and ok). Specific advice on the legal meaning and applicability of contract terms is another thing and would most likely be considered the practice of law.

 

[pizzatacos]

Thank you Zinger - I didn't understand that was out of the scope. This particular thread is 'Consumer Law, Contracts, and Warranties' - and I had searched and seen similar topics asking about enforceability and options of perceived broken contracts.. perhaps it was the way I phrased the question? I'm not looking for a contract review - only if what they did is OK; which sounds like advice?

Please correct me if I misunderstood, certainly not trying to cause a disruption, but the difference isn't that clear to me.

If clarity in what I'm asking helps - I'm only asking to understand if they can do what they did, and if not; any advice on what I can do. I only offered up the contracts and any details because I thought that may be helpful to evaluate.

 

[Zigner]

The question of "is what they did ok" requires a full review of all the terms of the contract followed by the offering of a legal opinion on the appropriateness of the actions of the other party. In other words, you should have a local attorney review the contract and all other facts of the matter in order to offer an opinion.

 

[zddoodah]

Chief among the commitments outlined in their portion of the contract was "We will continue to work with you until you [get the desired outcome]".

Before I will continue, it is unlikely that any court would interpret this to mean you get what you want, no matter what. Rather, I think it would be interpreted to mean that the other party's performance will be held to a standard of reasonableness.

I'm curious of what my recourse, if any, is.

No one who hasn't read the contract and who doesn't have all relevant facts and context can speak intelligently about this.

I very much thought the terms of a contract can't be changed without mutual agreement

True, unless the contract says otherwise.

and if mutual agreement can't be reached then a cancellation of the contract and refund is in order.

The parties could agree to that result, but this statement isn't true as a general matter.

There is no modifications clause in their contract

This is ambiguous. Does it mean there is nothing in the contract that talks about modifications? Or does it mean that there is a no modifications clause?

 

[pizzatacos]

Before I will continue, it is unlikely that any court would interpret this to mean you get what you want, no matter what. Rather, I think it would be interpreted to mean that the other party's performance will be held to a standard of reasonableness.




No one who hasn't read the contract and who doesn't have all relevant facts and context can speak intelligently about this.




True, unless the contract says otherwise.




The parties could agree to that result, but this statement isn't true as a general matter.




This is ambiguous. Does it mean there is nothing in the contract that talks about modifications? Or does it mean that there is a no modifications clause?

Thank you!!

I appreciate your feedback and answers here - this gives me a lot of insight!

To answer your last question - I meant that as there's no clause in the contract that talks about notifications. So the former "nothing in the contract that talks about modifications"