do i have to sign and agree with his solicitors letter

DullGreyGuy

Exodi said:

On an unrelated note, I find it astonishing that a solicitor would write such a letter (to the point of doubting whether it was genuinely written by a solicitor) and I'd be very interested in the legality of such an agreement.

Solicitors write many legally unenforceable things but in most cases its not illegal to do so its just as useful as an underwater hairdryer if one of the parties decides they no longer wish to be bound by it. Hopefully they'll have explained that to their client before billing them for the drafting etc.

The act of someone putting pen to paper is fairly effective tool wether its legally enforceable or legally necessary. When dealing with a motor claim as RTA insurer because the policyholder was in some way in breach of their insurance we already have a statutory and contractual right to recover the outlay from the PH but we still get them to sign a letter of indemnification to confirm they'll be repaying us. The proportion of customers that do repay is vastly higher in those that sign the letter than don't even though it doesn't legally change anything. 

Exodi

DullGreyGuy said:

Exodi said:

On an unrelated note, I find it astonishing that a solicitor would write such a letter (to the point of doubting whether it was genuinely written by a solicitor) and I'd be very interested in the legality of such an agreement.

Solicitors write many legally unenforceable things but in most cases its not illegal to do so its just as useful as an underwater hairdryer if one of the parties decides they no longer wish to be bound by it. Hopefully they'll have explained that to their client before billing them for the drafting etc.

The act of someone putting pen to paper is fairly effective tool wether its legally enforceable or legally necessary. When dealing with a motor claim as RTA insurer because the policyholder was in some way in breach of their insurance we already have a statutory and contractual right to recover the outlay from the PH but we still get them to sign a letter of indemnification to confirm they'll be repaying us. The proportion of customers that do repay is vastly higher in those that sign the letter than don't even though it doesn't legally change anything. 

As solicitors are commonly viewed as being knowledgeable or in positions of authority, which, as you point out can clearly influence a negotiation, is it not somewhat negligent for a solicitor to draft contracts which they know are legally unenforceable as an attempt to trick or coerce the other party?

I get the bravado in communications/negotiations where the judgement in court is not certain, and both solicitors are trying to achieve the best outcome for their client, but surely where the result in court is certain (e.g. that an agreement is legally unenforceable) it is sharp practice at best deliberately drafting unenforceable agreements to influence someone.

Just like your example, I'm sure the solicitor knows the agreement is unenforceable, and may have advised their client the same. But they may believe that the mere existence of a signed (though unenforceable) agreement may trick the OP into not pursuing a child maintenance claim. I'm just suprised that they would entertain trickery like this when it directly contradicts the SRA code of conduct.

I've no doubt what you are saying is true, it's just suprising to see examples of it.