Is a Text Message a Legal Document

Employers and employees should therefore pay attention to what they agree on via a text message. A text message can be a legal document under the ESIGN Act that gives electronically signed contracts the same weight as paper and ink contracts. In this way, acceptance methods such as electronic signatures, clickwrap agreements and text messages can act as unilateral contracts, provided that there is a clear method of consent (tick a box, SMS “I accept”, etc.) and an actual notification (link to a contract document in a text, on a payment screen, etc.). One of the fundamental laws of treaties is that both parties must follow a valid contract that has already been concluded. If a lease states that certain things must be done in writing, e.B. a notice from the landlord or changes in rental fees, this type of communication must be done in writing. A real writing. No text. However, if there are clauses in the initial lease that allow the SMS to be considered a legal written notice, then the SMS is indeed legally binding. The parties are free to define the terms of their “written request”. But in the absence of a contractual clause to the contrary, a text that is sufficient in itself is not always considered legally binding. If you have a situation in your workplace, seek legal advice before accepting anything or if you make a claim.

At Minken Employment Lawyers, we can review your situation to recommend the best course of action to ensure your legal protection. If you have any questions about the workplace, please contact us today or call us at 905-477-7011. Subject to UETA, a contract can be created by any electronic means, not just by e-mail. Although a text message string may seem occasional and therefore unenforceable, UETA says the opposite. If a text message string contains the necessary contractual language, the text messages are legally binding. On February 3, 2016, the broker of Two Electronics, LLC then sent a text message to buyers, SJH, in which it stated that the owner was interested in selling, but that buyers must first make the changes to the letter of intent, sign them, and attach a check for the agreed amount. However, by the time SJH followed the terms described in the text message, Two Electronics had already sold the property to a third-party buyer. You have not complied with SJH`s letter of intent or verification of the purchase. If you want to accept legally binding SMS between the landlord and the tenant, it is best to define the protocol in advance and in writing. At the very least, confirm that landlords and tenants are interested in using texts for communication and be consistent in using texts for the agreed uses. Potentially acceptable legally binding texts could be: the more transactions are carried out per text, new legal problems will follow.

Just explore these statistics for a while: in 2017, 8 trillion texts a day were sent worldwide. By the end of 2013, six billion text messages had been sent daily in the United States alone. Between 2011 and 2014, global text usage increased by 140% in two and a half years. Many now refer to SMS as the new email because of its speed. In fact, faster means everything in today`s business world and this is where SMS has a distinct advantage over email. In the business world, the advantage of SMS is obvious: faster reading, faster range, no subject line required, more personal and eye-catching. Text messaging has changed the way people communicate over long and small distances. As it is a form of digitized and traceable communication between two or more parties, text messages are often raised in legal disputes.

But can text messaging replace unilateral and bilateral treaties negotiated between one or more parties? Is a text message a legal document? It is important to remember that if you do not wish to create an enforceable agreement or warranty when negotiating in writing via SMS or email, make it clear that you are negotiating “subject to contract” and that you do not intend to be bound until a formal document is executed. Similarly, New York courts that have opposed findings of applicability by informal SMS correspondence appear to be focusing on the lack of a full and complete agreement that includes all essential conditions, rather than on issues with the medium itself. At present, Massachusetts is the only jurisdiction that actually has a reported case in this area. .